Edson Fachin, president of the Supremo Tribunal Federal and the Conselho Nacional de Justiça, said the Brazilian judiciary is facing a crisis.

The admission comes at a time of heightened tension between Brazil's legal and political branches. Fachin's warnings suggest that the perceived politicization of the courts could undermine public trust in the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary.

Speaking at a panel organized by Fundação Getúlio Vargas in São Paulo, Fachin said that the judiciary is currently under both internal and external pressures [1]. He said that the situation requires direct confrontation to maintain the integrity of the legal system.

Regarding the relationship between the courts and the government, Fachin offered a nuanced view of the tension. While he acknowledged a crisis within the judiciary, he said there is no institutional crisis between the judiciary and the legislature, but rather distinct perceptions [2]. He said that the parliament and judiciary do not replace or confront one another, but instead sustain each other [3].

Fachin said judges risk acting as political agents, noting that confidence is lost when a judge appears to function in such a capacity [1]. He called for judges to be resilient in the face of attacks and criticism [4].

There are conflicting reports regarding the exact date of the São Paulo event. Some records list the lecture as occurring on Monday, April 8, 2026 [1], while other sources cite Monday, April 11, 2026 [5].

Throughout the discussion, Fachin urged the judiciary to distance itself from political ambition and maintain a strict separation from partisan interests to preserve its legitimacy [5].

"Estamos imersos em uma crise no Judiciário que precisa ser enfrentada."

Fachin's comments highlight a delicate balancing act within the Brazilian state. By distinguishing between an internal 'crisis' of confidence and an 'institutional' conflict with the legislature, he is attempting to protect the judiciary's autonomy while acknowledging that the public perception of judicial activism is a liability. This suggests an internal effort to professionalize the bench and curb 'political' judging to prevent a broader constitutional clash.