Brazil’s COVID‑19 Crisis
Brazil accounts for roughly 3% of the world’s population, yet in late March 2021 it recorded approximately one third of daily global COVID‑19 deaths. Many observers attributed this catastrophic toll to Bolsonaro’s approach. He repeatedly downplayed the virus, stating that “death is an inevitability” and urging Brazilians to stop being “sissies”. He resisted evidence‑based public health measures and pursued a strategy resembling herd immunity.
Brazil’s public health system had once been admired for providing healthcare to 78% of the population. By 2021, the country was described as a pandemic pariah. Bolsonaro was labelled a threat to global health.
The Senate Inquiry and Crimes Against Humanity Allegations
In April 2021, a legislative inquiry committee in the Brazilian Senate recommended that Bolsonaro be charged with crimes against humanity. The report estimated that 120,000 lives could have been saved by March 2021 if non‑pharmaceutical interventions had been systematically implemented.
The final draft urged Brazilians to “never forget what happened in this country or the innocent people who lost their lives as a result of the government’s reckless handling of the pandemic.”
The committee relied on Article 7 of the Rome Statute, which defines crimes against humanity as extermination, persecution and other inhumane acts committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack against civilians. Unlike Article 8, which concerns war crimes, Article 7 does not require armed conflict. This allows criminal liability to arise from indirect or administrative forms of harm.
Could Public Health Failures Amount to Crimes Against Humanity?
David Scheffer, former United States ambassador for war crimes and a key negotiator of the Rome Statute, suggested that public health malpractice could fall within Article 7. He argued that political leaders who intentionally fail to implement timely and widespread measures, such as lockdowns or vaccination programmes, could be considered perpetrators of crimes against humanity.
However, determining whether conduct meets this threshold is the responsibility of national jurisdictions. In Brazil, Bolsonaro faced limited immediate legal risk. The prosecutor general at the time was a political ally, and Bolsonaro retained enough congressional support to block impeachment.
The Collapse of Domestic Legal Action
In October 2021, the congressional inquiry concluded without formal charges. The prosecutor’s office stated that the evidence lacked the “proper individual proofs” required to meet legal criteria. Key documents were missing, and links between alleged acts and criminal responsibility were insufficient.
Although Bolsonaro avoided prosecution, the inquiry damaged his public standing. Polls in mid‑2021 showed rising disapproval, reaching 51% in July and 53% in September.
The Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal Ruling
In September 2022, the Rome‑based Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal found Bolsonaro guilty of crimes against humanity and human rights violations for his pandemic response. The ruling was announced at the University of São Paulo. The Tribunal, created in 1979, has no formal legal authority and cannot impose sanctions. Its decision is symbolic, but it recommended filing a complaint before the International Criminal Court in The Hague.
Symbolic rulings can still shape public opinion. The Tribunal’s findings reinforced criticism of Bolsonaro’s leadership and amplified scrutiny of his pandemic strategy.
Political Consequences
Bolsonaro entered office in 2019 as a nationalist figure promising to clean up corruption and revive the economy. By 2020, Brazil’s GDP had shrunk by 4.1%. His pandemic response became a defining issue. Although he secured more votes in 2022 than pollsters expected, he ultimately lost support from many former loyalists.
His most committed supporters remain significant in number, but the “crimes against humanity” allegations contributed to a climate of distrust. They tarnished his credibility and helped set the stage for Lula’s return.
Conclusion
Bolsonaro avoided formal criminal charges, but the legal exposure surrounding his pandemic response shaped public perception. The Senate inquiry, the Permanent Peoples’ Tribunal ruling and widespread criticism created a narrative of negligence and harm. In a closely contested election, this narrative mattered. It influenced public opinion, weakened Bolsonaro’s political standing and contributed to the conditions that allowed a radically different candidate to take centre stage.
Not sure how close you are to qualifying?
The path-fit quiz reads your situation and shows you which routes you are ready for, and exactly what to do next. Four minutes, no account needed to start.
Check your readiness