The judgment of appeal AREspe 0600354-26.2024.6.26.0220 occurred in May 2026, confirming a decision by the São Paulo Regional Electoral Court (TRE-SP) that condemned the politicians for using a service at the Foursquare Gospel Church for electoral promotion. According to the case, the candidates took the pulpit during a religious ceremony in August 2024 and received prayers asking for electoral success, with the pastor declaring that the faithful would be "aligned" with the candidates.
Press quotes (1)
"A decisão foi tomada no julgamento de recurso apresentado pela então prefeita e candidata à reeleição Fabíola Alves (PSDB), pelo candidato a vice-prefeito Cezar Silva (PSDB) e pelo pastor Lilo (MDB), que concorria à reeleição para a Câmara Municipal."
The investigation also found an unjustified 34% increase in rent paid by the city hall to a church property during Fabíola's term, which was considered a possible economic benefit to the religious entity in an electoral context. The three politicians are ineligible for eight years. ✓
Press quotes (2)
"O julgamento do recurso ocorreu de forma unânime no Tribunal Superior Eleitoral. O processo tramita sob o número AREspe 0600354-26.2024.6.26.0220."
"os candidatos subiram ao púlpito durante a cerimônia e receberam orações que pediam por seu sucesso eleitoral"
Covered by only some sources, or where the accounts diverge.
Covered by only some sources (2)
-
Who was the reporting justice for the appeal at the TSE?
Why it's still unknown: Only one source mentions that the conviction was upheld by Justice Antonio Carlos Ferreira, but does not specify whether he was the rapporteur or session president.
-
What was the specific doctrinal framework applied by the TSE to characterize abuse of power?
Why it's still unknown: Sources mention there was political and economic abuse of power, but do not detail which jurisprudential test or specific precedent was applied.
-
Was there any manifestation from the PGR or other amici curiae in the case?
Why it's still unknown: No source mentions participation by the Public Ministry or interested third parties in the appeal judgment.
-
What are the operational criteria to distinguish permitted religious mention from electoral abuse?
Why it's still unknown: The decision establishes that absence of explicit vote requests does not eliminate the offense, but sources do not detail practical dividing line for pastors and candidates.