Lula's Ticket Minimizes Inconsistencies and Proves R$48 Million

The Lula and Geraldo Alckmin board, re-elected in 2026, told the Superior Electoral Court (TSE) that the inconsistencies pointed out by the technical team do not compromise the reliability of the accountability of the campaign. The event was registered after the Elections and Party Accounts Examination Advisory (Asepa) identified possible irregularities and requested clarification on items such as delay in the delivery of financial reports, undeclared tax notes and expenses.

In response, the defense maintained that the notes have a formal character and that R$ 48.3 million in questioned expenses were already duly registered or supported by documentary evidence. The tax bills questioned added exactly that amount, according to the document presented to the court.

Defense claims good faith and transparency

The board said it acted in “integral good faith” and that accountability reflects “transparency of electoral finances.” The lawyers made themselves available to provide further clarifications if deemed necessary by the rapporteur of the case, Minister Dias Toffoli.

The petition informs that the origin of a tax bill of R $ 200,000 issued by Magni & A.R Produções e Shows Ltda. This specific item was not detailed in the demonstration, but the defense indicated that it continues to investigate internally.

Most of the notes were already accounted for.

In response to the technical notes, the defense claimed that most of the amount, R$ 44.08 million referring to 151 tax documents, does not correspond to omitted expenses, but to expenses "already accounted for or linked to contracts, invoices, tickets and other documents." According to the lawyers, the divergence stemmed from limitations in the automated crossing of information carried out by the Justiça Eleitoral system.

This explanation suggests that the system was unable to automatically associate the tax notes to the campaign’s accounting releases, generating a false omission alert. The defence claims that, once analyzed manually, the documents prove the regularity of the expenses.

Shipping notes and cancellations explain the difference

According to the document, another R$ 3.5 million refers to simple consignment tax bills, intended only for the transport of campaign materials, such as printed matter and flags. These notes, by nature, do not represent the acquisition of goods or services, but only the movement of items between locations.

In addition, about R$670,000 relates to documents that were cancelled by suppliers or replaced due to issuance errors. In these cases, the defense argues that the amounts should not be considered as actual expenditures of the campaign, as the original documents were cancelled or corrected.

Next steps in the TSE

Minister Dias Toffoli, the rapporteur of the case, ordered the joint demonstration to the records and forwarded the clarifications to Asepa for analysis. After examination of the documentation, the technical unit should issue a conclusive opinion on the accounts of the campaign.

The opinion of Asepa will be fundamental for the TSE to decide whether to approve the accounts, approve with reservations or reject the provision. The final decision will fall to the plenary of the court, with no set date.

For the reader, the case demonstrates how the Justiça Eleitoral oversees the use of campaign resources and how defenses can challenge technical notes. The outcome can influence transparency and confidence in the electoral process.

Read Also

Lula faces opposition Senate to approve names in STF

Government launches guide for families at risk of hunger

Fux suspends 5×2 scale trial and leads to plenary

Font

www.gazetadopovo.com