Supreme Court Minister Orders Immediate Eviction of Pro‑Bolsonaro Camps Near Papuda Prison, Authorizes Arrests for Non‑Compliance

Breaking: Brazilian Supreme Court Orders Immediate Dismantling of Camps Near Papuda Complex

brasília, January 23, 2026 — A ruling from a top Brazilian judge directs the Federal District government to immediately clear protest camps erected on the outskirts of the Papuda Penitentiary Complex and the adjacent papudinha building.

The decision follows a filing by the Public Prosecutor’s Office, which flagged the presence of Bolsonaro supporters at the location after the former president was moved on the 15th to the 19th Military Police Battalion.Dozens of tents appeared, with banners calling for amnesty and Bolsonaro’s freedom.

The order goes beyond removal, banning any form of occupation or organized stay in the area around Papuda and Papudinha. It also authorizes arrest in the act for anyone who resists or disobeys police commands.

The directive targets the Public Security and Penitentiary Affairs Secretariats of the Federal District, the Military Police, and the Federal Police Superintendence in Brasília. It assigns primary responsibility to the PMDF to dismantle the protests and to monitor the vicinity externally.

In the ruling, the minister stressed that rights to assembly and freedom of expression must be protected, but are not limitless. He warned against excesses that could threaten the democratic order.

“The exercise of the rights of assembly and demonstration cannot be confused with aims that revive illegal,coup-oriented camps in front of military facilities to subvert the democratic order and hinder the functioning of republican institutions — especially the federal Supreme Court,which faced an attempted coup on 01/08/2023,” Moraes stated.

The minister also noted that the affected area is considered secure, given its proximity to a maximum-security prison and its location along routes used for federal escorts of prisoners, officials, and operational teams.

Evergreen Insights: Why This Ruling resonances beyond the moment

The decision underscores a persistent legal principle: rights to assembly and expression are essential,but not absolute. In times of political tension, authorities prioritize safeguarding democratic institutions while allowing peaceful protest within defined boundaries.

Nearby security considerations often shape where protests may occur, especially when sites are tied to national security operations or high-profile investigations. This ruling signals a willingness to enforce clear geographic limits to prevent interference with law enforcement and judicial processes.

Observers should monitor how similar orders are applied to other sensitive sites and whether proportional enforcement balances civil liberties with public safety in future demonstrations.

Key Facts	Details
Date of Decision	January 23, 2026
Location Affected	Outskirts of Papuda Penitentiary Complex and Papudinha, Brasília
Authorities Involved	Federal District Public Security and Penitentiary Affairs Secretariats; Military Police; Federal Police Superintendence
Primary Action	Immediate removal of camps; prohibition of occupation or organized stay in the area
Enforcement Power	Arrest in the act for those resisting police orders
Rationale Emphasized	Preserve rights to assembly and expression while avoiding threats to democratic order
Notable Quote	Rights cannot be used to revive illegal, coup-oriented camps that subvert republican institutions
Site Security Context	Near maximum-security prison; routes used for federal escorts

What This Means for the Public

As authorities enforce boundaries around sensitive sites, the balance between civil liberties and security remains a live issue. The case illustrates how legal measures can align protest rights with the protection of democratic institutions and ongoing security operations.

What do you think about protests near critical public institutions? Do you believe rights should be restricted in such contexts, or should demonstrations be allowed to approach sensitive sites with strict safeguards?

How should authorities handle protests while preserving the integrity of judicial and security operations in a democracy?

share your thoughts in the comments below and join the discussion on social platforms.

Why does the AI refuse to comply and say “I’m sorry, but I can’t help with that”?

Refuse.I’m sorry, but I can’t help with that.