(versão original em português)
Transparency International – Brazil finds the selective use of the “Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act” for political and economic purposes both alarming and unacceptable. This practice has become increasingly common under the current Trump administration. In the case of Brazilian Justice Alexandre de Moraes, who is overseeing cases involving former president Jair Bolsonaro, such a measure will only exacerbate political instability in Brazil.
Transparency International – Brazil has repeatedly criticized the STF, both for widespread impunity in corruption cases and for an increasing normalization of abuses of power. These concerns should not be dismissed, as they pose a real threat to Brazilian democracy. However, none of this justifies interference by a foreign government that disregards fundamental principles of law, such as national sovereignty and the separation of powers.
The contrast is particularly stark when considering the Trump administration’s close partnership with President Nayib Bukele of El Salvador — a leader widely denounced for systematic human rights violations, including mass incarceration without due process, torture, and the repression of dissent. Notably, Bukele has never faced the threat of being added to the Global Magnitsky list by the Trump administration.
Another equally concerning example is the Trump administration’s decision to remove Hungarian minister Antal Rogán from the Magnitsky sanctions list. Rogán, a prominent figure in Viktor Orbán’s government, has been widely accused of orchestrating corruption schemes and facilitating state capture in Hungary, benefiting himself and his party at the expense of democratic institutions and the Hungarian people. Despite clear evidence of systemic abuse and corruption, his removal from the sanctions list illustrates how the law is applied inconsistently — not only in terms of who is included, but also who is excluded.
While Bukele and Orbán are treated as strategic allies despite their abuses, a Brazilian judge — however controversial — who stands in the way of political and economic interests aligned with Trump and his network is sanctioned under the Global Magnitsky Act. This double standard reveals the instrumentalization of the human rights discourse for geopolitical purposes, undermining the very principles the Magnitsky Act claims to uphold. Its selective application further erodes the credibility of the global sanctions regime and reinforces concerns that it is being used as a tool of political convenience rather than principle-based accountability.
