Mauro Cid, former aide to ex-president Jair Bolsonaro, testified under oath before Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court that Bolsonaro personally edited a draft decree aimed at annulling the 2022 election results and insisted on keeping the order for the arrest of Supreme Court Justice Alexandre de Moraes.

Cid said Bolsonaro “streamlined” the document, removing most names except Moraes, and confirmed that Bolsonaro always sought evidence of electoral fraud but never found any.

He described pressure from generals Braga Netto and Mário Fernandes to replace the Army commander with someone open to a coup, and recounted that Bolsonaro knew about letters from active-duty colonels urging military intervention.

Cid also claimed Braga Netto delivered cash in a wine box to fund protests after the Liberal Party refused to provide R$100,000. However, Cid’s credibility is under fierce attack from Bolsonaro’s defense team.

Celso Vilardi, Bolsonaro’s lawyer, called Cid’s statements “typical of someone who is lying,” highlighting what he called “selective memory.”

Bolsonaro’s Defense Challenges Cid’s Memory as Coup Plot Testimony Roils Supreme Court. (Photo Internet reproduction)

Vilardi argued that Cid conveniently forgot details or contradicted himself whenever pressed about meetings, dates, or documents, and claimed Cid’s testimony was “full of contradictions.”

Cid’s Credibility Questioned Amid Conflicting Testimony

He also pointed out that Cid invented meetings and forgot key contexts, such as the content and timing of meetings with businessmen and generals. Vilardi insisted that this pattern of memory lapses and shifting narratives undermines Cid’s reliability as a witness.

During his testimony, Cid admitted to not remembering some contexts, dates, and conversations. He explained that leaked audio in which he criticized police investigators was a personal outburst during a stressful period, not evidence of coercion.

Cid reaffirmed under questioning that he was not pressured by authorities and that his plea bargain was voluntary. He also clarified that while he witnessed many events, he did not participate in planning the alleged coup.

The defense further noted that Cid’s statements sometimes benefited other defendants. For example, he downplayed the involvement of ex-ministers Anderson Torres and Augusto Heleno, saying Torres rarely attended key meetings and Heleno was not active in the later period.

Cid also stated that Bolsonaro never ordered the publication of a military note that encouraged protesters, nor did he encourage the January 8, 2023, attacks on government buildings.

In summary, Cid’s testimony places Bolsonaro at the center of the alleged coup plot, but his credibility remains contested. The defense points to selective memory and contradictions, while investigators rely on a broader base of documentary and digital evidence to support the charges.

The outcome will depend on whether the court finds Cid’s testimony, supported by corroborating evidence, credible enough to convict Bolsonaro and his allies. The case’s resolution will have lasting consequences for Brazil’s political and legal future.