Lula says rival should be disqualified over alleged Meta interference ahead of Brazil vote

Lula’s campaign asked Brazil’s Superior Electoral Court to investigate Flávio Bolsonaro and vice-presidential candidate Alfredo Gaspar for alleged abuse of economic power and improper use of social networks. It said Meta limited Lula-related content while boosting material connected to Bolsonaro. The campaign also sought an eight-year ban from standing for election after the 2026 election.

Bolsonaro’s campaign made a counter-allegation. It accused Lula of abusing political and economic power by using personal data from official government databases to send mass WhatsApp messages. Those messages allegedly promoted social programs and reached voters during the campaign.

The competing petitions show how online activity has become central to the election dispute. Meta denied treating the campaigns unequally and said it would follow a Brazilian court order requiring equal treatment. The Superior Electoral Court’s investigation could determine whether either campaign broke election rules or misused digital influence.

Meta is the technology company behind WhatsApp, Instagram and Facebook. These platforms are major channels for campaigns to publish messages, reach supporters and engage voters. Because Meta manages the systems that deliver content, its decisions can shape a campaign’s online visibility.

For example, a platform can affect reach through account interruptions, content restrictions, user feeds, recommendations and audience engagement. The article reports allegations that one campaign experienced lower reach, restricted Instagram posts and differences in view counts and feeds. Users also said Meta’s artificial intelligence tools did not generate images related to Lula.

That influence matters especially during a close election. Meta denied favouring either side and said it would follow a Brazilian court order requiring equal treatment. Still, reports that accounts linked to one side were disproportionately curtailed led UN experts to demand a level playing field online.

UN experts became concerned after reports suggested the two campaigns did not have equal access to Meta’s platforms. Their concern focused on whether technical and moderation decisions were changing how voters encountered campaign messages online.

The report cited a temporary interruption of one candidate’s campaign account. It also identified differences in audience engagement, user feeds, view counts and reach, along with restrictions on that campaign’s Instagram posts. Users separately reported that Meta’s artificial intelligence tools did not generate images related to Lula.

The report also said information, including from Meta employees, suggested accounts linked to one side were disproportionately curtailed. UN experts said Meta must ensure a level playing field during the election. Meta rejected claims that it favoured one side and said it would comply with a Brazilian court order requiring equal treatment of Bolsonaro and Lula.

Brazil’s electorate includes 159 million registered voters, making the presidential contest enormous in scale. Small differences in online reach can therefore affect a large number of citizens as they decide how to vote.

The first round required a candidate to receive 50% of valid votes to win outright. Bolsonaro narrowly beat Lula on 4 October, but he fell short of that threshold. Because neither candidate reached the required share, the election moved to a final round.

The run-off was scheduled for Sunday, with opinion polls suggesting an extremely close contest. The article describes Lula as seeking a fourth term and Bolsonaro as the right-wing challenger. In such a tight race, campaign access to Meta’s platforms became a major point of dispute between the two sides.

The Superior Electoral Court was asked to examine alleged abuse of economic power and improper use of social networks. Such a finding would make the campaign’s digital conduct an electoral matter, rather than only a dispute between political rivals and a technology company.

Lula’s petition specifically sought investigations into Bolsonaro and Alfredo Gaspar. It also asked that Bolsonaro be made ineligible to stand for election for eight years following the 2026 election. The article presents this as the campaign’s requested consequence, not as a confirmed court ruling.

The court’s proceedings could therefore have consequences beyond the immediate run-off. They could determine whether alleged online influence, platform treatment or mass messaging violated election rules. The article does not state what final penalty the court will impose, but it shows that both campaigns are using formal legal petitions to challenge the other’s digital tactics.

Mass messaging is not merely a campaign tactic when it may involve government-held personal data or public resources. Election authorities can examine whether voters were targeted through information collected for official purposes and whether that access gave a campaign an unfair advantage.

Bolsonaro’s campaign accused Lula of using personal data taken from official databases to send mass WhatsApp messages. It said the messages promoted social programs. The allegation connects three issues: data access, government communication and political persuasion during an election.

The accusation became part of a formal petition alleging abuse of political and economic power. Lula’s campaign made a separate complaint about Meta’s treatment of content linked to the campaigns. The article does not report a final finding on either allegation. It shows why digital campaigning can raise legal questions about fairness, resources and voter targeting.

Freedom of expression depends not only on whether campaigns can post, but also on whether voters can see their messages. A platform’s decisions about accounts, feeds, recommendations and moderation can expand or reduce political reach. That makes private systems relevant to election fairness.

The article gives concrete examples. One campaign account reportedly faced a temporary interruption, while posts on its Instagram account were restricted. Reports also described differences in user feeds, audience engagement, view counts and reach. These mechanisms can determine which messages appear, how often they appear and how many voters encounter them.

UN experts said Meta must ensure a level playing field online. Meta denied favouring either side and said it would follow a Brazilian court order to treat Bolsonaro and Lula equally. The dispute shows that platform transparency and equal treatment can become central election concerns, especially when polls predict a close run-off.