Lula's victory is against authoritarianism, says retired STF minister

Brazil elected Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva president for a fourth time on Sunday, according to the article. The result was presented not only as a change in leadership, but also as a defense of democratic values. It matters because elections can affirm limits on political power and reject attempts to weaken institutions or freedoms.

Celso de Mello, a retired STF minister and former court president, described Lula’s victory as an “afirmação cívica contra as tentações autocráticas.” He said voters had defeated what he called “aspirações autoritárias.” His key mechanism is civic participation: citizens use their votes to reject fear, intolerance, lies, and violence as political tools.

Mello also warned that an election alone is not enough. Democracy still requires vigilance, institutional integrity, an independent press, civic education, and respect for human dignity and pluralism. The OAB likewise said the result must be respected by everyone, regardless of political differences.

Lula has been elected president four times, making this election another major stage in his political career. The article identifies him as Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva and says he will lead Brazil for a fourth presidential mandate. The number matters because it shows repeated electoral success across different moments in the country’s political life.

The article does not list his earlier election dates or explain every stage of his career. It does establish that the latest victory came on Sunday, October 25, 2026, and that Lula was elected again by the voters. His return to the presidency therefore reflects the continuing importance of his political leadership.

The reactions also show the responsibilities attached to that record. The OAB congratulated Lula and wished him success while stressing the challenges ahead. It said the president must help strengthen justice and institutions, and that the popular decision must be respected by supporters and opponents alike.

Authoritarianism is a form of politics in which power is concentrated and leaders or institutions limit meaningful opposition, public criticism, and individual freedoms. Democratic government works differently. It depends on popular choice, institutional checks, political pluralism, independent information, and the protection of rights. In a democracy, winning office does not give leaders unlimited power.

The article offers a practical contrast. Celso de Mello said Lula’s victory rejected “aspirações autoritárias.” He also said citizens must refuse fear as a tool of submission and reject intolerance, lies, and violence as methods of political action. These examples show how authoritarian politics can undermine free public participation.

The distinction matters after an election because democratic government requires more than a winner. Leaders must respect institutions, freedoms, human dignity, and opposing views. Citizens and organizations must also accept the vote’s outcome while remaining vigilant. The OAB expressed this principle by saying the decision of the ballot box must be respected by everyone.

The STF is Brazil’s highest constitutional court, known in Portuguese as the Supremo Tribunal Federal. The OAB is the Ordem dos Advogados do Brasil, the national organization representing Brazilian lawyers. The IAB is the Instituto dos Advogados Brasileiros, a legal institute. The article identifies Celso de Mello as a retired STF minister and former court president.

Their reactions matter because courts and legal organizations help defend the rule of law and democratic institutions. After the election, the OAB congratulated Lula, wished him success, and said the ballot-box decision must be respected regardless of political differences. The IAB also congratulated Lula and Geraldo Alckmin and highlighted its Observatory of Democracy.

These statements create a public institutional signal. They support peaceful acceptance of the result, transparency, and dialogue. The article says the OAB will remain available to help strengthen justice and institutions. The IAB said it had demanded respect for the ballots and responsibilities tied to the rule of law.

When leaders or citizens refuse to accept a legitimate election result, they can damage the basic agreement that allows democratic government to function. The immediate risk is distrust in institutions. Continued rejection can also deepen intolerance, spread political conflict, and make peaceful transfers or cooperation harder. The article does not describe a specific post-election crisis, but it stresses why acceptance matters.

The OAB stated that the decision of the ballot box must be respected by everyone, regardless of political differences. This is the key mechanism: public recognition of the voters’ choice gives the elected government legitimacy while allowing opponents to continue debating and organizing lawfully.

Celso de Mello connected democratic strength with rejecting fear, intolerance, lies, and violence. If those tools replace respect for freedom, democracy becomes more fragile. The OAB and IAB therefore emphasized institutions, dialogue, transparency, and the rule of law. Their message points forward to peaceful political disagreement under constitutional limits.

An election gives citizens a way to choose leaders, but it does not automatically protect democracy between elections. Democratic government also needs reliable information, informed citizens, strong institutions, and space for disagreement. Without these supports, voters may be manipulated, opponents silenced, or public debate damaged even when elections continue.

Celso de Mello identified several protections: institutional integrity, an independent press, education for citizenship, and rejection of lies and violence. Each serves a different purpose. Institutions limit abuses of power. Journalism helps citizens examine claims. Civic education builds understanding of rights and responsibilities. Rejecting violence keeps political competition peaceful.

The article therefore describes defending freedom as a daily task. Mello said democratic vigilance remains necessary even after Lula’s victory. The OAB and IAB reinforced the institutional side of that task by supporting respect for the election, transparency, dialogue, justice, and the rule of law. These conditions shape Brazil’s democratic future beyond one vote.

The rule of law means public power must operate under established laws and constitutional principles. Elected governments receive authority from voters, but they do not receive unlimited control. Courts, institutions, rights, and legal procedures constrain official action. This protects people from arbitrary decisions and preserves space for criticism, opposition, and political diversity.

The article connects this idea to the IAB’s work. The institute said it created an Observatory of Democracy, demanded respect for the ballots and transparency, and emphasized responsibilities arising from a commitment to the rule of law. Celso de Mello similarly said power is legitimate only when it respects freedom, human dignity, and pluralism.

These limits matter after Lula’s election because democratic legitimacy continues during the mandate. The president must govern within institutional boundaries, while citizens and organizations must monitor power lawfully. The OAB’s call to respect the result and strengthen justice and institutions reflects the same principle: popular authority and legal restraint must work together.