By Marcela Ayres and Ricardo Brito
BRASILIA, Oct 2 (Reuters) – Brazil’s next president is set to inherit an unusually large number of appointments to the country’s most powerful institutions, with vacancies piled up at the Supreme Court, central bank and economic regulators.
The growing backlog of unfilled posts means the winner of the tight race between leftist President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and Senator Flavio Bolsonaro could gain significant influence over bodies that help shape monetary policy, oversee financial markets and interpret the constitution. The two candidates will face off in the first round of the electoral contest on Sunday, with a runoff later in the month forecast as the most likely outcome.
The vacancies reflect a broader shift in Brazilian politics: an increasingly powerful Congress is using confirmation of nominees as a tool for political leverage, eroding the executive branch’s room for maneuver.
A predominantly right-wing Congress has flexed this growing power during Lula’s current term by delaying confirmation of a number of his nominees. Lula has also failed to make some nominations.
While nominations once went promptly to Senate committees for approval, many nomination processes stalled during the pandemic, awaiting the Senate president’s approval. Senate President Davi Alcolumbre has maintained that practice, concentrating power in the Senate and turning what was once a routine step into a political decision, said a person familiar with the process, who requested anonymity.
The presidential palace and Alcolumbre’s office did not respond to requests for comment.
The use of presidential appointments as political leverage has made the executive reluctant to submit nominees without first gauging their Senate prospects, said Rubens Beçak, a law professor at the University of Sao Paulo.
BANK SEATS
At the central bank, two board seats, including the economic policy post that oversees forecasts ahead of rate decisions, have been empty since January, a record length of time for those posts to be left open. Lula has yet to submit nominees.
In April, senators rejected Lula’s Supreme Court nominee, Solicitor General Jorge Messias, in a historic setback that extended a vacancy now nearly a year old, the longest since Brazil’s return to democracy in the 1980s.
Securities regulator CVM has had board vacancies since late 2024, while antitrust watchdog Cade, lacking its president and two board members, is near its minimum quorum, delaying merger reviews.
Claudio Couto, a political scientist at the Fundacao Getulio Vargas, called the backlog “deeply problematic,” saying it risks concentrating appointments in one administration and politicizing “bodies that are meant to remain nonpartisan.”
STRUCTURAL SHIFT
Nominations and bills, once largely negotiated between the president and coalition parties, increasingly hinge on deals among congressional leaders, said Neuriberg Dias, head of legislative watchdog DIAP.
Congress’ growing control over spending, he said, has changed the incentives behind executive-legislative bargaining.
Congressional earmarks — which direct funding to local or pet projects — accounted for 7.5% of effective federal discretionary spending in 2018, but swelled to 21% in 2025, according to Planning Ministry data provided to Reuters.
The government’s grip on the agenda has in turn weakened. Last year, Congress approved 178 bills introduced by legislators and only 50 from the executive. In 2007, during Lula’s second term, the reverse was true: 142 executive bills versus 52 from Congress, according to DIAP data.
The 2026 campaign has slowed nominations further, people familiar with the matter said, as lawmakers wait to see whether Lula wins another term. Voters will also elect all 513 members of the Lower House and two-thirds of the Senate.
With power shifting from the presidency to Congress, the election may decide not only who governs Brazil, but how much room the winner will have to appoint officials and shape key institutions.
(Reporting by Marcela Ayres and Ricardo Brito, Editing by Brendan O’Boyle and Rosalba O’Brien)
Comments