By Brazil Stock Guide – A broad coalition of financial sector entities described as “concerning” the decision by TCU minister Jhonatan de Jesus to restrict the Central Bank of Brazil’s access to case files related to the audit of its conduct in the liquidation of Banco Master. The groups argue that the measure imposes an unjustified limitation on the Central Bank’s right to adversarial proceedings and full defense in a case viewed as systemically relevant.
The statement was signed by ABBC, ABBI, ABRACAM, ABDE, Abecs, Anbima, ABIPAG, Abranet, Acrefi, Fin, Febraban, OCB and Zetta — a spectrum that spans commercial banks, development institutions, cooperatives and payment companies. While acknowledging that procedural confidentiality may be appropriate in certain situations, the associations said the restriction lacks a clear and transparent technical justification, especially given that the Central Bank is the audited authority in the process.
The minister altered the classification of the case to “confidential with specific authorization required to access documents,” effectively preventing the Central Bank from reviewing the records despite being directly involved. According to reporting by Valor Econômico, court insiders described the move as unusual, since even in confidential proceedings the audited entity typically maintains access to the case files.
As rapporteur, Jhonatan de Jesus holds procedural authority over the case, including decisions related to confidentiality and its internal handling, at least until the matter is eventually examined by the full court. That role grants significant institutional weight to his determinations, particularly in a process involving financial supervision and systemic oversight.
The episode comes as the TCU’s technical unit prepares its final report on the Master liquidation. Preliminary assessments had reportedly indicated no evidence of “inaction” by the Central Bank in the handling of the case. The new restriction has heightened tensions between the oversight body and the monetary authority at a sensitive stage of the proceedings.
In their note, the associations stressed that decisions imposing confidentiality in matters of public interest must be properly motivated and accompanied by objective explanations to society. Given the potential implications for financial stability and confidence in supervisory mechanisms, they argue that transparency is essential to preserve legal certainty and institutional credibility.
The groups concluded by reaffirming their commitment to financial stability and best practices across the financial system, while emphasizing that only full transparency in the review process will safeguard trust in public institutions and ensure recognition of decisions grounded in technical analysis.