Goiás, Brazil: national judicial inspector suspends an electoral court judgment removing a councillor who alleged signs of unsupervised AI drafting
Goiânia city councillor Aava Santiago (PSB) told Brazil's National Council of Justice (CNJ) that the final text of a judgment of the Regional Electoral Court of Goiás (TRE-GO), which removed her from office for party infidelity, contained commands, instructions and review records indicating the use of artificial intelligence without the human supervision that CNJ Resolution 615/2025 requires. On 9 October 2026, the day a substitute took her seat, the national inspector of justice, Minister Benedito Gonçalves, found the allegations plausible on a preliminary reading, suspended the judgment and the administrative acts that followed from it, and gave the court 15 days to explain its review procedures, G1 and Jurinews report. The suspension does not review the merits of the removal, and whether AI was used irregularly has yet to be investigated.
- AI system
- Unidentified AI drafting tool (suspected)
- Occurred
- Oct 2026
- Reported
- 10 October 2026
- Event location
- Brazil
- What the AI did
- Informed a human decision about the person
- Reported harm
- Legal HarmProfessional Harm
- Whose AI use
- An institution’s AI use
- Setting
- Justice
- Evidence
- AI involvement suspected · Causal attribution alleged · 2 sources
- 4 claims: 4 reported. 3 open questions
- People reported harmed
- 1 person
AI system as recorded: Generative artificial intelligence allegedly used in drafting the TRE-GO judgment; no tool is named, and its use is alleged by the councillor and found plausible only on a preliminary reading by the national inspector of justice
What Happened
The judgment. According to G1, the TRE-GO decided by six votes to one in July 2026 to remove councillor Aava Santiago from office for party infidelity. The decision was upheld on Tuesday 6 October, which ended its suspensive condition and ordered immediate notice to the Goiânia city council so that a substitute named by the PSDB could take the seat. The substitute took the seat on Friday 9 October.
The AI allegation. The councillor petitioned the CNJ, alleging that the final text of the judgment contained commands, instructions and review records that would reveal possible use of artificial intelligence with failures in human review, contrary to CNJ Resolution 615/2025. G1 quotes the inspector: a reading of the passages reproduced in the petition shows, in theory, annotations that appear to correspond to internal review instructions intended to check the factual and legal premises used to build the judgment's reasoning.
The suspension. On 9 October the national inspector of justice, Minister Benedito Gonçalves, considered the allegations of non-compliance with the CNJ's rules on governance, human supervision and control of AI in the judiciary plausible on a preliminary analysis. He suspended the judgment's effects and the administrative acts derived from it and gave the TRE-GO 15 days to report. He stressed that the measure is not a review of the merits or a declaration of nullity, Jurinews reports. The substitute told G1 that the injunction is provisional, concerns formal procedure and does not reassess the merits of the electoral decision.
Limits. Neither report reproduces the disputed passages, names a tool or says which parts of the reasoning were machine-drafted. The removal rests on a merits ruling first voted in July; whether AI-drafted text shaped that ruling, or only the later text, is not established.
Reported harm
According to G1 and Jurinews, a judgment that the councillor says shows signs of AI use without the required human review removed her from her council seat, and a substitute took the seat on 9 October 2026 before the national inspector of justice suspended the judgment the same day. The AI connection is her allegation, found plausible only on a preliminary reading.
Outcome
PendingOn 9 October 2026 the national inspector of justice granted an injunction suspending the effects of the TRE-GO judgment and the administrative acts derived from it, pending further decision, and gave the court 15 days to provide information on its human-review procedures. The inspector stated that the measure neither reviews the merits nor declares the electoral judgment void. The city council suspended the administrative acts of the judgment, and the councillor was to take part in a council vote on 10 October, G1 reports. The TRE-GO told G1 it does not comment on such cases.
What remains unknown
- Which passages of the judgment contain the disputed annotations, and which tool, if any, produced them.
- Whether AI-drafted text affected the July 2026 merits vote or only the later judgment text.
- The TRE-GO's response to the CNJ and the outcome of the CNJ investigation.
What the evidence supports
AI involvement: suspected. The output at issue is text in the TRE-GO judgment about the councillor: she alleges, and G1 and Jurinews report, that the final text contained commands, instructions and review records indicating AI use without human review. The national inspector of justice, who examined the passages reproduced in her petition, wrote that they show in theory annotations that appear to be internal review instructions for checking the premises of the judgment's reasoning, and found the allegation of non-compliance with the CNJ's AI supervision rules plausible on a preliminary analysis. That judgment removed her from office until he suspended it. No tool is named, the passages are not reproduced, and AI use has not been established; the merits vote of July 2026 was made by the judges.
4 claims: 4 reported. What the statuses mean
Reported The TRE-GO judgment removed councillor Aava Santiago from office for party infidelity; it was upheld on 6 October 2026, ending its suspensive condition, and a substitute took her seat on 9 October.
Causal attribution. G1's account of the electoral proceedings.
- g1.globo.com(opens in new tab) supports · Portuguese
'acórdão feito pelo Tribunal Regional Eleitoral de Goiás (TRE-GO), que cassou o mandato da vereadora Aava Santiago (PSB)'; 'no texto que determinou a cassação por infidelidade partidária'; 'A decisão havia sido mantida nesta terça-feira (6) e encerrava a condição suspensiva do processo'; 'Nesta sexta-feira (9), Michel Magul (PSDB) havia assumido a vaga de Aava Santiago na Câmara Municipal.'
Reported The councillor alleged to the CNJ that the final text of the judgment contained commands, instructions and review records indicating the use of artificial intelligence without the human supervision required by CNJ Resolution 615/2025.
Causal attribution. The councillor's allegation, as both outlets report it; the petition was not inspected.
- g1.globo.com(opens in new tab) supports · Portuguese
'No documento, a vereadora alega que no texto final da decisão há comandos, instruções e registros de conferência que revelariam o possível uso de IA com falhas na revisão humana.'
- jurinews.com.br(opens in new tab) supports · Portuguese
'A parlamentar acionou o CNJ alegando que o texto final do julgamento continha comandos de conferência, instruções e registros de revisão que indicariam possível utilização de inteligência artificial sem a supervisão humana exigida pela Resolução CNJ nº 615/2025.'
Reported On 9 October 2026 the national inspector of justice found, on a preliminary analysis, the allegations of non-compliance with the CNJ's AI supervision rules plausible, writing that the passages reproduced in the petition show in theory annotations that appear to be internal review instructions; he suspended the judgment's effects and gave the TRE-GO 15 days to report.
Causal attribution. The inspector's preliminary finding as relayed by both outlets from the same decision; it is not a finding that AI was used.
- g1.globo.com(opens in new tab) supports · Portuguese
'evidencia, em tese, a existência de anotações que aparentam corresponder a instruções internas de revisão, destinadas justamente à conferência da correção de premissas fáticas e jurídicas utilizadas na construção da fundamentação do julgado'
- jurinews.com.br(opens in new tab) supports · Portuguese
'A liminar foi concedida nesta sexta-feira (9) pelo corregedor nacional de Justiça, ministro Benedito Gonçalves.'; 'Na decisão, Benedito Gonçalves considerou plausíveis, em análise preliminar, as alegações de descumprimento das regras de governança, supervisão humana e controle da utilização de inteligência artificial no Judiciário.'; 'O corregedor determinou a suspensão cautelar dos efeitos do acórdão e dos atos administrativos dele decorrentes.'; 'O TRE-GO terá prazo de 15 dias para prestar informações sobre o caso.'
Reported The inspector stated that the suspension neither reviews the merits nor declares the electoral judgment void, and that the possible irregular use of AI is still to be investigated; the substitute described the injunction as provisional and procedural.
Causal attribution. Limits stated by the inspector and the substitute; they bound how far the removal can be attributed to AI drafting.
- jurinews.com.br(opens in new tab) supports · Portuguese
'Embora Benedito Gonçalves tenha ressaltado que a medida não representa revisão do mérito nem declaração de nulidade do julgamento eleitoral'; 'A eventual utilização irregular de inteligência artificial ainda será objeto de apuração.'
- g1.globo.com(opens in new tab) supports · Portuguese
'A decisão liminar do CNJ possui caráter instrumental e provisório, motivada por questões formais de procedimento administrativo e governança no âmbito do tribunal.'
Sources
2 sources inspected. Sources that repeat one account do not corroborate each other.
- G1 Goiás, 10 October 2026: CNJ suspends the removal of councillor Aava Santiago(opens in new tab)
s1 · g1.globo.com · News report · Portuguese · Inspected · 10 October 2026 · Primary
- Jurinews, 10 October 2026: CNJ suspends Aava Santiago removal after suspected failures in AI use(opens in new tab)
s2 · jurinews.com.br · News report · Portuguese · Inspected · 10 October 2026
How the sources were read, and where the events happened
Read in full in Portuguese by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-13 (HTTP 200); the English assertions are the agent's translation and no human translator reviewed them. G1 quotes the inspector's decision and statements from the councillor's office and the substitute; the CNJ decision and the petition were not themselves inspected. Applies to s1.
Read in full in Portuguese by the research agent (an AI) on 2026-10-13 (HTTP 200); the English assertions are the agent's translation and no human translator reviewed them. Jurinews reports the CNJ injunction; the decision itself was not inspected. Applies to s2.
Event countries: Brazil. Affected-person countries: Brazil. Court countries: Brazil.
The removal concerns a seat on the Goiânia city council, Goiás, Brazil, decided by the Regional Electoral Court of Goiás and suspended by Brazil's National Council of Justice (G1, Jurinews). The councillor holds office in Goiânia.
Reviewed for publication 2026-10-13: Published because the national inspector of justice, after examining passages from an electoral court judgment that removed a councillor from office, found her allegation of unsupervised generative-AI drafting plausible on a preliminary analysis and suspended the judgment the day a substitute took her seat. AI use remains suspected and is attributed to her allegation and the inspector's preliminary finding.
People described
An elected city councillor in Goiânia, a public official who brought the complaint to the CNJ and is named in the reports.
People reported harmed in this case
1 person
0 AI participants · 1 other person harmed
One person: the councillor removed by the judgment whose drafting is disputed. Voters and the council are not counted.
Counted once within this case. The same person may appear in other cases. This count does not establish AI causation.
Cite this case
Compiled per our published methodology: verification statuses, sourcing standards, and corrections process.
APA
NOPE. (2026). Goiás, Brazil: national judicial inspector suspends an electoral court judgment removing a councillor who alleged signs of unsupervised AI drafting. AI incidents. https://nope.net/incidents/2026-goias-electoral-court-judgment-removing-councillor-suspended-over-suspected-unsupervised-ai-drafting
BibTeX
@misc{2026_goias_electoral_court_judgment_removing_councillor_suspended_over_suspected_unsupervised_ai_drafting,
title = {Goiás, Brazil: national judicial inspector suspends an electoral court judgment removing a councillor who alleged signs of unsupervised AI drafting},
author = {NOPE},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {AI incidents},
url = {https://nope.net/incidents/2026-goias-electoral-court-judgment-removing-councillor-suspended-over-suspected-unsupervised-ai-drafting}
} Related cases
Paraíba, Brazil: judge fines a lawyer R$32,800 over hidden AI commands in a petition, G1 reports; state bar later suspends two lawyers in such cases
A judge of the 5th Mixed Court of Sousa, Paraíba, found hidden instructions aimed at artificial intelligence tools spread over seven pages of a lawyer's motion for clarification in a public-competition case in June 2026, including an order to ignore impartiality and a note calling it a test of whether the judge used only AI to decide. The judge fined the lawyer two penalties of R$16,400 (R$32,800 in total) for bad-faith litigation and contempt of the court's dignity, and referred the case to the Paraíba bar (OAB-PB) and the state prosecutors, G1 reports. The defence said the commands were not inserted deliberately and blamed an error in exporting a file prepared with AI support. An appeal judge refused to suspend the fines on 30 June, the trial judge kept them on reconsideration, and in July, G1 reports, the OAB-PB preventively suspended two lawyers after opening procedures into two hidden-command cases, one of them the Sousa case.
Former federal prosecutor in North Carolina publicly reprimanded after admitting that a brief with fabricated quotations was drafted with AI; he lost his post
In December 2025 an Assistant U.S. Attorney in the Eastern District of North Carolina filed a response brief for the Department of Defense in a self-represented veteran's lawsuit over health-insurance coverage. The plaintiff identified fabricated quotations and misdescribed case holdings in it. The attorney first attributed the errors to an unfinalized draft filed by mistake. On 2 March 2026 Magistrate Judge Robert T. Numbers II ordered him to show cause why he should not be sanctioned. At the 10 March hearing the attorney, Rudy Renfer, said under oath that he had accidentally overwritten his draft, panicked and used artificial intelligence to draft the brief, and had not verified the cases it cited; he said he had resigned after 17 years in the office, and Courthouse News reported he was terminated the next day. On 28 April 2026 the court issued a public reprimand instead of a fine, writing that his reputation was in tatters and that his job loss already exceeded the usual fines.
Arizona federal court dismisses a Title VII complaint it says appears AI-generated and bars the plaintiff from using AI to draft the amended complaint
On 6 October 2026 a judge of the US District Court for the District of Arizona dismissed a 67-page, 199-paragraph workplace complaint filed on 11 September 2026, saying it appeared to have been generated by artificial intelligence because it resembled other AI-generated complaints the court had encountered. The court dismissed it as a shotgun pleading that did not give the defendant or the court sufficient notice of the claims, which it said shifted between Title VII retaliation, hostile work environment and retaliatory hostile work environment. It granted leave to file an amended complaint of no more than 25 pages by 19 October 2026, prohibited the plaintiff from using AI to draft it and directed entry of a judgment of dismissal with prejudice if no amended complaint is filed. The order does not establish who drafted the complaint or name any AI tool.
Prosecutor: judge used ChatGPT citations in Oklahoma custody order later vacated
In November 2025 Stephens County Associate District Judge Lawrence Wheeler issued an order in a child paternity and custody case that denied one parent's request for a psychological evaluation of the other parent and reprimanded the requesting parent's attorney 'for stooping to such frivolous trial tactics'. The attorney challenged the order at the Oklahoma Supreme Court in February 2026, telling the justices that it relied on two cases that do not exist; the challenge was dismissed in March after Wheeler vacated the order, and he is no longer on the case. According to a 17 August 2026 letter from the Stephens County district attorney, Wheeler told the Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation that he used ChatGPT for research and wrote the order himself, and that at least two citations in it produced by ChatGPT do not exist. The mother in the case told News 9 that learning the order's citations were allegedly fabricated was alarming because it concerned the custody of a child. The attorney general's office declined criminal prosecution; judicial discipline remains possible.
If you or someone you know is struggling, free and confidential support is available. Find a helpline near you at Signpost.