Brazil Defamation Laws: Civil, Criminal & Defences

Defamation in Brazil is both a crime and a civil wrong. The Penal Code defines three crimes against honour: calunia (slander, Article 138), difamacao (defamation, Article 139), and injuria (insult, Article 140). Victims can also claim moral damages under Civil Code Articles 186 and 927.

What counts as defamation in Brazil

Brazilian law protects honour through three separate crimes in the Penal Code (Decreto-Lei 2,848/1940). Calunia, in Article 138, is falsely attributing to someone a fact defined as a crime, knowing the accusation is false. Difamacao, in Article 139, is attributing to someone a fact that is offensive to their reputation, regardless of whether it amounts to a crime. Injuria, in Article 140, is offending a person's dignity or decorum, typically through abusive words or gestures rather than a factual allegation. The first two protect objective honour (a person's standing in society), while injuria protects subjective honour (self-esteem and personal dignity). The same provisions apply to written, spoken, and online statements, and a single act can sometimes implicate more than one offence.

Criminal defamation and its penalties

The Penal Code sets graduated penalties for the three crimes against honour. Calunia (Article 138) carries detention from 6 months to 2 years plus a fine. Difamacao (Article 139) carries detention from 3 months to 1 year plus a fine. Injuria (Article 140) carries detention from 1 to 6 months or a fine. Article 141 increases penalties by one-third in aggravating circumstances, such as offences against the President, public officials acting in their duties, or in the presence of several people, and doubles them when the act is committed for payment. Most crimes against honour proceed by private criminal complaint (queixa-crime) filed by the victim, rather than by public prosecution.

Defences to a defamation claim

Truth (exceptio veritatis) is a defence to calunia, since the crime requires a false accusation, and to difamacao only in limited situations, notably where the target is a public official and the fact relates to their duties. Truth is generally not a defence to injuria, which punishes the offence to dignity rather than the truth of any fact. Article 142 excludes liability for certain statements, including those made in court proceedings by a party or counsel, fair literary, artistic, or scientific criticism, and unfavourable opinions by a public official acting in their duties. Article 143 allows retraction: a defendant who fully retracts a calunia or difamacao before judgment is exempt from penalty. Courts have generally held that legitimate criticism, factual reporting, and value judgments about public figures attract strong constitutional protection under the free-expression guarantees of Article 5 of the Constitution.

Watch out: Truth will not save an injuria claim. Because injuria targets a person's dignity rather than a verifiable fact, proving your insult was accurate does not provide a defence.

Remedies and damages

Apart from criminal penalties, a defamation victim can sue for moral (non-pecuniary) damages in the civil courts. The basis is Civil Code Article 186, which provides that anyone who, by act or omission, negligence or recklessness, violates a right and causes harm (including purely moral harm) commits an unlawful act, together with Article 927, which imposes the duty to repair that harm. There is no statutory cap on moral damages; courts set the amount based on the gravity of the offence, how widely it spread, the parties' situations, and the defendant's degree of fault. Civil and criminal liability are independent, so a person may face both a queixa-crime and a damages suit over the same statement. Courts may also order rights of reply and removal of unlawful content.

Limitation period

For civil moral-damages claims, the Civil Code sets a limitation period of 3 years (Article 206, paragraph 3, item V) running from when the victim becomes aware of the violation. For the criminal route, because crimes against honour are generally prosecuted by private complaint, the victim must file the queixa-crime within 6 months of learning who the offender is, under the Code of Criminal Procedure. Missing the criminal deadline does not necessarily bar a separate civil claim, since the two tracks run independently and have different limitation rules.

Online defamation

Defamatory content posted online is governed by the same crimes against honour and the same civil rules as offline statements. Platform liability is shaped by the Marco Civil da Internet (Law 12,965/2014). Under its framework, internet application providers have generally not been liable for third-party content unless they failed to comply with a specific court order to remove it. A 2025 Supreme Federal Court ruling reshaped this regime, moving most categories of unlawful content toward a notice-and-takedown model while preserving, for crimes against honour, the requirement of a judicial order before platform liability arises. Victims can seek removal of content, identification of anonymous users through court procedures, and damages against the author.

Watch out: Forwarding or resharing defamatory material can create your own liability. Spreading or divulging a known false accusation is expressly punishable under the calunia provision in Article 138.

How to bring a claim

The criminal route typically begins with a private criminal complaint (queixa-crime) filed by the victim or their lawyer with the competent criminal court, since the Public Prosecutor does not ordinarily initiate honour crimes. The civil route is a damages action in the civil courts seeking moral damages under Articles 186 and 927, and may be combined with requests for content removal and a right of reply. Because the criminal six-month deadline is short and runs from learning the offender's identity, and because online cases often require a preliminary step to identify anonymous authors, anyone considering action consults a qualified Brazilian lawyer (advogado) without delay.