World

Tarcísio dismisses deputy Carlos Alberto da Cunha from the Civil Police

Governor Tarcísio de Freitas dismissed Carlos Alberto da Cunha from his role as delegate, but the courts have suspended the termination.

3 September 2026Tagblick Newsdesk

AI-generatedWritten by an AI system, editorially responsible — how we work

Archive photo: Tarcísio dismisses deputy Carlos Alberto da Cunha from the Civil Police — Archive photoPhoto: assembleiaam · Flickr · PDM

On Thursday (3), the governor of São Paulo, Tarcísio de Freitas, dismissed federal deputy Carlos Alberto da Cunha from his position as delegate of the Civil Police. The decision was published in the "Official Gazette" and is attributed to issues related to a kidnapping staging case.

Carlos Alberto da Cunha, also known as Delegate Da Cunha, is a member of União Brasil and is seeking re-election as a federal deputy. However, the dismissal has generated swift reactions in the legal sphere.

The São Paulo courts granted a preliminary injunction preventing Da Cunha's dismissal, allowing him to retain his position within the Civil Police. The injunction was issued by Judge Álvaro Torres Júnior and is considered provisional.

With this ruling, the formalization of the dismissal cannot be carried out. The situation now remains open, awaiting possible developments in the judiciary.

So far, there has been no official statement from Governor Tarcísio de Freitas regarding the granted injunction. Opposition members and other deputies may express their views on the matter, but no declarations have yet been published.

This episode illustrates the complexity of the relationships between political positions and public roles within the police sphere. Carlos Alberto da Cunha's situation remains under scrutiny, both by the judiciary and state politics.

This item was written by an AI system on the basis of the headlines and short teasers of the independently operating newsrooms named below. We disclose this under Art. 50(4), second subparagraph, of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (AI Act). Before publication we check origin and verifiability — anything that appears in only one place is not published — as well as language, substance and legally sensitive content. No separate substantive review of each individual item by a natural person takes place; we therefore do not rely on the exemption in Art. 50(4), second subparagraph, of the AI Act. Editorial responsibility for this publication rests with the person named in the imprint (§ 18 Abs. 2 MStV). Please report errors to [email protected] — we will correct or remove the item. Full reports are available from the sources listed.