Article 85 of the 1988 Brazilian Constitution defines the "crimes of responsibility" of the President of the Republic as those acts that violate the Constitution, including: "I – the existence of the Union; ... V – probity in administration; VI – the budgetary law; VII – compliance with laws and court decisions." It specifies that such crimes are to be defined in a special law and are the basis for impeachment. Article 86 states that once the Chamber of Deputies authorizes proceedings, the President is tried by the Federal Supreme Court for common crimes and by the Federal Senate for crimes of responsibility, and is suspended from duties during the trial.

The final report of the Mixed Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry, created to investigate the facts contained in the denunciations of Mr. Pedro Collor de Mello regarding the activities of Mr. Paulo César Cavalcante Farias, states that the commission was established to investigate acts "capable of configuring criminal illegality" connected to the presidential campaign and government. In its conclusions, the report affirms that President Fernando Collor "received undue economic advantages" through deposits in accounts of his secretary, wife, ex‑wife, mother, sister, and through the purchase of goods such as the Fiat Elba and improvements to his properties, paid with resources originating directly or indirectly from Paulo César Farias. It characterizes these acts as crimes of responsibility and recommends the filing of an impeachment request.

This official retrospective by Brazil's Chamber of Deputies describes the process that "culminated with the admission of the accusation, by the Chamber of Deputies, of the commission of crime of responsibility by Collor, thus authorizing the Senate to judge him." It notes that on December 30, 1992, "by 76 votes in favor and 2 against, Fernando Collor is condemned to disqualification, for eight years, for the exercise of public function, without prejudice to other judicial sanctions." The text frames the impeachment in terms of "crime of responsibility" under Article 85 of the Constitution, not using phrasing about self‑enrichment, though the broader context refers to corruption allegations investigated by a CPI (parliamentary inquiry) into PC Farias.

The Chamber of Deputies’ historical program on the PC Farias CPI explains that the mixed CPI investigated the activities of PC Farias in the Collor government and that its final report was approved in August 1992. It states that the report "found that the personal expenses of Collor were paid by 'ghosts' who supplied the President’s accounts" and that these ghost accounts were creations of the PC scheme. The CPI also concluded that PC Farias "spoke on behalf of the President of the Republic, who received undue economic advantages." The program notes that six months after the CPI was installed, "suffering an impeachment process, the president of the Republic resigned" and that the CPI "opened the way" for this new page in Brazilian history.

The article notes that in May 1992, "Pedro Collor de Mello accused his brother and then-president of Brazil, Fernando Collor de Mello, of involvement in an extensive corruption scheme organized by Paulo César (PC) Farias." It explains that the scheme "used the president's name and the influence of his office to extract illicit payments from businessmen seeking government contracts and favors" and that money from this network "was used to pay personal expenses of the president and his family." The author writes that the congressional investigation concluded the president had received "undue advantages" through this scheme, providing the legal basis for impeachment on charges of crimes of responsibility, especially violations of probity in public administration.

The World Bank working paper describes the case: "The corruption accusations were first directed at PC Farias (Collor de Mello's campaign manager) and several Cabinet members. On March 30th 1992, Veja magazine published an interview with Pedro Collor de Mello, the President's brother, who denounced the existence of a corruption scheme run by PC Farias" and linked it to the president. It notes that congressional investigators found that PC Farias "had created an influence-peddling network that collected illegal commissions from private firms in exchange for government favors" and that "a significant share of these funds was used to pay for the personal expenses of President Collor and his family," leading to the impeachment process for crimes of responsibility.

Reporting on the key congressional report in August 1992, the article states that investigators said President Fernando Collor de Mello's "household and family received $6.5 million from a ring of grafters and influence peddlers linked to his administration." It explains that the report found Paulo César Farias had "organized an illicit financial network that used Farias' connection to Collor to squeeze illegal 'commissions' from companies seeking to do business with the government" and that checks from "phantom" accounts "went for improvements on Collor's residential properties or to accounts controlled by Collor's personal secretary, his wife, his wife's secretary, his former wife and his mother." The report concluded "that the nexus between the 'PC scheme' and the president of the republic emerges precise and remains complete" and that the president "permanently and during more than two years of his term, received undue economic advantages directly or indirectly from Mr. Paulo Cesar Cavalcante Farias," grounds for impeachment under Brazilian law as offenses against the dignity, honor and decorum of the office.

Britannica’s biography states that in 1992 "allegations that he and his campaign treasurer, Paulo César Farias, had engaged in an influence‑peddling scheme" led to an investigation and impeachment proceedings against President Collor. It notes that the scheme involved kickbacks from businesses seeking government favors and that the money was allegedly used to enrich Farias and to pay Collor’s personal expenses. Britannica further explains that Collor resigned in December 1992 just before the Senate was to vote on his removal but that the Senate nevertheless voted to bar him from public office for eight years.

This historical entry describes that the mixed CPI was set up to investigate accusations made by Pedro Collor, the president’s brother, who revealed "a scheme of collecting bribes and diverting public resources commanded by Paulo César Farias, former treasurer of Collor’s campaign, inside the government." It reports that the CPI "concluded that the president was involved in common crimes and crimes of responsibility". As a result, on 29 September 1992 the Chamber of Deputies approved, by 441 votes to 38, the opening of the impeachment process against Fernando Collor de Mello, leading to his suspension and subsequent trial in the Senate.

The article explains that the impeachment process of Fernando Collor took place at the end of 1992 and resulted in his definitive removal from the presidency. It describes Paulo César Farias, Collor’s campaign treasurer, as the key figure and notes that investigations into the "PC Farias scheme" showed the use of illegal artifices to raise money during Collor’s government. One of the methods used by PC was to "open 'ghost' accounts to transfer money raised with the payment of bribes and diverted from public coffers to the accounts of Ana Acioli" (the president’s secretary). It states that expenses of the official residence, Casa da Dinda, were paid with money from PC Farias’s companies and that the CPI’s final report, approved by 16 votes to 5, led to the request for the president’s impeachment. The Senate later condemned Collor to loss of office and eight years of ineligibility despite his attempt to avoid impeachment by resigning.

The official record for Request 52/1992 notes the creation of the Mixed Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry (CPMI - P.C. Farias) to investigate the facts contained in the denunciations of Pedro Collor de Mello regarding the activities of Paulo César Cavalcante Farias, "capable of configuring criminal illegality." The entry registers that the commission met to vote on the final report, which was approved by 16 votes in favor and 5 against, thereby formally adopting the CPI report that would underpin the subsequent impeachment proceedings against President Fernando Collor de Mello.

The PDF of the Mixed Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry on P.C. Farias, hosted by the Federal Senate, includes the full text of the CPI report created from Request No. 52/1992. In its analytical sections, the report details how resources from companies linked to Paulo César Farias were used to pay personal expenses of President Collor and his family, including renovations to properties and the purchase of a Fiat Elba, through "ghost" bank accounts. The report concludes that such conduct constituted undue economic benefits to the president and configured crimes of responsibility, providing the basis for impeachment.

Reporting on the 29 September 1992 vote, the New York Times writes that Brazil’s lower house "voted overwhelmingly today to impeach President Fernando Collor de Mello on charges that he took part in a vast influence‑peddling scheme." It explains that investigators said Collor’s campaign treasurer, Paulo César Farias, "used his ties to the President to extort millions of dollars from businessmen seeking favors from the Government" and that some of this money "was used to pay the President's personal bills and improve his homes." The article notes that under the Brazilian Constitution the charges were classified as crimes of responsibility, subject to trial by the Senate.

NACLA's analysis recounts that after Pedro Collor's accusations, a congressional CPI uncovered "a vast corruption scheme centered on PC Farias, who used his access to the presidency to exact bribes from firms seeking state contracts or other government favors." It states that much of the money "was funneled through front companies and phantom accounts and used to pay the private expenses of the President and his family, including household costs and renovations to residences." The article emphasizes that the impeachment charges against Collor "were framed as crimes of responsibility for violating probity in public administration and the budgetary law, not as a common criminal indictment," even though the political discourse treated the case as one of corruption and diversion of state-related resources for private benefit.

In background on Collor’s career, El País notes that his presidency "was brief because he resigned in the middle of an impeachment process motivated by accusations of corruption." It adds that Collor "suffered the first impeachment process of Brazil’s democracy" and that "indications of corruption and financial fraud and massive popular pressure" (the caras-pintadas movement) removed him from the presidential seat, although not from politics.

Folha reports that Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court (STF) acquitted Fernando Collor of criminal charges connected to the corruption allegations that led to his impeachment. The court "absolved Collor of the accusations of embezzlement, passive corruption and ideological falsehood" regarding acts committed during his presidency (1990–1992). The article notes that despite the criminal acquittal, he had already been removed from office and disqualified politically by the impeachment process.

This scholarly article on the 1992 crisis explains that the impeachment petition against Collor "accused the president of benefiting from an illicit network of companies controlled by Paulo César Farias, which obtained commissions from firms in exchange for influence in public contracts and decisions." It notes that the funds "served to cover expenses of the presidential family and to finance luxury consumption and improvements to private residences" and argues that Congress treated these facts as "crimes of responsibility related to violations of administrative probity and misuse of public resources," even though the legal debate distinguished them from ordinary criminal charges.

In its historical reconstruction, this article reports that testimony from Francisco Eriberto França, driver of Collor’s secretary, revealed that "personal expenses of the president were paid with money from ghost accounts linked to PC Farias." It notes that the CPI’s rapporteur, Senator Amir Lando, concluded that Collor "received undue economic advantages, configuring crime of responsibility, subject to impeachment." The piece quotes Lando’s report stating that throughout more than two years of his mandate, the president received undue economic advantages via bank deposits into accounts of his secretary, his wife and her secretary, his ex‑wife, mother, and sister, as well as funds for the purchase of goods and improvements on his property, paid by companies of Paulo César Farias. The article states that on 29 September 1992 the Chamber approved the opening of the impeachment process, and that despite Collor’s resignation minutes before the final Senate judgment, the Senate still judged him and determined his ineligibility for eight years.

This academic thesis examines the impeachments of Presidents Fernando Collor de Mello and Dilma Rousseff "as resulting from infractions of the core obligations of presidential responsibility." Although the full text is lengthy, the work situates Collor’s impeachment within the legal category of "infrações" (infractions) to presidential duties, treated as crimes of responsibility under Brazilian constitutional law, arising from allegations of corruption and misuse of the presidential office.

An article in the journal Lua Nova analyzes "the Collor impeachment" and states that the process was driven by "denunciations of corruption involving the president's close associate Paulo César Farias" and the conclusion of a parliamentary inquiry that these schemes benefited the president. The author notes that the CPI documented how PC Farias negotiated advantages with economic groups in exchange for governmental favors and directed the resulting funds to finance expenditures of Collor and his entourage. The article stresses that the Chamber framed these facts as crimes of responsibility, specifically as an attack on probity in the administration and misuse of the presidential office.

In a backgrounder on impeachment in Brazil, the BBC notes that Fernando Collor de Mello "was elected president in 1989 but was forced to step down in 1992 amid a huge corruption scandal." It explains that a congressional investigation "found evidence that a scheme run by his campaign treasurer, Paulo César Farias, had solicited bribes from companies seeking public contracts" and that "part of the money was used to pay Collor's personal expenses," leading Congress to vote to impeach him. The article emphasizes that Collor resigned before the Senate's final vote but was nevertheless "banned from holding public office for eight years" as a result of the impeachment judgment.

In "Brazil's Collor: anatomy of a crisis," the author describes the 1992 scandal, explaining that a congressional committee uncovered a "vast network of corruption" organized by Paulo César Farias, the president's former campaign treasurer. The article notes that businesses paid commissions to Farias's firms in return for influence over state agencies and that "substantial sums" from these operations "were used to pay the personal expenses of President Collor and members of his family." It emphasizes that these findings formed the basis for the Chamber of Deputies’ decision to accept an impeachment complaint accusing Collor of crimes of responsibility for violating the probity of the public administration.

This long-form historical article explains that the final report of the PC Farias CPI "practically demanded a complaint for crime of responsibility" against President Collor. It recounts how the CPI documented a network in which PC Farias managed funds that paid for personal expenses and property improvements for Collor and his entourage, characterizing this as undue advantage linked to the office of the presidency. The report’s conclusions, according to the article, directly fueled the impeachment request subsequently accepted by the Chamber of Deputies in September 1992.

The article describes how businessman Paulo César Farias, treasurer of Collor’s 1989 presidential campaign, was "the key personality that caused the impeachment process" in 1992. It explains that in a May 13, 1992 report in Veja, Pedro Collor accused PC Farias of "articulating a corruption scheme of influence peddling, division of public positions and collection of kickbacks within the government." The so‑called "PC scheme" would have, as beneficiaries, "members of the top echelon of the government and the President himself." A congressional investigation commission later concluded that Collor and PC Farias’s accounts were not included in the 1990 bank account freeze and then requested the impeachment of the President.

Politize! recounts that in May 1992 "his brother, Pedro Collor, gave an interview to Veja magazine accusing him of maintaining a partnership with businessman Paulo César Farias, Collor’s campaign treasurer." According to Pedro, the treasurer would be the president’s "front man in illegitimate negotiations" – that is, someone who intermediates fraudulent financial transactions "in order to conceal the identity of those who really contract them." In June 1992 Congress created a CPI to investigate PC Farias, and "as the commission’s work progressed, Pedro Collor’s accusations gained substance, with many pieces of evidence of illicit transactions linking PC Farias to Collor." The article states that the impeachment began with a corruption scandal "directly linked to the president’s name," but also emphasizes the backdrop of weak political support and deep economic crisis as factors in his downfall.

Toda Matéria summarizes that Fernando Collor "was accused of involvement in corruption and financial fraud" and that his brother publicly revealed evidence of the president’s involvement in a money diversion case. It explains that "the crime consisted in using Collor’s electoral campaign as a slush fund (caixa 2). Thus, a lot of money was diverted from public funds through the creation of shell companies and accounts abroad." PC Farias, Collor’s campaign treasurer, is described as his supposed "front man" in several negotiations during the government.

Infobae reports that on September 29, 1992, the Chamber of Deputies approved the political trial (impeachment) against Collor, "accused of corruption." It recalls that he was the first Brazilian president elected by direct vote after the military regime, and that three months after the vote he resigned amidst the process.

Under Brazilian Law No. 1.079/1950, "crimes of responsibility" include the improper use of public funds or using the office to obtain personal advantages, and such crimes can lead to impeachment by Congress. In the Collor case, the Chamber of Deputies’ impeachment petition, based heavily on the CPI findings, alleged that the president had benefited personally and through associates from funds raised via influence‑peddling and diverted from state‑related operations, framing this as misuse of the presidency to obtain material advantage rather than a formal criminal conviction for defrauding the state treasury in court.