Brazilian forward Richarlison is facing a difficult period both on and off the pitch. Having fallen out of favour at Tottenham Hotspur, the 29-year-old has now accused presidential candidate and senator Flávio Bolsonaro of being involved in a dispute over a luxury property on an island in Brazil. Richarlison claims that he lost control of the property after investing around 10 million Brazilian reais alongside business partners and has called for an investigation by the Federal Police.
Flávio, the son of former Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro, has denied any involvement in the property’s ownership or purchase. The allegations have nevertheless sparked fresh debate on social media, bringing together questions about property rights, legal proceedings and the political standing of one of Brazil’s prominent presidential hopefuls.
According to reports by British newspaper The Sun and Brazilian news outlet UOL, the dispute concerns a luxury house on Ilha Comprida, in the Angra dos Reis region along the coast of Rio de Janeiro state. Richarlison began investing in the property during the Covid-19 pandemic, between 2020 and 2021.
The footballer says he invested approximately 10 million reais in the venture with business partners. The property was reportedly purchased jointly with Alencar da Silveira Júnior, then president of Brazilian club América Mineiro, and Richarlison’s former agent, Renato Velasco.
The dispute emerged after several people reportedly expressed an interest in purchasing the property. Richarlison claims Flávio Bolsonaro was among those interested, but says he refused to sell it to him. He alleges that the subsequent legal complications ultimately resulted in him losing control of the property.
Richarlison questions the legal process
In a video shared on social media, Richarlison expressed frustration over the circumstances surrounding the loss of the property. He alleged that the legal system had been used to secure possession after he declined to sell.
‘I didn’t want to sell the island to him. Because I refused, they used the courts to take possession of it through a legal manoeuvre,’ the footballer said, according to the report.
Richarlison explained that he and his associates had been working to regularise the property’s ownership documents. They had allegedly been told that resolving the matter could take several months or even years.
He questioned why the process appeared to move much faster for the other party.
‘Flávio Bolsonaro and that man named Willer Tomaz went there and took possession of the island in just 24 hours. The justice system has failed here. As far as I know, they took the property without spending a single penny. I spent around 10 million reais there, but I haven’t received anything back,’ he said.
These statements represent Richarlison’s account of the dispute. The circumstances surrounding the transfer of possession, the legal basis for it and the parties’ respective claims remain central to the controversy.
Footballer calls for a Federal Police investigation
Richarlison has called on Brazil’s Federal Police to investigate the matter, seeking clarification over what happened to the money he says he invested. He has also urged his social media followers to demand answers from Flávio Bolsonaro.
The allegations have attracted attention partly because of the substantial sum involved and the political prominence of the person named by the footballer. Richarlison’s public appeal has also brought renewed scrutiny to a dispute that has reportedly been moving through the Brazilian legal system for several years.
Flávio, however, has rejected the accusations. Responding in the comments section of a video posted by Brazilian singer and influencer Juliette, the presidential candidate described the allegations as ‘fake news’.
Richarlison responded with a pointed question: ‘Then what happened to my island?’
The exchange prompted further discussion on Brazilian social media, although neither the public accusations nor the online responses alone establish the facts of the case.
Property dispute has a lengthy legal history
The disagreement over the property’s ownership predates Richarlison’s latest statements. According to Brazilian media reports, the house, previously associated with a company linked to the footballer, is now under the control of WT Administração de Imóveis, a company associated with lawyer Willer Tomaz.
The case reportedly spent around three years before the courts in Rio de Janeiro before progressing to Brazil’s higher courts. In 2025, following an unfavourable legal decision, a company associated with Richarlison and his former agent withdrew from the proceedings, according to the reports.
The legal history is significant because the latest allegations have emerged against the backdrop of an established dispute over ownership and possession. Richarlison’s claim that he invested a substantial sum does not, by itself, determine legal ownership; that depends on the relevant documents, transactions and court decisions.
Flávio Bolsonaro has specifically denied any connection with the purchase or ownership of the property. He maintains that his name appeared in the legal dispute only as a witness and that he had no role in acquiring the house or taking possession of it.
Tomaz has also rejected Richarlison’s allegations. He has challenged the footballer to produce documents demonstrating lawful ownership and evidence that the money was paid.
The lawyer has reportedly said that if Richarlison can provide the necessary documentation, he is prepared to transfer the property’s rights to the footballer without requiring payment.
That position places the documentary evidence at the centre of the dispute. Records showing the purchase arrangements, the parties’ financial contributions and the legal grounds for the current possession could prove crucial in clarifying the competing claims.
Allegations add to Brazil’s political debate
The controversy has gained an additional political dimension because Flávio Bolsonaro is a senator and a presidential candidate. As the son of former president Jair Bolsonaro, he is already a prominent figure in Brazilian politics.
The allegations have therefore attracted attention beyond the immediate question of property ownership. However, the political implications should be distinguished from the legal merits of the case. Flávio has denied wrongdoing, and Richarlison’s accusations have not, on the information contained in the reports, been independently established as fact.
The original report also referred to a second round of Brazil’s presidential election sched
