Omar Bennett
Brazil's current constitution, drafted in 1988, is a reaction to the country's history of military dictatorship and guarantees individual rights and civil liberties. However, it has been criticised for its length, which has led to frequent amendments, and for reproducing a model of state capitalism, which has been argued to favour patrimonialism and corruption. Brazil's democracy has faced challenges due to increasingly polarised politics, a weak central state, and a slow judicial system.
| Characteristics | Values |
|---|---|
| Extensive, long-winded, and analytical | The 1988 Constitution has been criticised for being extensive, long-winded, and analytical, requiring politically costly amendments to adapt to societal changes. |
| Mention of God | The mention of God in the preamble of the 1988 Constitution and on the Brazilian currency was opposed by leftists as incompatible with freedom of religion, excluding polytheists and atheists. |
| State capitalism | The 1988 Constitution has been criticised for reproducing a model of state capitalism, expanding state monopolies and regulations, restricting foreign companies, and aggravating income inequality. |
| Slow judicial system | The 1988 Constitution has been blamed for a slow judicial system, allowing any case to be appealed to the Supreme Court, resulting in provisional arrests and overburdening the judiciary. |
| Civil servant privileges | Critics argue that the 1988 Constitution was captured by civil servant groups, offering rigid employment stability and aggravating income inequality. |
| Polarised politics | Brazil's democracy is challenged by polarised politics, a weak central state, and erosion of trust in the ruling class. |
| Corruption | Corruption is a persistent problem in Brazilian politics, and the Constitution's economic model has been criticised for favouring patrimonialism and corruption. |
| Multiparty system | Brazil's unrestricted multiparty system weakens electoral coalitions due to ideological incoherence and party-switching, requiring the Executive to form ideologically inconsistent alliances. |
Explore related products
$9.99 $9.99
$15.99 $16.99
What You'll Learn
A weak central state
Brazil has a democratic federal system of government with a constitution that guarantees civil liberties and rights to employment, childcare, and healthcare. However, Brazil's democracy has faced challenges due to a weak central state, which has struggled to maintain law and order across the country's vast territories. This weakness has resulted in a power vacuum in certain areas, allowing illegal groups to gain control and undermine faith in the democratic state.
The weakness of the central state in Brazil can be attributed to various factors, including the country's history of military dictatorship and the influence of the military in politics. From 1964 to 1985, Brazil was under military rule, during which the National Congress was dissolved, elections were suspended, the media was censored, and opposition was forbidden. This period of dictatorship left a lasting impact on the country's political system.
Additionally, Brazil's constitution has been criticized for its extensive and analytical nature, which has required multiple amendments to adapt to societal changes. The 1988 Federal Constitution has been accused of reproducing a model of state capitalism, expanding state monopolies and regulations, and creating restrictions for foreign companies, which has negatively impacted the country's economic growth. The constitution has also been criticized for aggravating income inequality by extending the privileges of civil servants.
Moreover, Brazil's political system has been plagued by corruption and a slow judicial process. A constitutional amendment allows any case to be appealed to the Supreme Court, contributing to an overburdened judicial system. The persistence of corruption and the slow administration of justice have further weakened the central state's authority and eroded trust in the ruling class.
In conclusion, the weak central state in Brazil is a complex issue with historical, political, and economic dimensions. Addressing this weakness requires comprehensive reforms to strengthen the rule of law, improve the efficiency of the judicial system, and enhance the central state's capacity to maintain law and order across the country.
The Judicial Branch: Interpreting the Constitution
You may want to see also
Polarised politics
Brazil's democracy has been challenged by increasingly polarised politics, a weak central state, and an erosion of trust in the ruling class. The country has a US-style presidential system with power divided between the executive, the legislature, and the judiciary. However, Brazil's political landscape is fragmented, with 24 political parties represented in the Brazilian congress. This has led to a lot of "horse-trading" as small parties offer their support to larger ones in exchange for incentives made outside the scrutiny of ordinary citizens.
The election of President Jair Bolsonaro in 2018 was a result of disillusionment with continual political scandals and deeper shifts in Brazil's historically fluid system. Voters placed their faith in someone perceived as a political outsider and a strongman, much like former US President Donald Trump. Under Bolsonaro, a former military officer, polarisation in Brazil's politics worsened and public discourse coarsened.
In 2013, Brazil witnessed a series of spontaneous, massive protests that fractured Brazilian society. In response to the country's hefty investment in the World Cup and the Olympics, many Brazilians demanded government funding for public services such as transportation, education, and health services. Another camp, fed up with a nationwide bribery scandal, demanded a government clean-up. About 12% of the entire population—200 million people—marched. By late 2013, citizens on the political right had coalesced around the issue of corruption, while those on the political left focused on social programs and public services. As political parties began putting these issues at the centre of their platforms, the left and right pulled apart, both politically and socially.
Brazilian society is deeply divided, with people increasingly using social media platforms like Facebook and Twitter as their primary source of news and information. In 2013, Brazilian Facebook users with political interests could be categorized into six "user communities" based on the types of pages they visited: conservative politicians and parties; left-wing politicians and parties; hard-line anti-crime groups; anti-corruption campaigns; progressive social movements; and human rights and environmentalism. While there was initially some overlap between these communities, they began to divide more sharply after the June 2013 protests.
While the intensity of polarisation in Brazil seems to have declined since the highly contentious 2022 presidential elections, with politicians dialling down the rhetoric and refraining from personal attacks, Brazilian politics remains volatile. For example, less than a week after President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva's controversial remarks comparing Israel's war against Hamas to the Holocaust, ex-president Bolsonaro gave a fiery speech to thousands of supporters in São Paulo, leading to mutual accusations and confrontations on social media.
Citing Constitutions: In-Text Style Guide
You may want to see also
Ineffective anti-corruption measures
Brazil's current constitution, enacted in 1988, provides strong protections for civil liberties and guarantees rights such as employment, childcare, and healthcare. It also establishes an independent judiciary, media, and central bank. However, critics argue that it has certain weaknesses that contribute to ineffective anti-corruption measures.
Firstly, the 1988 Constitution has been criticized for reproducing a model of state capitalism, expanding state monopolies and regulations. This has allowed the Brazilian state to hold stakes in numerous companies, impacting the country's economic growth and creating an environment conducive to patrimonialism and corruption. The Constitution has also been blamed for contributing to a slow judicial system, which can hinder anti-corruption efforts. Brazil's judiciary is ranked as the 30th slowest out of 133 countries, according to the World Bank. This slowness can be partly attributed to a constitutional amendment that allows any case to be appealed to the Supreme Court, leading to a backlog of cases and delayed justice.
Secondly, the 1988 Constitution has been described as extensive and analytical, requiring frequent amendments to adapt to societal changes. This has resulted in politically costly processes and potential instability in the legal framework. The Constitution's focus on bureaucratic state expansion and rigid stability for civil servants has been criticized by scholars like Fernando Schüler, who argues that it goes against the global trend towards modernization and meritocracy in public management. The extensive protections and guarantees provided by the Constitution may unintentionally create complexities and loopholes that can be exploited by those engaged in corrupt practices.
Additionally, while Brazil has enacted several anti-corruption laws, such as the Brazilian Anti-Corruption Act (Clean Company Act) and the Brazilian Anti-Bribery Law, there are still concerns about their effectiveness. These laws primarily target legal entities and corporations, while individuals involved in corruption schemes may enter into plea bargains or rewarded whistleblowing agreements. The existence of leniency agreements, which have resulted in significant financial returns to the Brazilian Treasury, can be seen as both a strength and a potential weakness, as they may reduce the deterrent effect of anti-corruption measures.
In conclusion, while Brazil's 1988 Constitution and subsequent anti-corruption legislation aim to address corruption, their effectiveness has been questioned. The Constitution's impact on the economic model, the slow judicial system, and the complex and lengthy nature of the document itself create challenges in the fight against corruption. Strengthening the independence and efficiency of the judiciary, regularly updating and streamlining the Constitution, and ensuring proportional penalties for individuals and entities involved in corruption could be potential steps towards improving the effectiveness of anti-corruption measures in Brazil.
What Percentage Drop Counts as a Market Correction?
You may want to see also
Explore related products
Slow justice system
Brazil's justice system is notoriously slow, with a massive backlog of cases and paperwork. The country has more law schools than the rest of the world combined and more lawyers per capita than the US. However, there are not enough judges to handle the volume of cases, with many positions remaining unfilled. According to one source, Brazil has the 30th slowest judiciary out of 133 countries.
The slowness of the justice system is partly due to a constitutional amendment that allows any case to be appealed to the Supreme Court. The 1988 Constitution also created many rights for citizens, leading to an increase in litigation. However, the judicial system has failed to keep pace with this development, resulting in a backlog of cases that can take years or even decades to resolve.
Another factor contributing to the slow justice system is the extensive and analytical nature of the 1988 Federal Constitution, which has required multiple amendments to adapt to changing societal needs. This has resulted in politically costly processes that further slow down the judicial process.
The inefficiency of the justice system has had significant consequences, including the use of provisional arrests as an advance sentence. In 2015, more than 40% of prisoners in Brazil were provisional. The slow pace of justice has also led to a loss of faith in the system and Brazil's democratic institutions.
To address the backlog of cases, some judges have an extraordinarily high workload. For example, a group of five judges in Sao Paulo was handling 1.6 million cases. However, even with this high caseload, it can take years or decades for cases to be resolved, impacting the lives of those involved.
Understanding the Constitution's Core Principles
You may want to see also
Lack of trust in democratic institutions
Brazil's democracy has been challenged by increasingly polarised politics, a weak central state, and a general erosion of trust in the ruling class. This lack of trust in democratic institutions is a significant issue in Brazil, with a 2022 Gallup poll indicating that 69% of Brazilians perceive corruption as widespread in their government. This perception of inefficiency and corruption has shaken people's faith in democracy, with 41% expressing ambivalence towards democracy in 2020. This has also contributed to a decreased interest in politics and political participation, with 72% of Brazilians reporting little to no interest in politics in 2020.
Brazil's history of military dictatorship and the influence of the military in politics have also played a role in shaping the public's trust in democratic institutions. The country transitioned to democracy in 1985 after 21 years of military dictatorship, during which time the National Congress was dissolved, elections were suspended, the media was censored, and opposition was forbidden. The current constitution, enacted in 1988, provides strong protections for civil liberties and guarantees various rights, including employment, childcare, and healthcare. However, it has been criticised for its extensive and analytical nature, requiring costly amendments to adapt to societal changes.
Corruption is a persistent problem in Brazilian politics, with multiple presidents facing charges or impeachment due to corruption scandals. The Petrobras scandal, in particular, drained faith in Lula's Workers' Party and created division and suspicion of the justice system and democratic institutions. The slow judicial system, characterised by a constitutional amendment allowing any case to be appealed to the Supreme Court, has further contributed to the public's perception of inefficiency and lack of trust.
Racial biases and historical injustices against Black and Indigenous Brazilians have also led to distinctly different levels of democratic trust across racial and ethnic groups. A majority of Indigenous Brazilians and a plurality of Black Brazilians do not believe that democracy matters for people like them, reflecting the racialised politics and systemic biases in the country.
Overall, the lack of trust in democratic institutions in Brazil is a complex issue influenced by historical factors, corruption, polarised politics, and racial biases. Addressing these challenges is crucial for strengthening Brazil's democratic system and restoring faith in the country's political institutions.
Political Systems: Understanding Country's Power Dynamics
You may want to see also
Frequently asked questions
The Brazilian Constitution has been criticised for being too long and detailed, requiring multiple amendments to adapt to changes in society. It has also been criticised for favouring state capitalism, expanding state monopolies and regulations, and restricting the performance of foreign companies. The Constitution has also been blamed for Brazil's slow judicial system, which has resulted in a high number of provisional arrests.
From 1988 to 2018, the Constitution was amended an average of 3.5 times per year. Under Bolsonaro, this average increased to 7.5 amendments per year, furthering his strategy of autocratisation and challenging principles such as social democracy, labour protection, and social security guarantees.
The protection of civil rights significantly deteriorated during the Bolsonaro administration. Bolsonaro and his supporters disseminated hate speech against marginalised groups, emboldening attacks against women, the LGBTQ+ community, Black individuals, and Indigenous Brazilians. Bolsonaro also challenged the legitimacy of affirmative action policies in higher education.
The 1988 Federal Constitution has been criticised for extending the privileges of civil servants, who are among the wealthiest fifth of the Brazilian population. This has aggravated income inequality in Brazil.
