Brazilian’s Supreme Court in a Democratic Coup d’état

Abstract

Background and Originality: It is correct to say that Bolsonaro was not able to conceive his re-election bid as he would have liked, much of it due to the decision-making expansionism of the STF. The method employed does not necessarily see such a situation as negative, even if it is atypical, as long as it enhances democracy.

Method: The measures adopted by the STF are characteristics of what Issacharoff (2015) read as a “fragile democracy”, in which the discourse during the electoral process needs to be linked to democratic achievement, where everything that contrasts with it is out of the possibility of the exercise of the right, on the grounds of guaranteeing the freedom to vote. Challenging the conventional view, Varol (2017) understands that there are measures usually used in authoritarian regimes that, sometimes, promote and help to develop the democratic game more and better than those typically used by the democratic system itself. The research proposes a dialogue between the authors.

Results: The research can demonstrate that, despite having taken authoritarian decisions, the court managed to contribute to guaranteeing the normality of the elections.

Society: Bolsonarism raised its tone against the court and reinforced questions about the legitimacy of the institutions and the voting process. The issue, however, is that Bolsonaro's campaign was largely based on fighting a democratically established system, in the same tone in which he attacked the human rights of minority groups. Understanding these complex dynamics of power in the social context, the impact on future elections, or even the quality of the democracy game is an essential part of the contribution of this work.

Limitations / further research: Limitations / further research: reading the work is enough to identify one of the fields of action of the Judiciary, as well as informing only the 2022 elections, not taking care of the past.