Suchergebnisse

Avalia-se aqui as mudanças que os editais de apoio a arranjos produtivos regionais, instituída pelo Fundo Setorial do Audiovisual em 2014, desencadeou nas políticas de produção audiovisual de estados e municípios em seus primeiros anos de aplicação. Além dos dados gerais dos três primeiros anos da aplicação desta nova política, disponibilizado pela Ancine e BRDE, foram analisados mais a fundo os dados de seis entes federativos anteriores e posteriores a ela. Como resultados, observa-se a padronização no processo de seleção de projetos, a burocratização nas tramitações e a dilação dos tempos entre seleções e a efetiva contratação das obras contempladas. Apesar de uma das premissas da criação destes editais ser o combate à concentração de recursos no eixo Rio-São Paulo, os dados observados nos anos iniciais da política indicam que a concentração se manteve.

Resumo Este artigo explora a complexa interação entre a letra da Lei Maria da Penha (Lei 11.340/2006) e o contexto institucional no qual ela funciona. Após detalhar as mudanças institucionais introduzidas pela lei, analisamos as medidas adotadas pelo governo brasileiro para implementar reformas, apontando inúmeras deficiências. Ademais, mostramos que os tribunais brasileiros não têm reconhecido a importância das instituições previstas na lei. Concluímos o artigo propondo um caminho alternativo, denominado modularidade: rejeitamos a ideia de que mudanças legais e institucionais operam de forma hierárquica ou independente, em prol do entendimento de que a Lei e as instituições podem se complementar ou compensar mutuamente os seus pontos fracos.

The article analyzes the dynamics of protest control in São Paulo, from June 2013 to June 2014, focusing on coalitions between actors, arenas and institutional repertoires. We argue that the police crackdown on June 13 in São Paulo encouraged ordinary citizens to join the demonstrations, as well as spurred changes in local and federal government responses to protests and in repressive repertoires of social control.

Brazil has been constitutionalizing disputes on women's right to terminate unwanted pregnancy. This paper explains how this process started with the drafting of the new constitution in 1986-87, and evolved in different arenas, the legislative, the executive and in the public sphere. Most recently, it moved to the Supreme Court, primarily in its anencephalic pregnancy decision, brought as a Claim of Non Compliance with Fundamental Precept (ADPF 54). Decided in 2012, it was the first time since the adoption of the Penal Code in 1940 that the Brazilian Supreme Court moved the criminal boundaries to enable women to decide whether to terminate anencephalic pregnancies. The purpose of this article is to examine how the ADPF 54 decision contributed to the constitutionalization of abortion. First, it established the right to life as a non-absolute right, granting constitutional legitimacy to the system of legal exceptions. Second, it signaled the balancing of constitutional rights as the reasoning paradigm for this issue. Third, in framing the controversy as a matter of balancing constitutionally protected rights, the positions established in the Court ultimately recognized crucial understandings of women's rights.

Brazil has been constitutionalizing disputes on women's right to terminate unwanted pregnancy. This paper explains how this process started with the drafting of the new constitution in 1986-87, and evolved in different arenas, the legislative, the executive and in the public sphere. Most recently, it moved to the Supreme Court, primarily in its anencephalic pregnancy decision, brought as a Claim of Non Compliance with Fundamental Precept (ADPF 54). Decided in 2012, it was the first time since the adoption of the Penal Code in 1940 that the Brazilian Supreme Court moved the criminal boundaries to enable women to decide whether to terminate anencephalic pregnancies. The purpose of this article is to examine how the ADPF 54 decision contributed to the constitutionalization of abortion. First, it established the right to life as a non-absolute right, granting constitutional legitimacy to the system of legal exceptions. Second, it signaled the balancing of constitutional rights as the reasoning paradigm for this issue. Third, in framing the controversy as a matter of balancing constitutionally protected rights, the positions established in the Court ultimately recognized crucial understandings of women's rights.

Abstract Brazil has been constitutionalizing disputes on women's right to terminate unwanted pregnancy. This paper explains how this process started with the drafting of the new constitution in 1986-87, and evolved in different arenas, the legislative, the executive and in the public sphere. Most recently, it moved to the Supreme Court, primarily in its anencephalic pregnancy decision, brought as a Claim of Non Compliance with Fundamental Precept (ADPF 54). Decided in 2012, it was the first time since the adoption of the Penal Code in 1940 that the Brazilian Supreme Court moved the criminal boundaries to enable women to decide whether to terminate anencephalic pregnancies. The purpose of this article is to examine how the ADPF 54 decision contributed to the constitutionalization of abortion. First, it established the right to life as a non-absolute right, granting constitutional legitimacy to the system of legal exceptions. Second, it signaled the balancing of constitutional rights as the reasoning paradigm for this issue. Third, in framing the controversy as a matter of balancing constitutionally protected rights, the positions established in the Court ultimately recognized crucial understandings of women's rights.

This article proposes a relational approach to the study of abortion law reform in Brazil. It focuses on the interaction of pro-choice and anti-abortion movements in different state arenas and political contexts. It details the emergence of a strategic action field on abortion during the Brazilian re-democratization process and the National Constituent Assembly. We offer analysis on pro-choice and anti-abortion mobilization in state arenas-mainly in the executive and legislative powers-during the two terms of President Fernando Henrique Cardoso (FHC), 1995-1998 and 1999-2002, and the first term of President Luis Inacio Lula da Silva (Lula), 2003-2006. We then map political resources for mobilization, such as legislative bills, public policy norms, and judicial decisions, and track legal continuities and changes. Finally, we analyze anti-abortion reaction, which was consolidated through an increased conservative presence in congress after 2006, and discuss how the abortion debate has migrated from congress to the Supreme Court and the public sphere. ; Research Council of Norway ; Getulio Vargas Fdn, Sch Law, Rio De Janeiro, Brazil ; Brazilian Ctr Anal & Planning CEBRAP, Sao Paulo, Brazil ; Univ Fed Sao Paulo, Sociol, Sao Paulo, Brazil ; Univ Fed Sao Paulo, Sociol, Sao Paulo, Brazil ; Research Council of Norway ; Web of Science

President Jair Bolsonaro's government (2019-2022) brought unprecedented turmoil to the Brazilian democracy. In this paper, we argue that Bolsonaro's government builds on and expands pre-existing zones of authoritarianism embedded in the country. We illustrate the intricacies and perils of sustaining and expanding zones of authoritarianism in the Brazilian case in two domains: corruption and police violence, areas that represent some of the most important unsolved puzzles of redemocratization. They are bound together by the centrality of impunity, where unchecked power creates zones where the Rule of Law is contested. By illustrating the struggles to build accountability in these areas, we discuss the challenges that pre-existing zones of authoritarianism pose to democracy and how new autocrats have mobilized them. We also highlight analytical as well as empirical challenges for those studying autocratization processes in countries that are as hybrid or dual legal orders.

The goal of this paper is to analyze Brazilian anti-racism law in practice, assessing judicial response to cases of racial stigma and insult. We analyzed over 200 cases from 9 Brazilian states involving racial insults and racial disparagement in Brazilian courts of appeal. We find that the judiciary tends to downplay the importance of insult and stigma, often dismissing cases or lowering penalties. This judicial treatment conflicts with the evidence that racial insults are prevalent in society and serve to maintain racial hierarchies. While the judiciary appears to be enforcing anti-discrimination law, the actual decisions show that the legal system fails to recognize and deal with the real dynamics of Brazilian racism thereby reinforcing the myth of Brazil racial democracy.