This book provides a fascinating analysis of a single jurisdiction, Brazil, and accounts for both the successes and the failures of its most recent constitutional project, inaugurated by the Constitution of 1988. It sets out the following aspects of the constitutional development and erosion: - the different phases of the promised transition from military rule to a 'social-democratic constitutionalism'; - the obstacles to democratisation derived from the absence of true institutional reforms in the judicial branch and in the civil-military relationship; - the legal and social practices which maintained a structure that obstructed the emergence of an effective social-democracy, such as the neoliberal pattern, the acceptance in the political field of unlawful organisations, such as the milícias, and the way the digital revolution has been harming the formation of democratic sovereignty. Situating Brazil in the global context of the revival of authoritarianism, it details the factors which are common to the third wave of democratisation reflux. Accounting for those aspects, particular to the Brazilian jurisdiction, it shows that there is a tension in the Brazilian constitution. On the one hand, such constitutionalism was renewed by democratic pressure on governments to undertake social politics since 1988. On the other hand, it retained authoritarian practices through the hands of diverse institutions and political actors. By exploring the ideas of constitutional erosion and collapse, as well as democratic, social and digital constitutionalism, the book presents a comparative analysis of Brazil and other jurisdictions, including the United States, South Africa, and Peru.

"This book provides a fascinating analysis of a single jurisdiction, Brazil, and accounts for both the successes and the failures of its most recent constitutional project, inaugurated by the Constitution of 1988. It sets out the following aspects of the constitutional development and erosion: - the different phases of the promised transition from military rule to a 'social-democratic constitutionalism'; - the obstacles to democratisation derived from the absence of true institutional reforms in the judicial branch and in the civil-military relationship; - the legal and social practices which maintained a structure that obstructed the emergence of an effective social-democracy, such as the neoliberal pattern, the acceptance in the political field of unlawful organisations, such as the milícias, and the way the digital revolution has been harming the formation of democratic sovereignty. Situating Brazil in the global context of the revival of authoritarianism, it details the factors which are common to the third wave of democratisation reflux. Accounting for those aspects, particular to the Brazilian jurisdiction, it shows that there is a tension in the Brazilian constitution. On the one hand, such constitutionalism was renewed by democratic pressure on governments to undertake social politics since 1988. On the other hand, it retained authoritarian practices through the hands of diverse institutions and political actors. By exploring the idea of 'social-democratic constitutionalism' the book presents a comparative look at jurisdictions which share a similar sharp inequality including Thailand, Argentina and South Africa."--

This book provides a fascinating analysis of a single jurisdiction, Brazil, and accounts for both the successes and the failures of its most recent constitutional project, inaugurated by the Constitution of 1988. It sets out the following aspects of the constitutional development and erosion: - the different phases of the promised transition from military rule to a 'social-democratic constitutionalism'; - the obstacles to democratisation derived from the absence of true institutional reforms in the judicial branch and in the civil-military relationship; - the legal and social practices which maintained a structure that obstructed the emergence of an effective social-democracy, such as the neoliberal pattern, the acceptance in the political field of unlawful organisations, such as the milícias, and the way the digital revolution has been harming the formation of democratic sovereignty. Situating Brazil in the global context of the revival of authoritarianism, it details the factors which are common to the third wave of democratisation reflux. Accounting for those aspects, particular to the Brazilian jurisdiction, it shows that there is a tension in the Brazilian constitution. On the one hand, such constitutionalism was renewed by democratic pressure on governments to undertake social politics since 1988. On the other hand, it retained authoritarian practices through the hands of diverse institutions and political actors. By exploring the ideas of constitutional erosion and collapse, as well as democratic, social and digital constitutionalism, the book presents a comparative analysis of Brazil and other jurisdictions, including the United States, South Africa, and Peru.

This book provides a broad perspective of the functioning, evolution, and dynamics of the rule of law in Brazil. It stresses not only how the rule of law has developed in the legal system, but also how the political institutions and extra-legal organisations have transformed its foundations. The rule of law is not a simple concept when it comes to defining the political, economic, and legal developments of a country like Brazil. Similar to many other Latin American countries, Brazil is a young democracy struggling with its longstanding extractive institutions and entrenched interests. It features, however, one of Latin America's richest constitutional moments, when civil society actively participated in drafting the most democratic constitution in the country's history. Brazil has since strengthened its institutions and the rule of law, but the road toward consolidating them has been challenged by inequality and the legacies of that authoritarian past. The book explores how Brazilian democracy has dealt with the high levels of social inequality and the authoritarian mindset that still play a big role in its fate, and asks whether the country's democratic achievements and institutional framework are sufficiently strong to enforce the rule of law as an imperative for Brazil's development, especially in times when the country is most in need of them.

Is the world facing a serious threat to the protection of constitutional democracy? There is a genuine debate about the meaning of the various political events that have, for many scholars and observers, generated a feeling of deep foreboding about our collective futures all over the world. Do these events represent simply the normal ebb and flow of political possibilities, or do they instead portend a more permanent move away from constitutional democracy that had been thought triumphant after the demise of the Soviet Union in 1989? Constitutional Democracy in Crisis? addresses these questions head-on: Are the forces weakening constitutional democracy around the world general or nation-specific? Why have some major democracies seemingly not experienced these problems? How can we as scholars and citizens think clearly about the ideas of "constitutional crisis" or "constitutional degeneration"? What are the impacts of forces such as globalization, immigration, income inequality, populism, nationalism, religious sectarianism? Bringing together leading scholars to engage critically with the crises facing constitutional democracies in the 21st century, these essays diagnose the causes of the present afflictions in regimes, regions, and across the globe, believing at this stage that diagnosis is of central importance - as Abraham Lincoln said in his "House Divided" speech, "If we could first know where we are, and whither we are tending, we could then better judge what to do, and how to do it."

The COVID-19 pandemic not only ravaged human bodies but also had profound and possibly enduring effects on the health of political and legal systems, economies and societies. Almost overnight, governments imposed the severest restrictions in modern times on rights and freedoms, elections, parliaments and courts. Legal and political institutions struggled to adapt, creating a catalyst for democratic decline and catastrophic increases in poverty and inequality. This handbook analyses the global pandemic response through five themes: governance and democracy; human rights; the rule of law; science, public trust and decision making; and states of emergency and exception. Containing 12 thematic commentaries and 25 chapters on countries of diverse size, wealth and experience of COVID-19, it represents the combined effort of more than 50 contributors, including leading scholars and rising voices in the fields of constitutional, international, public health, human rights and comparative law, as well as political science, and science and technology studies. Taking stock after the onset of global emergency, this book provides essential analysis for politicians, policy-makers, jurists, civil society organisations, academics, students and practitioners at both national and international level on the best, and most concerning, practices adopted in response to COVID-19 – and key insights into how states and multilateral institutions should reform, adapt and prepare for future emergencies.

Democratic dysfunction can arise in both 'at risk' and well-functioning constitutional systems. It can threaten a system's responsiveness to both minority rights claims and majoritarian constitutional understandings. Responsive Judicial Review aims to counter this dysfunction using examples from both the global north and global south, including leading constitutional courts in the US, UK, Canada, India, South Africa, and Colombia, as well as select aspects of the constitutional jurisprudence of courts in Australia, Fiji, Hong Kong, and Korea. In this book, Dixon argues that courts should adopt a sufficiently 'dialogic' approach to countering relevant democratic blockages and look for ways to increase the actual and perceived legitimacy of their decisions--through careful choices about their framing, and the timing and selection of cases. By orienting judicial choices about constitutional construction toward promoting democratic responsiveness, or toward countering forms of democratic monopoly, blind spots, and burdens of inertia, judicial review helps safeguard a constitutional system's responsiveness to democratic majority understandings. The idea of 'responsive' judicial review encourages courts to engage with their own distinct institutional position, and potential limits on their own capacity and legitimacy. Dixon further explores the ways that this translates into the embracing of a 'weakened' approach to judicial finality, compared to the traditional US-model of judicial supremacy, as well as a nuanced approach to the making of judicial implications, a 'calibrated' approach to judicial scrutiny or judgments about proportionality, and an embrace of 'weak DS strong' rather than wholly weak or strong judicial remedies. Not all courts will be equally well-placed to engage in review of this kind, or successful at doing so. For responsive judicial review to succeed, it must be sensitive to context-specific limitations of this kind. Nevertheless, the idea of responsive judicial review is explicitly normative and aspirational: it aims to provide a blueprint for how courts should think about the practice of judicial review as they strive to promote and protect democratic constitutional values.