3. Continuities and Discontinuities in Brazilian Political and Institutional Life: Past and Present Dilemmas for Democracy

Because slavery continued to exist after Brazil’s independence, the difference between citizens and slaves was subtly infiltrated into the legislation. This made the concept of “individualization of punishment” difficult, and it also hindered the formulation and ample application of the 1830 Penal Code of the Empire (Soares do Bem, 2006b: 79). In spite of the gradual legal humanization of slaves, the cruel and violent punishments established in the Philippine Ordinances (Ordenações Filipinas 1603–1830) remained in force. According to Linhares da Silva (2004: 119), the Code of the Empire, “Does not grant the slave civil rights nor does it acknowledge him as a legal person but, at the same time, it transforms him into a defendant and indirectly allows him to use the system of justice to claim certain rights, especially those regarding his physical integrity when threatened by the owner.”

Translated by Jeanie Deselaers and Nicole Nucinkis. Original text: “…não obstante a existência de atritos, há uma complementaridade básica, nos núcleos dominantes do país […] entre os setores agrários e industriais, sob hegemonia da burguesia do café. Isso decorre da própria formação da fração industrial, que nasce com o avanço dos negócios cafeeiros e deles depende para a sua própria sobrevivência”.

Please see Abbreviation glossary for all abbreviations.

Hygienism is the legacy of European racist social theories that had far-reaching impact among Brazilian intellectuals of the nineteenth century. The Statute of the Child and Adolescent put an end to this heritage, regarding the ways to protect poor children and adolescents. But already in the 1930s and even in the nineteenth century many voices were raised against hygienists policies. Although they are not identical to the German holocaust, they did play an important role in developing strategies aimed to the ‘whitening’ of the Brazilian population.

According to Codato (2005: 96): “New unionism was a different way of organizing the workers as compared to the state’s official labor unions (created after 1930), and also a different way of presenting their wage demands. The key aspect was to attempt to negotiate the issue directly with the businesspeople without the mediation of the Ministry of Labor”.

The term refers to corrupt politicians who gained their wealth illegally.

According to Lenardão (2008: 199), “The main composition of the coalition that elected Fernando Henrique Cardoso was formed by the PSDB, the PFL and the PTB”. Beside these parties, Gomes (2000: 28) also includes segments of the PMDB and the PPB. A brief comment on these parties is necessary: The PSDB was founded in 1988, among others by Fernando Henrique Cardoso, and although it describes itself as a center-left party, critics and intellectuals considered it a center-right or plain right-wing party. Its symbol is a blue and yellow toucan, which is why its members are called “toucans”. The PFL is the main heir of the former ruling party of the military period (ARENA) and is known for its corrupt practices and its “updated” right-wing program (Lenardão, 2008: 199). The PPB, also formed with representatives of the old ARENA, is a party “with clear rightist orientation, representing the interests of Brazilian businesspeople, especially from São Paulo” (Lenardão, 2008: 199). The PTB was originally founded in 1945 and existed until 1965 when it was dissolved with the introduction of the two-party system. After the political amnesty, this party was recreated in 1979 and received its new register by the Superior Electoral Court (TSE) in 1980. In spite of declaring itself a nationalist party, and defender of labor rights and unionist autonomy, the party cooperated in the defense of neoliberal policies. The PMDB was founded in 1980, integrating many politicians who were part of the MDB, which had congregated the opposition at the time of the two-party system during the military regime. It has a centrist and corrupt orientation and is “among the main parties in Congress, and the least coherent and consistent in performance” (Lenardão, 2008: 199).

Fernando Henrique Cardoso’s long permanence in office was enabled by a constitutional amendment (Amendment No. 16, June 4, 1997), which institutionalized the reelection of the executive posts within all the governance levels by adding § 5 to Article 14 of the Constitution. Cardoso benefitted from this measure and became the first reelected president of Brazil.

Between 1999 and 2002, Fernando Henrique was bombarded by numerous attacks, some of which came from within his own political party. Among these attacks it is worthy to note the following: Parliamentary Inquiry Commission (CPI) of the judiciary system and the banks; suspension and dissidence on the part of the representatives of Congress, and the attempts to install the CPI to investigate allegations of corruption in his government (Almeida, 2006: 178–179).

In 1989, he lost to Fernando Collor in the second round. In 1994 and 1998, he lost to Fernando Henrique Cardoso, in the first round. In 2002, he was defeated by José Serra, and in 2006 by Geraldo Alckmin: in both cases in the second round.

The “Letter to the Brazilian people,” of June 22, 2002, was emblematic of this moment. Lula was facing a crisis that brought down the stock market and increased the risk for foreign investments in Brazil. Through the Letter he sought to calm down the investors and ensure the stability of the financial market.