Early in May, a group of U.S. lawmakers held a hearing about a “crisis of democracy” in Brazil. I am Brazilian, and I follow Brazilian politics for a living. Their anxiety over the state of democracy in my country is wildly exaggerated.
Worse, the conversation about Brazil in Washington increasingly reflects the bitter partisan debates in Latin America’s largest nation.
The recent hearing was not the first time U.S. lawmakers have raised alarms about Brazil in recent months. Earlier, far-right Brazilian lawmakers and their allies on Capitol Hill brought similar concerns to the Congressional Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission, complaining that conservatives in Brazil were subject to censorship and politicized investigations led by the Supreme Court.
This has been surprising to watch.
By many measures, Brazil’s democracy stands out as one of the strongest in the hemisphere. The 2022 Economist Democracy Index notably praised Brazil for its robust electoral system, highlighted by its advanced electronic voting technology. Moreover, in 2023, the V-Dem Democracy indices placed Brazil as the 13th most democratic nation in terms of electoral processes in Latin America and the Caribbean.
That said, not all the criticism of Brazil in Washington is entirely without merit. The influence wielded by Brazil’s powerful Supreme Court, particularly through investigations that scrutinize political speech, deserves attention.
After all, the court’s crackdown on so-called disinformation, its investigation into the January 8, 2023 assault on Brazil’s capital and other alleged attempted coups, and its scrutiny of actions seen as undermining Brazil’s electoral system warrant attention from Brazilian lawmakers and citizens. Indeed, many Brazilians across the political spectrum are debating whether the court has gone too far in its defense of democracy.
It is worth remembering that, when the inquiry into disinformation networks was opened in 2019, the Supreme Court censored a story that raised suspicions about its then-Chief Justice. Justice Alexandre de Moraes called the story a “textbook example of fake news” — although the concept doesn’t exist in Brazilian law.
At the time, he ordered the publication to remove the story or pay a BRL 100,000 fine for every day it remained online and summoned the reporters to provide depositions. The gag order has since been lifted.
Brazil’s Supreme Court is potent by design. Following military rule, the 1988 Constitution endowed the court with broad powers to resolve political disputes and prevent a return to authoritarianism. Unusually active and accessible, the court frequently adjudicates disputes that Congress fails to resolve.
In recent years, the court’s 11 justices have used their authority to shield Brazil’s democracy from perceived threats from supporters of former President Jair Bolsonaro. To do so, the court relied not only on its broad constitutional mandate, but also on the Law for the Defense of the Democratic Rule of Law, passed in 2021.
The justices have used that law to justify expansive inquiries into the January 8 chaos in Brasília, when a violent mob of Mr. Bolsonaro supporters attacked Brazil’s Supreme Court, Congress, and the presidential palace in the Three Powers Square, in an attempt to overturn his 2022 loss to his archrival, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva.
In the past, the court had alienated Brazilian liberals by investigating corruption linked to the leftist Workers’ Party, including during Lula’s previous terms (2003-2010). But the court’s response to the excesses of Mr. Bolsonaro’s presidency and the January 8 crisis boosted its image among many Brazilians, who now saw the court as a bulwark against authoritarianism and a defender of fundamental rights and democratic norms.
The judiciary’s increasing role in Brazilian political life was unwelcome by Mr. Bolsonaro’s fans, of course. Their criticism reached a fever pitch last June, when a Brazilian court barred Mr. Bolsonaro from holding public office until 2030 as punishment for his unfounded attacks on Brazil’s voting system in the run-up to the last election.
Conservatives also cried foul in February, when police seized Mr. Bolsonaro’s passport as part of an investigation into an alleged plot to overturn the 2022 election result. But by and large, independent legal experts generally applauded the country’s justice system.
That has changed in recent months. Judicial actions to curb disinformation and other perceived threats to democracy have discomfited many of the court’s admirers. Elon Musk’s very public feud with the court over the suspension of social media accounts of prominent conservatives provoked a strong defense by Lula of Brazil’s institutions.
But many others in Brazil — and not only on the right — did not entirely dismiss Musk’s grievances.
Still, there are three problems with Washington’s scrutiny of Brazil’s democracy.
For one, the fears tend to be overblown. Democratic institutions are eroding in many parts of the region, but Brazil’s democracy is robust and resilient. Following the horrors of January 8, Brazil has experienced no significant political violence. In fact, Lula and the conservatives who dominate Brazil’s Congress have actually worked together on important projects, including a sweeping tax reform.
A second problem is the increasingly partisan tone of the debate over Brazil in Washington. Brazil has historically enjoyed bipartisan support in the U.S. Now, Mr. Bolsonaro’s supporters are exporting Brazil’s political polarization, building an echo chamber in Washington that amplifies their criticisms of Brazil’s justice system.
Lastly, there is the awkwardness of throwing stones from glass houses. Given the challenges facing democratic institutions in the U.S., American observers should approach the debate over Brazil’s judiciary with humility. Undoubtedly, Brazil faces difficult decisions as it attempts to preserve a strong and independent judiciary while evaluating potential adjustments to the role and powers of the Supreme Court.
As a friend of Brazil and the oldest democracy in the Americas, the U.S. has a unique opportunity to support Brazil in these complicated times. It should do so through bipartisan outreach that seeks to bolster democratic institutions both in Brazil and at home the U.S.
Search
