Legislative resistance to illiberalism in a system of coalitional presidentialism: will it work in Brazil?

Thomas Bustamante, E. Meyer
{"title":"Legislative resistance to illiberalism in a system of coalitional presidentialism: will it work in Brazil?","authors":"Thomas Bustamante, E. Meyer","doi":"10.1080/20508840.2021.1942370","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT Illiberal governments typically attempt to undermine representative democracy by adhering to a single comprehensive doctrine sustained through a majoritarian account of legitimacy that is suspicious of the rationality of liberal constitutional democracies. But perhaps there is hope for a system of coalitional presidentialism, such as Brazil. It has been argued that coalitional presidentialism may be in a better position to resist an illiberal project to erode democracy because of its centripetal and conservative forces, which might constitute a firewall against the concentration of powers in the executive branch. The legislature can either slow the pace of authoritarian measures or subject the government to relevant political defeats, raising the chances of democratic reconstruction. Should we expect success for legislative resistance to illiberal populism? What can the Brazilian experience under the first eighteen months of Bolsonaro's government teach us about it? Even though it might be too early for a conclusive assessment of these matters, we try to offer in the following sections a moderately optimistic response to the first question based on our assessment of the second.","PeriodicalId":42455,"journal":{"name":"Theory and Practice of Legislation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/20508840.2021.1942370","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theory and Practice of Legislation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/20508840.2021.1942370","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

ABSTRACT Illiberal governments typically attempt to undermine representative democracy by adhering to a single comprehensive doctrine sustained through a majoritarian account of legitimacy that is suspicious of the rationality of liberal constitutional democracies. But perhaps there is hope for a system of coalitional presidentialism, such as Brazil. It has been argued that coalitional presidentialism may be in a better position to resist an illiberal project to erode democracy because of its centripetal and conservative forces, which might constitute a firewall against the concentration of powers in the executive branch. The legislature can either slow the pace of authoritarian measures or subject the government to relevant political defeats, raising the chances of democratic reconstruction. Should we expect success for legislative resistance to illiberal populism? What can the Brazilian experience under the first eighteen months of Bolsonaro's government teach us about it? Even though it might be too early for a conclusive assessment of these matters, we try to offer in the following sections a moderately optimistic response to the first question based on our assessment of the second.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
在联合总统制制度下,立法抵制非自由主义:这在巴西会奏效吗?
摘要:非自由政府通常试图通过坚持一种单一的全面学说来破坏代议制民主,这种学说是通过对自由宪政民主合理性的怀疑来维持的。但也许有希望建立一个像巴西这样的联合总统制。有人认为,联盟总统制可能更适合抵制一个侵蚀民主的非自由项目,因为它的向心力和保守力可能会构成阻止权力集中在行政部门的防火墙。立法机构可以放慢独裁措施的步伐,也可以让政府遭受相关的政治失败,从而增加民主重建的机会。我们是否应该期待对非自由民粹主义的立法抵制取得成功?博索纳罗政府执政前18个月的巴西经历能教会我们什么?尽管现在对这些问题进行结论性评估可能还为时过早,但我们试图在以下几节中,根据对第二个问题的评估,对第一个问题做出适度乐观的回应。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
10.00%
发文量
23
期刊介绍: The Theory and Practice of Legislation aims to offer an international and interdisciplinary forum for the examination of legislation. The focus of the journal, which succeeds the former title Legisprudence, remains with legislation in its broadest sense. Legislation is seen as both process and product, reflection of theoretical assumptions and a skill. The journal addresses formal legislation, and its alternatives (such as covenants, regulation by non-state actors etc.). The editors welcome articles on systematic (as opposed to historical) issues, including drafting techniques, the introduction of open standards, evidence-based drafting, pre- and post-legislative scrutiny for effectiveness and efficiency, the utility and necessity of codification, IT in legislation, the legitimacy of legislation in view of fundamental principles and rights, law and language, and the link between legislator and judge. Comparative and interdisciplinary approaches are encouraged. But dogmatic descriptions of positive law are outside the scope of the journal. The journal offers a combination of themed issues and general issues. All articles are submitted to double blind review.
期刊最新文献
Regulatory capture in energy sector: evidence from Indonesia Operationalisation of legislation and the will of legislators in the judgments of international courts of war crimes and post-war recovery Observing law-making patterns in times of crisis Exploring the relationship between law and governance: a proposal Governing during the COVID-19 pandemic
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1