Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x24gv Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-06T18:44:49.330Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Presidential Preferences? The Supreme Federal Tribunal Nominations in Democratic Brazil

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 January 2018

Mariana Llanos  and
Leany Barreiro Lemos
Mariana Llanos
Affiliation:
German Institute of Global and Area Studies. mariana.llanos@giga-hamburg.de
Leany Barreiro Lemos
Affiliation:
University of Brasília and a senior official at the Brazilian Federal Senate. leanyl@yahoo.com.br
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article studies the processes of nomination and appointment to the Supreme Federal Tribunal in Brazil made by Presidents Sarney through Lula da Silva. It shows that in relations with the Senate, presidential anticipation prevails over presidential dominance. Brazilian presidents are successful appointers because they invest great effort in the moment of selection, when potential candidates are tested in the juridical and political communities. As a consequence, a uniform Senate approval of candidates coexists with a differential pattern of candidate recruitment. Sometimes presidents can select close candidates from their government; sometimes first-choice candidates are ruled out for lack of consensus. The type of coalition the president heads and the number of vacancies available affect the president's chances of imposing a candidate. The filter posed by center-right parties in the Senate induces the selection of nominees with centrist preferences.

Type
Research Article
Information
Latin American Politics and Society , Volume 55 , Issue 2 , Summer 2013 , pp. 77 - 105
Copyright
Copyright © University of Miami 2013

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ames, Barry. 2001. The Deadlock of Democracy in Brazil. Ann Arbor : University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amorim Neto, Octavio. 2006. The Presidential Calculus: Executive Policy Making and Cabinet Formation in the Americas. Comparative Political Studies 39, 4: 415–40.Google Scholar
Arantes, Rogério, and Cláudio, Couto. 2008. A constituição sem fim. In Vinte anos de constituição, ed. Praca, Sergio and Diniz, Simone. São Paulo : Paulus. 31–60.Google Scholar
Araujo, Paulo. 2009. Bicameralismo no Brasil: as bases institucionais e políticas do desempenho legislativo do Senado Federal (1989–2004). Ph.D. diss., Universidade Federal do Minas Gerais.Google Scholar
Attorney for the Workers’ Party (PT). 2009. Author interview. Brasília, July 29.Google Scholar
Backes, Ana Luiza. 2008. Fortalecimento parlamentar de minorias regionais e suas razões. In O Senado federal brasileiro no pós-constituinte, ed. Lemos, Leany. Brasília : Senado Federal/Unilegis. 63–85.Google Scholar
Brinks, Daniel. 2004. Judicial Reform and Independence in Brazil and Argentina: the Beginning of a New Millennium. Texas International Law Journal 40: 595–626.Google Scholar
Brinks, Daniel. 2011. Faithful Servants of the Regime: the Brazilian Constitutional Court's Role under the 1988 Constitution. In Helmke and Ríos-Figueroa 2011. 154–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brouard, Sylvain. 2008. The Constitutional Council: The Rising Regulator of French Politics Despite Continued Politicization. In The French Fifth Republic at Fifty: Beyond Stereotypes, ed. Brouard, Andrew Appleton, and Mazur, Amy. Basingstoke : Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Cameron, Charles, Cover, Albert, and Jeffrey, Segal. 1990. Senate Voting on Supreme Court Nominees: a Neoinstitutional Model. American Political Science Review 84, 2: 525–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chang, Kelly. 2001. The President versus the Senate: Appointments in the American System of Separated Powers and the Federal Reserve. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 17, 2: 319–55.Google Scholar
Chávez, Rebecca Bill. 2004. The Rule of Law in Nascent Democracies: Judicial Politics in Argentina. Stanford : Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Chávez, Rebecca Bill, Ferejohn, John, and Barry, Weingast. 2011. A Theory of the Politically Independent Judiciary: a Comparative Study of the United States and Argentina. In Helmke and Ríos-Figueroa 2011. 219–47.Google Scholar
Correio Braziliense (Brasília). 1994a. Escolha não agrada juristas. October 25.Google Scholar
Correio Braziliense (Brasília). 1994b. Nomeação delicada. October 26.Google Scholar
Correio Braziliense (Brasília). 1997. Novo estilo chega ao Supremo. March 16.Google Scholar
Correio Braziliense (Brasília). 2002. Gilmar Mendes passa no teste. May 16.Google Scholar
Correio Braziliense (Brasília). 2003. Um time para empatar o jogo. January 8.Google Scholar
Correio Braziliense (Brasília). 2005. A composição do Stf. December 27.Google Scholar
Correio Braziliense (Brasília). 2006a. Uma escolha difícil para Lula. January 9.Google Scholar
Correio Braziliense (Brasília). 2006b. Lula descarta políticos no Stf. January 13.Google Scholar
Correio Braziliense (Brasília). 2006c. Lula define novo ministro do Stf. February 7.Google Scholar
Correio Braziliense (Brasília). 2006d. A segunda mulher a ingressar no Supremo. May 11.Google Scholar
Domingo, Pilar. 2004. Judicialization of Politics or Politicization of the Judiciary: Recent Trends in Latin America. Democratization 11, 2: 104–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Estado de São Paulo . 1994. Senado aprova nome de Corrêa para o Stf. October 27.Google Scholar
Estado de São Paulo . 2000. Causa polêmica a possível escolha de juíza gaúcha para o Supremo. November 10.Google Scholar
Estado de São Paulo . 2003a. Planalto quer um negro e mais uma mulher no Stf. February 4.Google Scholar
Estado de São Paulo . 2003b. Lula anuncia hoje 3 novos ministros do Stf. May 5.Google Scholar
Estado de São Paulo . 2003c. Lula adia indicação de ministros para Stf May 6.Google Scholar
Estado de São Paulo . 2003d. Lula indica primeiro negro para o Supremo. May 8.Google Scholar
Estado de São Paulo . 2010. E preciso rediscutir as formas de escolha do Supremo. November. 1.Google Scholar
Federal Senate of Brazil. 2002. Committee debates. Gilmar Mendes. May 15. Unpublished archive document. Subsecretaría de Taquigrafía.Google Scholar
Federal Senate of Brazil. Plenary debates. Various years.Google Scholar
Federal Senate of Brazil. 1992. Francisco Rezek. DCN2. National Congress Diary 2, May 5. 2646–54.Google Scholar
Federal Senate of Brazil. 2002. Gilmar Mendes. DSF. Federal Senate Diary, May 23. 8851–61.Google Scholar
Federal Senate of Brazil. 2009. Dias Toffoli. DSF 9. Federal Senate Diary, October 1. 48530–37/48543–54.Google Scholar
Ferejohn, John, and Pasquale, Pasquino. 2004. Constitutional Adjudication: Lessons from Europe. Texas Law Review 82: 1671–74.Google Scholar
Figueiredo, Argelina Cheibub, and Fernando, Limongi. 1999. Executivo e legislativo na nova ordem constitutional. Rio de Janeiro : Editora da FGV.Google Scholar
Figueiredo, Argelina Cheibub, and Fernando, Limongi. 2000. Presidential Power, Legislative Organization, and Party Behavior in Brazil. Comparative Politics 32, 2: 151–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folha de São Paulo . 1990. Collor indica primo para ministro do Supremo. May 1.Google Scholar
Folha de São Paulo . 2002a. Senado aprova Gilmar Mendes para o Supremo. May 23.Google Scholar
Folha de São Paulo . 2002b. Polêmico, Mendes toma posse hoje no Stf. June 20.Google Scholar
Folha de São Paulo . 2003. Lula indicará procurador negro para o Stf. May 2.Google Scholar
Folha de São Paulo . 2007. Lula vai convidar Carlos Alberto Direito para o Stf. August 27.Google Scholar
Folha.com. 2009a. Mendes diz que críticas a Toffoli se assemelham às que recebeu em 2002. September 18. http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/folha/brasil/ult96u625977.shtml.Google Scholar
Folha.com. 2009b. Amb propõe ampliar número de magistrados de carreira no Supremo. November 12. http://www1.folha.uol.com.br/folha/brasil/ult96u651473.shtml.Google Scholar
García Montero, Mercedes. 2009. Presidentes y parlamentos: ¿quién controla la actividad legislativa en América Latina? Madrid : Centro de Investigaciones Sociológicas.Google Scholar
Gazeta Mercantil . 1994. Votação pode ser hoje. October 26.Google Scholar
Gazeta Mercantil . 2006. Lula não está“aparelhando” o Stf, garantem advogados. February 13.Google Scholar
Gazeta Mercantil . 2007a. Lula indica conservador para vaga no Stf. August 29.Google Scholar
Gazeta Mercantil . 2007b. Direito chora em sabatina no Senado. August 30.Google Scholar
Ginsburg, Tom. 2003. Judicial Review in New Democracies: Constitutional Courts in Asian Cases. New York : Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
O Globo (Rio de Janeiro). 2011. Senado aprova indicação de Fux ao Stf. February 9.Google Scholar
Gloppen, Siri, Gargarella, Roberto, and Skaar, Elin, eds. 2004. Democratization and the Judiciary: The Accountability Function of Courts in New Democracies. London : Frank Cass.Google Scholar
Hammond, Thomas, and Jeffrey, Hill. 1993. Deference or Preference? Explaining Senate Confirmation of Presidential Nominees to Administrative Agencies. Journal of Theoretical Politics 5, 1: 23–59.Google Scholar
Helmke, Gretchen, and Ríos-Figueroa, Julio, eds. 2011. Courts in Latin America. New York : Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Jornal de Brasília . 2003. Infidelidade constitucional. May 12.Google Scholar
Jornal do Brasil (Rio de Janeiro). 2003. Lula preencherá três vagas no Supremo dentro de 30 dias. April 4.Google Scholar
Jornal do Brasil (Rio de Janeiro). 2007. Lula indica Carlos Alberto Direito para o Supremo. August 29.Google Scholar
Kapiszewski, Diana. 2011. Power Broker, Policy Maker, or Rights Protector? the Brazilian Supremo Tribunal Federal in Transition. In Helmke and Ríos-Figueroa 2011. 154–86.Google Scholar
Lemos, Leany. 2007. Las reformas promercado en Brasil: el tratamiento legislativo del fin de los monopolios estatales en el gobierno de Cardoso. Desarrollo Económico 47, 185: 73–94.Google Scholar
Lemos, Leany, and Mariana, Llanos. 2008. On Reactive Legislatures: the Politics of Presidential Nominations in Argentina and Brazil, 1989–2003. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais 4 (online). http://socialsciences.scielo.org/scielo.php?pid=S0102-69092008000100003&script=sci_arttext.Google Scholar
Lijphart, Arend. 1999. Patterns of Democracy: Government Forms and Performance in Thirty-six Democracies. New Haven : Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Limongi, Fernando, and Figueiredo, Argelina Cheibub. 2009. Poder de agenda e políticas substantivas. In Legislativo brasileiro em perspectiva comparada, ed. Inácio, Magna and Rennó, Lucio. Belo Horizonte : Editora UFMG. 77–104.Google Scholar
Llanos, Mariana, and Schibber, Constanza Figueroa. 2008. El presidente y el senado: los nombramientos del poder judicial en la Argentina democrática (1983–2006). Desarrollo Económico 47, 188: 607–37.Google Scholar
Luci Oliveira, Fabiana. 2008. Justice, Professionalism, and Politics in the Exercise of Judicial Review by Brazil's Supreme Court. Brazilian Political Science Review 2, 2 (July-December): 93–116.Google Scholar
Mainwaring, Scott, and Matthew, Shugart. 1997. Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America. Cambridge : Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Malleson, Kate, and Peter, Russell. 2006. Appointing Judges in an Age of Judicial Power: Critical Perspectives from Around the World. Toronto : University of Toronto Press.Google Scholar
Marenco, Andre, and Da Ros, Luciano. 2008. Caminhos que levam à corte: carreiras e padrões de recrutamento dos ministros dos órgãos de cúpula do poder judiciário brasileiro (1829–2006). Revista Sociologia e Política 16, 30: 131–49.Google Scholar
McMahon, Kevin. 2007. Presidents, Political Regimes, and Contentious Supreme Court Nominations: a Historical Institutional Model. Law & Social Inquiry 32, 4: 919–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Filho, Mello, Celso de, José. 2007. Notas sobre o Supremo Tribunal (império e república). Brasília : Supremo Tribunal Federal.Google Scholar
Minister, Superior Court of Justice (STJ). 2009. Author interview. Brasília, August 17.Google Scholar
Minister, Supreme Federal Tribunal (STF). 2009a. Author interview. Brasília, August 4.Google Scholar
Minister, Supreme Federal Tribunal (STF). 2009b. Author interview. Brasília, August 18.Google Scholar
Moe, Terry. 1985. Control and Feedback in Economic Regulation: the Case of the Nlrb. American Political Science Review 79: 1094–1116.Google Scholar
Moe, Terry. 1987. An Assessment of the Positive Theory of Congressional Dominance. Legislative Studies Quartely 12, 4: 475–520.Google Scholar
Nokken, Timothy, and Brian, Sala. 2000. Confirmation Dynamics: a Model of Presidential Appointments to Independent Agencies. Journal of Theoretical Politics 12, 1: 91–112.Google Scholar
Nunes, Rodrigo. 2010. Politics without Insurance: Democratic Competition and Judicial Reform in Brazil. Comparative Politics 42, 3: 313–31.Google Scholar
O'Donnell, Guillermo. 2003. Horizontal Accountability: The Legal Institutionalization of Mistrust. In Democratic Accountability in Latin America, ed. Manwaring, Scott and Welna, Christopher. Oxford : Oxford University Press. 34–54.Google Scholar
Pereira, Carlos, and Bernardo, Mueller. 2002. Comportamento estratégico em presidencialismo de coalizão: as relações entre executivo e legislativo na elaboração do orçamento brasileiro. Dados 45, 2: 265–301.Google Scholar
Pereira, Carlos, Power, Timothy, and Eric, Raile. 2009. Presidencialismo de coalizão e recompenses paralelas: explicando o escândalo do mensalão. In Legislativo brasileiro em perspectiva comparada, ed. Inácio, Magna and Rennó, Lucio. Belo Horizonte : Editora UFMG. 207–34.Google Scholar
Pérez-Liñán, Añíbal, and Andrea, Castagnola. 2009. Presidential Control of High Courts in Latin America: a Long-Term View (1904–2006). Journal of Politics in Latin América 1, 2: 87–114.Google Scholar
Raile, Eric, Pereira, Carlos, and Timothy, Power. 2011. The Executive Toolbox: Building Legislative Support in a Multiparty Presidential Regime. Political Research Quarterly 64, 2: 323–34.Google Scholar
Ricci, Paolo. 2008. A produção legislativa de iniciativa parlamentar no congresso brasileiro. Diferenças e similaridades entre Câmara dos Deputados e Senado Federal. In O Senado Federal brasileiro no pos-constituinte, ed. Lemos, Leany. Brasília : Unilegis/Senado Federal. 237–71.Google Scholar
Ríos-Figueroa, Julio. 2007. Fragmentation of Power and the Emergence of an Effective Judiciary in Mexico. Latin American Politics and Society 49, 1 (Spring): 31–58.Google Scholar
Ríos-Figueroa, Julio. 2011. Institutions for Constitutional Justice in Latin America. In Helmke and Ríos-Figueroa 2011. 27–54.Google Scholar
Santos, Fabiano. 2003. O poder legislativo no presidencialismo de coalizão. Belo Horizonte/Rio de Janeiro : UFMG/IUPERJ.Google Scholar
Santos, Fabiano, and Neto, Octavio Amorim. 2003. The Inefficient Secret Revisited: the Legislative Input and Output of Brazilian Deputies. Legislative Studies Quarterly 27, 4: 449–79.Google Scholar
Segal, Jeffrey, and Harold, Spaeth. 2002. The Supreme Court and the Attitudinal Model Revisited. New York : Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shugart, Matthew, and John, Carey. 1992. Presidents and Assemblies: Constitutional Design and Electoral Dynamics. New York : Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sieder, Rachel, Schjolden, Line, and Angell, Alan, eds. 2005. The Judicialization of Politics in Latin America. New York : Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Snyder, Susan, and Barry, Weingast. 2000. The American System of Shared Powers: the President, Congress, and the Nlrb. Journal of Law, Economics, and Organization 16, 2 (October): 269–305.Google Scholar
Solomon, Peter. 2007. Review Article: Courts and Judges in Authoritarian Regimes. World Politics 60, 1 (October): 122–45.Google Scholar
Taylor, Matthew. 2008. Judging Policy: Courts and Policy Reform in Democratic Brazil. Stanford : Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Tribuna do Brasil (Brasília). 2006. Ccj faz acordo contra indicações. January 19.Google Scholar
Valor Econômico (Rio de Janeiro). 2000. Fernando Henrique quebra o tabu e indica uma milher para o Supremo. November 11. http://www.valor.com.br.Google Scholar
Valor Econômico (Rio de Janeiro). 2004. Governo procura jurista afinado com reforma para preencher vaga no Stf. April 19.Google Scholar
Veja . 2010. A primeira queda de braço entre Lula e Dilma. August 8. http://veja.abril.com.br.Google Scholar
Veja . 2011. Quem é o novo ministro do Supremo. February 7.Google Scholar
Verissimo, Marcos Paulo. 2008. A Constituição de 1988, vinte anos depois: Suprema Corte e ativismo judicial “à brasileira.” Revista Direito GV 4, 2 (December): 407–40.Google Scholar
Vieira, Oscar Vilhena. 2008. Supremocracia. Revista Direito GV 4, 2 (December): 441–63.Google Scholar
Yalof, David Alistair. 1999. Pursuit of Justices: Presidential Politics and the Selection of Supreme Court Nominees. Chicago : University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Zucco, Cesar Jr. 2009. Ideology or What? Legislative Behavior in Multiparty Presidential Settings. Journal of Politics 71, 3: 1076–92.Google Scholar
Zucco, Cesar Jr., and Lauderdale, Benjamin E. 2011. Distinguishing between Influences on Brazilian Legislative Behavior. Legislative Studies Quarterly 36, 3 (August): 363–96.Google Scholar