‎Brazil News

Do You Have A Case?

Contact our attorneys now

I'm not a robot


Modern democracies appreciate dignity as an irrepressible value, drawn from the inherent humanity of each person. In this spirit, the current sense of justice rejects, in connection with the protection of a reasonable pluralism, forms of treatment that are outrageous, unworthy and unworthy of the consideration due, unconditionally, to every human being[1].
In the election panel, dignity emerges translated into norms and guarantees that ensure, on the one hand, the equivalent weight of individual opinions and the compulsory character of the public will and, on the other hand, wide freedom for the circulation of impressions about the current state of things and about the alternatives put for tomorrow under construction.
Obviously, this climate of openness claims, as a condition of possibility, the fortification of an atmosphere of reciprocal recognition, since the libertarian edifice disarms in the face of the programmed denial of the rights of others. Social pluralism, in this light, emerges as a constitutional shield against oppression and cancellation, evils incompatible with the humanist logic that animates liberal States. It is the sense of peace that translates tolerance.
As a result, in the arc of political discussions, protected communication is - and can only be - a communication consistent with the ethical normativity that guides the constitutional society, which prescribes elective games carried out by competitors faithful to their intimate spirit of peace and acceptance, that is to say , by tolerant actors, deferring to respect and mutual consideration. Anti-politics, defined as the civic exercise that denies the dignity of others, contaminates the expression of speech, and in this context it transposes the reasonable boundaries of the freedoms granted.
The adjusted perception that misinformation inhabits illegality has been disseminated, fundamentally, because it complicates access to adequate information, already seen by some as a new right not to be deceived[2]; nevertheless, it is time to emphasize, in addition, that toxic speech, loaded with hate and prejudice, dispersing disintelligence and promoting turmoil, affects, with similar impetus, peace and tolerance, founding bases of the electoral framework.
Quiz do Nosso Papo Reto encourages dialogue by demonstrating that there are more opinions that bring Brazilians closer together than separate them. Click and play!
Intolerance and the rejection of both dissonant individuality and unwanted electoral results clearly depress — and for different reasons — the normal character and democratic substratum of the electoral event. Disinformation, in this scenario, manufactures falsehoods in order to justify the removal of protective anchors from the popular regime.
In the first case, an attempt is made to invalidate freedom of choice, resignifying the right to suffrage, framed then, in a paradoxical, autophagic and empty logic, as the “right” (surrounded by quotation marks) to position oneself in a single sense. Here is an unequivocal mistake or moral deviation, according to the dogmatic and manipulative fable of the so-called “right vote”.
On the other side, fallacies stir dissimulated objections that, together, seek to support movements tending to de-authorize the autonomy and sovereignty of the popular instance, making democratic elections a rite whose effectiveness is conditioned to contentment with the respective numerical balance. By the illiberal ideology, inspiring oppressive experiences today referred to as democraturas[3], regular elections are, and only, won elections: the people only have a voice in acquiescence.
The protection of normality, in respect of the democratic normative order, resonates as an imperative of constitutional defense, guiding the behavior of bodies structurally in charge of appreciating, when provoked, the legality of demonstrations held in electoral contexts. The disinformation aimed at the exacerbation of hatred and the irradiation of an anti-system radicalism, for the reasons mentioned, goes beyond the limits of freedom of expression, since it jeopardizes democratic stability and removes the peaceful character of political competitions. Consequently, they demand the firm activation of the accountability scheme.
For these reasons, the Electoral Justice dresses up in peace for the party of democracy in 2022.


Mr. Alessandro Jacob speaking about Brazilian Law on "International Bar Association" conference

Find Us

Rio de Janeiro

Av. Presidente Wilson, 231 / Salão 902 Parte - Centro
CEP 20030-021 - Rio de Janeiro - RJ

+55 21 3942-1026

São Paulo

Travessa Dona Paula, 13 - Higienópolis
CEP -01239-050 - São Paulo - SP

+ 55 11 3280-2197