Author:

Bruno Furtado Vieira

Abstract:

This research focuses the trial of “ADIN 4.029” by the Supreme Court. The case is characterized by a very atypical of shift of direction by Supreme Court. The case involved examining the constitutionality of Law n. 11.516/07 which created the Brazilian Biodiversity and Conservation Institute. The legislation was contested with the allegation that it did not observe all formal requirements of its legislative process. The argument was accepted by the Supreme Court, which declared the law incompatible with the Constitution. However, apparently the Tribunal was not aware that there were hundreds of Laws in the same situation. The situation was critical. A great deal of the country‟s most important legislation was also compromised for the same reason: the lack of due legislative process. To avert chaos that would take place if all the defective legislation were to be declared void, the Court changed its previous deliberation and declared the creation of the Biodiversity and Conservation Institute legal despite the fact that it was created without due legislative process. This consequentialist and improvised manner of deliberating exposed the fragility of the Court‟s understanding of Brazilian Legislative Process and the use of pragmatic argumentation in damage control situations.