When the court is divided: minimum-winning coalitions in Brazil’s Supreme Court

Oliveira, Fabiana Luci de

doi:10.1590/2179-8966/2017/23724

Acessibilidade / Reportar erro

Brasil

Español English

sumário « anterior atual seguinte »

Sumário

Articles • Rev. Direito e Práx. 8 (3) • July 2017 • https://doi.org/10.1590/2179-8966/2017/23724 copy

When the court is divided: minimum-winning coalitions in Brazil’s Supreme Court

Authorship SCIMAGO INSTITUTIONS RANKINGS

Abstract

The aim of this article is to examine the decision-making behavior in Brazil’s Supreme Court (STF) judicial review cases, analyzing the dynamics of the collegial body in situations where "every vote counts", i.e., in cases that divided the court being decided by a margin of 1 or 2 votes. To do so, we conducted an exploratory study analyzing judicial review cases (ADIs) decided by the Supreme Court from 1988 to 2014, seeking to answer: i) how often and in which situations the court was divided in ADIs trials? ii) how compositions were formed, mapping the constitution and the fluidity of the minimum winning coalitions, and iii) how did its deliberative process flow? We answered to these descriptive questions, gathering empirical evidence to discuss the determinants of the minimum winning coalitions, to better understand the decision-making behavior of Supreme Court, dialoguing with arguments that understand the decision-making process of this court as personalistic, questioning its potential as a collegial body - which would pose concerns to democratic legitimacy of the institution. We conclude the Supreme Court was very consensual in the period analyzed, being divided into only 3% of all decisions. In terms of voting composition, we found much fluidity in coalitions, but even so we identified factors that make coalitions more predictable, like combination of the subject being questioned and the past career of Justices. We found strong evidence that Justices with career in the judiciary are more likely to vote together than to divide their votes. We also observed that the deliberative process in the court occurred with intense exchange of arguments, changes in vote direction and debates. The main contribution of this article is therefore the relativization of the personalism in decisions, presenting evidence of the centrality of the collegial game in the deliberative process and in the construction of decisions of the Brazil’s Supreme Court.

Keywords:
Supreme Court; Decision-making process; Minimum winning coalition

Period		Composition	Total				Collegiate
Period		Composition	Unanimous decisions	Majority decisions	Decisões monocráticas	(N)	Unanimous decisions	Majority decisions	(N)
1	10/03/87 13/04/89	Mayer, Falcão, Alves, Silveira, Correa, Passarinho, Rezek, Sanches, Gallotti, Madeira, Borja	75%	0%	25%	4	100%	0%	3
2	05/04/89 16/05/89	Mayer, Alves, Silveira, Correa, Passarinho, Rezek, Sanches, Gallotti, Madeira, Borja, Brossard	50%	0%	50%	2	100%	0%	1
3	17/05/89 16/08/89	Mayer, Alves, Silveira, Passarinho, Rezek, Sanches, Gallotti, Madeira, Borja, Brossard, Pertence	50%	0%	50%	6	100%	0%	3
4	17/08/89 12/06/90	Alves, Silveira, Passarinho, Rezek, Sanches, Gallotti, Madeira, Borja, Brossard, Pertence, Mello	59%	11%	30%	27	84%	16%	19
5	13/06/90 25/06/91	Alves, Silveira, Passarinho, Sanches, Gallotti, Borja, Brossard, Pertence, Mello, Velloso, Aurélio	43%	26%	31%	42	62%	38%	29
6	26/06/91 20/05/92	Alves, Silveira, Sanches, Gallotti, Borja, Brossard, Pertence, Mello, Velloso, Aurélio, Galvão	52%	21%	27%	67	71%	29%	49
7	21/05/92 14/12/94	Alves, Silveira, Sanches, Gallotti, Brossard, Pertence, Mello, Velloso, Aurélio, Galvão, Rezek	47%	30%	23%	91	61%	39%	70
8	15/12/94 14/04/97	Alves, Silveira, Sanches, Gallotti, Pertence, Mello, Velloso, Aurélio, Galvão, Rezek, Corrêa	68%	18%	13%	76	79%	21%	66
9	15/04/97 13/12/00	Alves, Silveira, Sanches, Gallotti, Pertence, Mello, Velloso, Aurélio, Galvão, Corrêa, Jobim	41%	22%	38%	282	65%	35%	176
10	14/12/00 19/06/02	Alves, Silveira, Sanches, Pertence, Mello, Velloso, Aurélio, Galvão, Corrêa, Jobim, Gracie	26%	5%	69%	341	83%	17%	106
11	20/06/02 24/06/03	Alves, Sanches, Pertence, Mello, Velloso, Aurélio, Galvão, Corrêa, Jobim, Gracie, Mendes	49%	6%	44%	311	88%	12%	173
12	25/06/03 29/06/04	Pertence, Mello, Velloso, Aurélio, Corrêa, Jobim, Gracie, Mendes, Peluso, Britto, Barbosa	39%	9%	52%	198	81%	19%	95
13	30/06/04 15/03/06	Pertence, Mello, Velloso, Aurélio, Jobim, Gracie, Mendes, Peluso, Britto, Barbosa , Grau	25%	15%	61%	354	62%	38%	140
14	16/03/06 20/06/06	Pertence, Mello, Aurélio, Jobim, Gracie, Mendes, Peluso, Britto, Barbosa, Grau, Lewandowski	39%	14%	47%	49	73%	27%	26
15	21/06/06 04/09/07	Pertence, Mello, Aurélio, Gracie, Mendes, Peluso, Britto, Barbosa, Grau, Lewandowski, Lúcia	47%	22%	31%	116	69%	31%	80
16	05/09/07 22/10/09	Mello, Aurélio, Gracie, Mendes, Peluso, Britto, Barbosa, Grau, Lewandowski, Lúcia, Direito	40%	16%	44%	366	72%	28%	205
17	23/10/09 02/03/11	Mello, Aurélio, Gracie, Mendes, Peluso, Britto, Barbosa, Grau, Lewandowski, Lúcia, Toffoli	28%	24%	48%	148	53%	47%	77
18	03/03/11 18/12/11	Mello, Aurélio, Gracie, Mendes, Peluso, Britto, Barbosa, Lewandowski, Lúcia, Toffoli, Fux	41%	18%	40%	99	70%	31%	59
19	19/12/11 28/11/12	Mello, Aurélio, Mendes, Peluso, Britto, Barbosa, Lewandowski, Lúcia, Toffoli, Fux, Weber	7%	22%	71%	69	25%	75%	20
20	29/11/12 25/06/13	Mello, Aurélio, Mendes, Britto, Barbosa, Lewandowski, Lúcia, Toffoli, Fux, Weber, Zavascki	0%	14%	86%	7	0%	100%	1
21	26/06/13 30/07/14	Mello, Aurélio, Mendes, Barbosa, Lewandowski, Lúcia, Toffoli, Fux, Weber, Zavascki, Barroso	30%	7%	63%	57	81%	19%	21
Total			38%	15%	48%	2.712	72%	28%	1.419

Justices ^{^} Justices Rafael Mayer, Djaci Alves Falcão e Oscar Dias Correa did not vote in any of the majoritarian decisions in judicial review cases in the analysed period, therefore the analysis take into consideration the amount of 31 Justices	Total majority ADIs they voted for	% of times that they voted with majority	% of times that they voted isolated in minority	Total majority ADI in which they voted (minority >1)	% of times that they voted with majority (minority >1)	Total ADI with tight division in which they voted	% of times that they voted for the minimum winning coalition
Weber	18	100%		8	100%	1	100%
Zavascki	5	100%		2	100%	1	100%
Alves	150	94%		89	90%	17	82%
Sanches	153	93%		88	88%	16	81%
Gracie	198	92%		109	85%	18	78%
Corrêa	128	90%	2%	73	85%	16	75%
Gallotti	125	86%	2%	79	81%	16	75%
Mello	310	88%		169	78%	26	69%
Jobim	150	94%		84	89%	16	69%
Grau	145	87%	1%	73	77%	14	64%
Lúcia	143	92%		60	82%	11	64%
Lewandowski	158	94%		71	87%	13	62%
Galvão	134	87%	1%	79	80%	16	56%
Britto	210	74%	4%	109	58%	16	56%
Peluso	221	89%	1%	110	81%	18	56%
Passarinho	10	80%		9	78%	2	50%
Brossard	48	81%	2%	32	75%	6	50%
Barbosa	195	80%	3%	100	66%	18	50%
Velloso	205	77%	2%	123	65%	22	50%
Pertence	274	69%	3%	155	50%	27	41%
Mendes	233	91%	0%	115	82%	15	40%
Direito	37	81%		19	63%	5	40%
Aurélio	384	24%	37%	202	28%	35	34%
Rezek^* ***** Second appointment period: 5/21/92 to 5/2/97	29	69%		20	65%	3	33%
Borja	27	52%	7%	18	39%	4	25%
Silveira	135	73%	1%	81	57%	17	24%
Barroso	4	100%		1	100%	0
Fux	33	91%	3%	14	86%	0
Toffoli	57	91%	2%	22	82%	0
Rezek^ First appointment period: 3/24/83 to 3/15/90	2	100%		0		0
Madeira	3	100%		0		0

	Silveira	Passarinho	Sanches	Gallotti	Borja	Brossard	Pertence	Mello	Rezek	Velloso	Aurélio	Galvão	Corrêa	Jobim	Gracie	Mendes	Peluso	Britto	Barbosa	Grau	Lewand.	Lúcia	Direito	Weber
Alves	18	50	86	56	50	83	31	55	33	38	29	40	82	88
Silveira		50	36	50	50	50	50	36	67	44	53	53	27	0
Passarinho			50	50	0	50	50	50		50	50
Sanches				57	25	67	36	58	33	29	29	39	89	67	0
Gallotti					50	67	40	46	67	40	13	71	40	71
Borja						75	75	25		25	50	0
Brossard							50	0	0	0	33	25
Pertence								58	33	45	52	47	36	36	46	50	36	67	36	33	29	60
Mello									67	75	48	40	67	50	50	27	43	50	50	27	50	38	40	100
Rezek										33	67	33	0
Velloso											71	47	50	36	17	50	20	80	20	0
Aurélio												40	33	27	24	60	56	56	39	21	39	18	60	100
Galvão													33	56	100
Corrêa														73	60	50	0	50	25
Jobim															50	50	57	14	100	50	25
Gracie																43	53	44	65	69	50	80	40
Mendes																	67	31	47	33	20	22	100	0
Peluso																		25	50	57	54	27	80	0
Britto																			44	42	58	60	0
Barbosa																				29	46	36	0	100
Grau																					70	90	75
Lewand.																						50	25	100
Lúcia																							50	0
Direito
Weber

Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro Rua São Francisco Xavier, 524 - 7º Andar, CEP: 20.550-013, (21) 2334-0507 - Rio de Janeiro - RJ - Brazil
E-mail: direitoepraxis@gmail.com

Acompanhe os números deste periódico no seu leitor de RSS

[1] Tradução: Gabriel B. G. de Oliveira Filho, doutorando em Teoria e Filosofia na UERJ.