The role of the Brazilian congress in foreign policy: an empirical contribution to the debate

Abstract

The article aims to contribute to the debate on Legislative participation in Brazil's foreign policy. The research is based on presidential messages referent to international agreements forwarded to Congress for deliberation between 6 October, 1988 and 31 December, 2006. We find that the Brazilian institutional model does not totally restrict the decision-making process concerning international acts to the Presidency of the Republic and to the Ministry of External Relations. We submit that by analysing presidential messages referent to international agreements forwarded by the Executive to Congress for deliberation, and how these make their way through the Chamber of Deputies, it is possible to identify the existence of a broader spectrum of political participation than much of the literature tends to point out.

The non-ratification of bilateral investment treaties in Brazil: a story of conflict in a land of cooperation†

“…Some say it does oblige, some it does not (Fontanive, 1997). The fact is that since 1988 around 7% of the treaties were approved with some reservation clause (Diniz and Ribeiro, 2008). 19.…”

“…Since the promulgation of the Brazilian Constitution in October 1988, only 3 out of the 812 treaties sent to the Congress until 2006 were rejected, and 12 others were withdrawn by the president À less than 2% of the total (Diniz and Ribeiro, 2008). Moreover, 75% of these treaties were approved within three years of being presented to the Congress, a spell comparable to the 2.5 years that BITs have taken on average to enter into force in South America.…”

Reviewing horizontalization: the challenge of analysis in Brazilian foreign policy

“…The study test the hypothesis about the consequences of systemic Revista BRasileiRa de Política inteRnacional changes (political and economic liberalization) to the domestic sphere. This can also be seen in research projects that analyze the formulation of Brazil's position regarding litigation in the WTO Dispute Settlement Body, the participation of the Brazilian Congress in foreign policy and the implementation of South-South cooperation agreements, among others (Oliveira and Moreno 2007;Lopes 2008;Diniz and Ribeiro 2008;Faria, Nogueira and Lopez 2013). These works highlight the emergence of new stakeholders, driven by the country's redemocratization and by a closer connection between domestic issues and the international arena.…”

Itamaraty on the Move: Institutional and Political Change inBrazilian Foreign Service underLuladaSilva'sPresidency (2003–2010)

“…Hence, it is possible to say that Brazil is undergoing a number of transformations with regard to the institutional dimension of its foreign policy: (a) growing pressure towards constitutional changes that would recover legislative activism in foreign policy‐making, after a lifetime of delegation (Lima and Santos, ; Diniz and Ribeiro, ); (b) the intensification of presidential diplomacy (Cason and Power, ); (c) the overcoming of the import‐substitution model of development, which has been replaced by a market‐oriented one; (d) the expansion of the distributive and contentious nature of diplomatic activity in the country, and; finally; (e) the erosion of the otherwise unwavering cohesion of the diplomatic corps , especially under the Lula administration. On this last point, an increasing dissatisfaction among some segments of the diplomatic corps can be seen, especially retired ambassadors, who have not spared criticism of the way the government has conducted foreign‐policy matters in academic articles and opinion editorials.…”