Arthur Lira defends the adoption of semi-presidentialism, but without affecting Lula

The mayor, Arthur Lira (PP-AL), reiterated his support for the implementation of semi-presidentialism to improve the political stability of governments. He suggests that this model, in which the president shares power with a prime minister elected by Congress, could be introduced in 2030 or 2034. Thus, this change would be implemented without harming the prerogatives of Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT), if re-elected for a fourth term, or the rights of a successor, who could serve two consecutive terms of four years.

In Lira’s view, semi-presidentialism would increase political stability. That’s because, during crises, the system has faster tools to replace a prime minister. They do not depend on the lengthy impeachment processes characteristic of current presidentialism. “I ended last year with more than 180 requests for the impeachment of the president”, said Lira.

Some examples of these crises are scenarios in which a president does not have enough congressional support to govern and the country is stagnant or the president is suspected in some serious investigation.

But this does not mean that semi-presidentialism is immune to political instability. In theory, successive downfalls of prime ministers or the inability of Parliament to choose a prime minister could also generate scenarios of great instability. That is, in practice, the biggest winner with the change of system would be Congress, which would come out stronger.

Lira says that the Constitution is already parliamentary

On March 6, during an event at the São Paulo Commercial Association (ACSP), Lira brought the subject up for discussion, once again confirming her sympathy for the change. He declared that semi-presidentialism allows for a better division of responsibilities between Congress and the President of the Republic in running the government and, therefore, would defuse the country’s political instability once and for all. “The Constitution is already parliamentary. It is unreasonable that we do not look for a more suitable model, ”he added.

Lira says she believes that the party context is paving the way for the adoption of the new system, as it is reducing the number of political parties. Analysts estimate that the existence of a large number of political parties could make systems with characteristics of parliamentarism unfeasible, as is the case of semi-presidentialism.

Among the changes that have reduced the number of political parties is the barrier clause, which makes it difficult to create dwarf parties and is in effect in proportional elections. Furthermore, the end of coalitions and the advent of federations would be leading to a decrease in the number of parties. Lira estimates that there will be a maximum of eight parties left in Brazil: two on the left, two on the right, two on the center-left and two on the center-right.

He made a point of discarding his interest in becoming prime minister. His argument is that he does not intend to continue in politics after 2030.

In interviews when he was a candidate for the Presidency of the Republic, Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva (PT) classified the discussion proposed by Lira on the possibility of Brazil changing the system of government as a “coup”. He and left-wing parties interpreted the initiative as a way of hampering “popular sovereignty” and his government.

In semi-presidentialism, the government is exercised by the prime minister, who heads the council of ministers. He is not impeached, but can be removed by a motion of no confidence in Parliament or censure, presented by two-fifths of parliamentarians or by the president.

Among the main advantages of the system, Lira pointed to the preservation of the election by universal suffrage of the president, which would keep significant power in the hands, such as vetoing parliamentary laws, control of the constitutionality of norms, appointment of the prime minister and other relevant positions, in addition to the power to dissolve the government.

Congress, in turn, would have roles similar to those it has in presidentialism, overseeing the government, debating and approving laws and helping the prime minister with parliamentary support.

Change tends to be resisted by presidents

The discussion around the subject has been taking place since the Constituent Assembly (1987-1988), as a possible solution to frequent political crises. But all the presidents of the Republic since then, except Michel Temer (MDB), have always resisted the idea.

According to experts consulted by the People’s Gazettethe new model proposed to take effect from 2030 is already being tested in practice, driven by a growing role of Congress.

In 2022, Lira created a working group coordinated by Deputy Samuel Moreira (PSDB-SP) with a view to implementing the system in 2030. There is still no prospect of organizing a new group.

The current government system has been gaining semi-presidential aspects over the years, even without a formal transition to this new model. This can be seen in the proposal of parliamentarians for Congress to evaluate the appointment of directors of regulatory agencies, as well as in the secret budget, extinguished by the Federal Supreme Court (STF) at the end of last year. It allowed senators and deputies to obtain even more funds from the Budget, but without transparency.

These two cases are examples of the strengthening of Congress, which has assumed functions that in theory belonged to the Executive Branch.

Debate over system change returns to light according to government performance

According to Eduardo Galvão, professor of Public Policy at Ibmec-DF, the semi-presidential theme has never completely left the country’s agenda and its relevance has varied according to the performance of the government in office. During the management of former President Jair Bolsonaro (PL), the proposal almost returned to the political agenda due to the concession of spaces of power by the then president to the Legislative. This included outsourcing the management of the federal budget to Congress and appointing parliamentarians to important positions in the Executive, such as Ciro Nogueira (Casa Civil) and Flávia Arruda (Secretary of Government). Galvão points out that “Parliament quickly filled this vacuum, but remains willing to conquer even more power”.

The expert highlights the unprecedented partnership between the Legislative and Executive during the Temer government (2016-2019) as a significant experience. It guaranteed, for example, the imposing budget, a change that increased congressional interference in public spending.

With it, parliamentarians began to define part of the Union Budget that cannot be changed by the President of the Republic. The former president of the MDB also allowed that provisional measures not completely block the agenda of Congress. With the Lula administration, he sees little room for greater synergy between the Powers, considering the strongly centralized way in which the current president governs.

For Galvão, Lula rejects semi-presidentialism and the loss of any presidential prerogative, “but there are variables that must be considered”. Among them are the performance of the economy and its impact on Lula’s popularity, the support of the Judiciary for the government’s actions, and a political environment that does not require negotiation efforts. “So far, however, things have been favorable to the president, such as Bolsa Família payments authorized by the STF to stay outside the spending ceiling.”

According to Matheus Pimenta de Freitas, professor of Constitutional Law at the University of Brasília (UnB) and coordinator of the study group on electoral law at the institution, this is an opportune moment to start structuring the semi-presidential system in Brazil. He emphasizes that the implementation will take time, due to the many necessary adaptations in the Constitution and in the infraconstitutional regiment, in addition to demanding considerable political work. In this sense, the specialist believes that 2036 would be the ideal year to inaugurate the system, upon completion of the current process of gradual downsizing of the party framework promoted by the legislation.

“The adoption of semi-presidentialism would bring a solid parliamentary majority to the government, with a unified opposition minority. This is because the system combines parliamentary and presidential elements, guaranteeing the interdependence of the Legislative and Executive and having a president who does not only have a representative role as head of state”, he argues.

Freitas argues that the traumatic processes of impeachment of presidents for crimes of responsibility never completely left the horizon and show the indispensability of congressional support to govern. He points out that the shift towards semi-presidentialism would promote ideological consistency of parties, emptying out radicalism.

Finally, Freitas points out that, with a protagonist Congress, the Brazilian crises motivated by the purchase of support from parliamentarians by the government will always be lurking. He bets that the parties most used today to put the new system under discussion would be those of the so-called political center, such as União Brasil, PSD and MDB, due to the loss of relevance of the PSDB, historically more linked to this proposal.

In the evaluation of political scientist Antonio Lavareda, the proposal for a semi-presidential system first requires programmatic solidity and greater identification with society on the part of the parties. “This precondition, which is also part of parliamentarism, as a government of parties, is far from being met by Brazil in my view”, he says. For him, the individualized and personalist logic still applies to holders of mandates in Congress, as voters “ignore the importance of an absolute majority of parties”.

In his opinion, to overcome the cartorial and bureaucratic scenario of the parties, the solution would be to change the proportional voting system without ordering the list of candidates. This is because this model implemented in large electoral districts (states) encourages unbridled competition within the subtitles and harms their own cohesion. “Therefore, I suggest that Brazil adopt the model of ordered lists, as occurs in parliamentarism, in which the voter votes for the acronym and not directly for the candidate, as a way of strengthening the bond between society and political associations”, he defends.

Brazil even adopted parliamentarism in the republican period between 1961 and 1963, after the resignation of Jânio Quadros, in a political arrangement to reduce the powers of the then Vice President João Goulart, who ended up assuming the Presidency of the Republic. Presidentialism returned after holding a plebiscite.

In 1993, as provided for in the 1988 Constitution, a new public consultation on the form of government also confirmed the option for the presidential republic.

System has explicit support from ministers of the Supreme

Minister Luís Roberto Barroso, of the Federal Supreme Court (STF), has been defending the model with the mechanism for replacing the head of government without compromising institutional stability. In August 2017, Gilmar Mendes, then President of the Superior Electoral Court (TSE) met with former President Michel Temer (MDB) to discuss the Proposal for an Amendment to the Constitution (PEC) that addressed the issue and which had been presented in the year by Senator Aloysio Nunes Ferreira (PSDB-SP).

In the Judiciary, there are other defenders of the system, such as Minister Dias Toffoli, of the STF, who made statements criticized by parliamentarians who pointed to legal activism. “In practice, we already have a semi-presidential system with moderating power exercised by the Federal Supreme Court”, said the magistrate during his participation in the 9th Brazilian Legal Forum, held in Lisbon, on November 15, 2021.

At the same event, the president of the Senate, Rodrigo Pacheco (PSD-MG), defended the debate on semi-presidentialism, praising the role of Congress in the pandemic.