1

[DRAFT PAPER]

The context of participation: challenges and opportunities for civil society in participatory institutions in Brazil

*Valesca Lima Holanda

This study provides a discussion about a type of democratic institution in Brazil, the so-called

"management councils". Participatory institutions, such as rights councils and participatory

budget, are said to enhance popular participation in politics, promote citizen’s quality of

participation and improve democratic levels. Over the past 20 years, civil society has been i

integration in the process of formulation of public policies. From data provided by the

Institute Pólis about popular participation, this paper addresses two main questions: how civil

society was included in those participatory institutions and the challenges and opportunities

posed to social movements after gaining access to those spaces. This paper will discuss the

advances and limitations faced by civil society, focusing especially on challenges posed

ahead to deepening democracy in Brazil.

3.1 Brazil: the country of contradictions

‘’A rich country is a country without poverty’’ is the Dilma Rousseff government’s motto.

Brazil has more than 200 million people1. 21% of its population live below the poverty line2

(with less than 1.25 US$ per day3) despite being the 6th economy in the world4.

Brazilian politicians celebrated in October 2013 ten years of the conditional cash transfer

(CCT) program Bolsa Família. This program has helped lift approximately 11.1 million

families (around 46 million people) out of poverty between 2003 and 2009 by directly

transferring to the head of the families a monthly allowance between $16 and $150. This is a

* Valesca Lima Holanda is a PhD candidate at University College Dublin (UCD) and lectures on Local Government and Latin America Politics. 1 IBGE (2013). Brazil has an estimated population of 201 032 714 inhabitants, according to the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics (IBGE). The city of São Paulo is the one that has the largest population of the country: 11.8 million. 2UN data (2009). Population below national poverty line. Available at [http://data.un.org/Data.aspx?d=MDG&f=seriesRowID%3A581#f_4] 3 World bank poverty line definition. 4 The guardian - March 2012 - Brazil's economy overtakes UK to become world's sixth largest

2

means-tested program that reaches a major portion of the country’s low-income groups (1/4 of

the country’s population). Although internationally recognised as one of the biggest and most

successful cash transfer programs in the world5, this social program is closely related with the

current electoral gains obtained by the former president Lula and the current president Dilma

Rousseff. Their electoral campaigns are centred on the beneficiaries of this cash transfer

program and other Bolsa Família initiatives (Power&Zucco 2013).

Another debate regarding this program is related to its narrow focus on extreme poverty,

which inserts the program in the international trend of shifting from universal to target social

policies. According to Mkandawire (2005), target social policies are less efficient, since most

of the citizens have no access to these social benefits. Another fold of this debate is the

consequence of social policies targeting extreme poverty has on citizenship (Dagnino 2005,

Mkandawire 2005, Townsend 2002). The deepening of the neoliberal project and the

consequent reduction of the role of the state, make social policies formulated as emergencial

efforts projected towards very specific sectors of society, whose conditions for existence are

jeopardised. The target public of these social policies are not interpreted as citizens entitled to

rights, but as ‘needy’ human beings to be the targets of public or private charity (Dagnino

2005,2007).

Brazil – the letter B of the BRICS countries - is a place of deep inequalities. Poverty,

violence and corruption have affected the way regular citizens understand and participate in

politics. Brazilian citizens are disappointed and discredited with the model of politics

conducted nowadays. Some authors (Houtzager and Lavalle 2009 2010, Menegullo and

Moises 2013) point to a crisis of trust in the political process. The citizens' distrust on

democratic institutions was recently exposed in several street demonstrations all over the

country during the FIFA Confederations Cup in July 2013.

Civil society claims for political participation in contemporary Brazil seek to destabilize a

long-standing power structured system that excludes the poor. Power relations are based on

authoritarism and clientelism, features that have emerged alongside with classic institutions

of representative democracy. In the next section it will be discussed the process of the return

to democracy and the participation of different social actors in this process.

5 On Oct 15th 2013 Brazil won the Award for Outstanding Achievement in Social Security” from the

International Social Security Association, for the pioneering Bolsa Família poverty-reduction programme.

3

2.1.1 The Brazilian process of democratisation

The Brazilian dictatorship lasted for 21 years (1964-1985). It was characterized as a very

repressive and violent regime. Thousands of reports of torture and kidnapping were made and

media organisations were strongly repressed. The official numbers shows there are no more

than 1000 people killed by the repressive regime – but many cases were labelled as suicide or

disappearance. Also, a number of indigenous populations were killed in conflicts in Amazon

Forest over land sites in their indigenous reservations. If compared to other authoritarian

regimes in Latin America, such as Argentina (30.000 people killed) and Chile (40.000 people

killed), Brazil would not be considered as country with heavy authoritarian regime, but the

consequences of the centralization of power of the regime over citizenship and participatory

rights left profound marks on the modus-operand of social policies and electoral arena.

The 70’s and 80’s saw a period of great expansion of social policies, targeting mainly the

popular sectors, as a political strategy to bring attention away from the constant attacks to

political and civil liberties. Most of the social benefits were directed towards the ‘‘good

citizens’’, meaning those who had a job and did not get involved in political associations.

According to Dagnino (2005) it was a type of restricted or regulated citizenship, which is

always supervised by the state. The clientelistic exchanges also narrowed the political sphere,

since it interfered with the way citizens see themselves as rights holders, making the

development of an autonomous base for self-mobilisation against the autocratic regime very

difficult.

According to Lamounier (1999), it is observed that in those ten last years of the dictatorial

regime three characteristics already suggested the path that the autocratic government was

taking: 1. Elements of self-restrain from the side of the military government; 2. Electoral

practices and rules maintained in an acceptable level of credibility, and 3. An opposition not

willing to violently confront the regime and playing by the rules of the electoral regime6. The

victory of the opposition in 1974 elections made clear the decompression towards an opening

process. In general, the opposition made a good evaluation of the situation and it was able to

explore the internal failures of the regime itself. “Its formidable success in the 1974 elections helped it

(the opposition) to organized themselves under the label of MDB – Movimento Democrático Brasileiro

6 The first 10 years were the most repressive period of the Brazilian dictatorship. The Brazilian military

government commanded Brazil from March 31, 1964 to March 15, 1985. The Institutional Act No. 5, or AI-5, was released in 1968 is known to be the cruelest of Institutional Acts enacted by the military regime, signed by President Arthur Costa e Silva. The AI-5 severely restricted political rights, given to the legal prerogatives that allowed the expansion of the military-police repression.

4

(Brazilian Democratic Movement) establishing bridges among a variety of social movements and associations

then increasing (re)politicization.” (Lamounier 1999, 133). The gradual decrease of coercion combined

with the decompression of the repressive apparatus leaded to the progressive collapse of the

authoritarian legitimacy.

The Brazilian “opening’’7 process under the term of the military president Ernesto Geisel

(1974 to 1979) marked an important moment in the Brazilian (re)democratization process.

That “opening” process distinguishes itself for being operationalized by elections. The

process of return to democracy was slow. The initial years were characterized by a

‘‘restricted’’ representative democracy and fragile linkages between political and civil

societies (Porto 2013). Brazil’s transition to democracy was marked by the preponderance of

the same old elites and patron-client ties and also by a significant continuum in relation to the

former autocratic regime. Thus, the emphasis is not on new political groups. Elites did not

lose power; they just changed sides (Alves 1988, Hagopian 1996). Slowly, the authoritarian

regime was losing legitimisation and the opposition was growing firmly. The last move to the

traditional elites was to move to the side who was winning. Some well-known representatives

of the government, such as the future new president Tancredo Neves, were members of one

of the two authorised parties of the dictatorial regime, the MDB (today PMDB), a centre-right

party. The other party was ARENA - Aliança Renovadora Nacional (National Renewal

Alliance).

Regardless of the end of the dictatorial regime in 1985 there was no open and direct election

immediately. The period just after dictatorship is called ‘‘new republic’’ and was established

by indirect elections. The civil rule is back, at least in legal terms, with the election of

Tancredo Neves. However, he had no opportunity to exercise his term as president: he died a

few days after his election after surgery complications. His death opened space to the

unexpected rise of Jose Sarney, his vice president. Once in office, Sarney started a new

economic plan (including a new currency named Cruzado) in order to confront the massive

problems that came from the dictatorial regime: debt, inflation, recession, unemployment,

poverty – there were also many other challenges to the young Brazilian democracy. He also

legalised communist parties and lifted authoritarian acts, such as the AI-5. In Sarney’s term

as president, the peak of this democratisation process was the call for a constituent assembly

7 “Opening” is the closest translation to the Portuguese word “abertura”, that in this particular context means the

start of a new idea or a process.

5

in 1985 to elaborate a new constitution. The new constitution conceded extra power to

political organisations but kept the social advances in a controlled way.

Especially after the promulgation of the new Constitution of 1988 the process of

democratisation advanced. The new constitution together with the impeachment of the first

directly elected president Collor de Mello helped to enforce the representative system and

strengthened the force of the demands from popular groups (Porto 2013). Despite its various

and complex flaws, the quality of the Brazilian democracy improved by permitting more

citizens to participate in the policy-making process and by providing improvements in

accountability laws and institutional renovation, which helped to create a more stable and

participatory regime. Among those innovations I can cite the new relationship between state

and society that contributed to the creation of institutions more sensitive to demands coming

from popular sectors. The state support for projects of participatory budgeting, local councils

and City Master Plans were highly relevant to the empowerment of social mobilised groups

(Porto 2013, Avritzer 2010).

Although positive, this new relationship between state and civil society was contentious and

involved different political actors. Behind the return to democracy, there was a coalition that

included students, teachers, professors, politicians, industrial workers, etc, that headway

towards the creation of new civil society organisations and new urban movements (Baiocchi

2005). Grassroots movements started to project themselves in national and local levels,

demanding to be heard and more participation and autonomy, seeking to overturn the

centralisation of power in the public administration. After many rounds of negotiations

involving social movements, politicians in office, workers and members of the traditional

elites, and endless sessions in the constituent assembly, the final version of the Constitution

was published on October 5, 1988.8

The new constitution granted more autonomy to local level government institutions, as those

institutions were given more political and financial autonomy. Municipalities became the

main providers of social services, such as housing, education, health etc. The Constitution of

1988 included mechanisms of direct and participatory democracy, being the most influent

among those the creation and implementation of management councils for public policies.

8 The 1988 Brazilian Constitution has over 250 articles and till 2012 have been amended 70.

6

The membership in these councils is shared equally among member of the civil society and

civil servants.9

The introduction of those new participatory mechanisms gave a boost to social organisations

locally. Regular citizens were invited to come close to social policies and take part in the

decision-making process, by proposing and approving public policies and budgets. That was

one of the main demands of social groups that have been requesting more voice and

participation in local governments. The inclusion of the agenda of social movements in the

decision-making process changed the relationship between state and civil society, once the

social demands were recognised by the state. From this new constitution on, citizens’

demands need to be included in councils’ debates, voted and approved (or not) by the

members of the councils.

Another important step towards democratisation was the implementation of the participatory

budget. This experience started in 1988 in the city of Porto Alegre in the southwest of the

country and still been applied today. This is considered, for some authors a very successful

experience of participatory democracy in country dominated by nepotism and inequality in

many ways (Santos 1998, Baiocchi 2005, Avritzer 2009, Wampler 2010).

Once democracy is considered to be well established in the country, there is no more

controversy that Brazil is consolidated democracy (Lamonier 2006, Levine and Molina

2011). As in most countries in Latin America, democracy in Brazil was reborn in the middle

of an economic crisis and resisted serious setbacks. The centre of the debate is not, anymore,

if the country has reached the transitional phase of democracy to a consolidated one. The

scholarship is more focused in the quality of this democracy. The current analysis seeks to

comprehend, in theory and practice, if citizens have access to full social rights, for example

(Levine and Molina 2011).

2.1 - Experiences that informs participation level nowadays: the creation of spaces for participation

9 Some councils, such as the Urban National Council, includes members of the private sector, for example, representants of the building sectors and research agencies. In this case a bylaw will define the number of members for each group involved in the council.

7

This section analyses the creation of the spaces for participation and democratic structures for

participation of civil society during the governments of President Lula.

After nearly 30 years of the return to democracy, one can observe many experiences of

participation in the Brazilian government. The establishment of Community Councils and

People's Councils in the 80s, the Participatory Budget and Management Councils in the 90s,

and the Councils and National Conferences of the Lula government, among other attempts,

demonstrate the democratic vitality and the active role civil society is playing. Several studies

have been produced on the formation and operation of these public spaces; however, there is

little discussion about how it works, who participated on it and how those spaces were

created.

When Sader (1988) published his study about the “new social actors“ from 70’s and 80’s, he

listed three pillars for the social agitation: the Catholic Church, the new unions and left-wing

groups. The role the Catholic Church plays in support anti-militarist social movements is

connected with the “Liberation theology“. It consisted in list of recommendations created at

the II Vatican Council, in the 2nd General Episcopal Conference of South America in 1968,

Medellín (Boff 1986). According to Boff, it was a recommendation based on the idea that the

church needed to change the parish attendees from simple passive people to active

participants in society acting against social injustices. After the release of a document called

“The Medellín resolutions’’ in 1984, Latin-American bishops interpreted it as a invitation to

the church to take part in the transformation taking place in South America. In practice, it

meant to organise the population to claim better life conditions and more government

compromise with social causes. Small groups of debate, reflection and prayers were created;

those groups were called Basic Ecclesial Communities (Comunidades Eclesiais de Base –

CEB).

Those groups proved to be very effective and spread important values for participatory

struggles, social organization in small groups, mostly the poor, and a resistance to

authoritarian institutions. Their conduct code promoted organization's social base: exercised

reflection on the conditions of life, evidenced basic notions of social and human rights, they

discussed collective identities, created solidarity between people and social movements and

encouraged the knowledge acquisition and democratizing practices At some point those

groups were present in more than 80.000 communities and mobilised nearly 2 million people.

(Boff 1986; Carvalho 1998).

8

This impulsion for mobilisation created the base for a direct participation and implanted the

idea of a power coming from the bases, a power coming from the population. The

communities organised by the Catholic Church and leaded by priests and bishops very

connected to the marginalised classes created for the fist time the idea of the organisation

from grassroots. The same members of CEB and its leaders established important

connections with the "new unionism" and leftist groups, influencing and fortifying each other

(PÓLIS 2014).

Simultaneously, in the city of São Paulo, the “new unionism“ started to reconfigure the

capital-work relations. New unionism meant the workers entrance in the political sphere,

especially in the in metallurgical and chemical industries in the south of Brazil. Some authors

called it “authentic unionism“ to differentiate it from previous union practices, defined by

patronizing and clientelism. The Workers Central Union (Central Única dos Trabalhadores

(CUT), created in 1983, influenced and still influence the performance of other unions around

the country. The important change they implemented was to modify the institutions from the

inside, especially on hierarchies inside the existent unions (PÓLIS 2014). Instead of surging

as parallel power, it was organised around internal core values and a horizontal hierarchies.

Lula da Silva assumed the presidency of the union in 1972.

The third social actor mentioned by Sader (1988), along with the Catholic Church and the

trade unions were left-wing groups. Those groups were dispersed due the intense repression

promoted by the military government. Articulating in the shadows and many times supported

by left-wing Catholic priests, those groups tried to reconnect again with masses in an attempt

to promote new ideas and defeat the dictatorship. Inspired by Gramsci and Paulo Freire, daily

social practices were comprehended as important moments to reflections and formulation of

political strategies. By that time, a few NGOs were created with the mission to promote

education and share the knowledge produced by social movements and other civil society

organisations. Paulo Freire and his “pedagogy of the oppressed“ were widely used.

According to Souza (2011) apud Paoli (1995), the organization of the popular sectors,

workers in special, led to the rise of the new unionism and the defence of workers' rights, the

creation of advocacy and neighbourhood associations organizations, the creation of Worker’s

Party (Partido dos Trabalhadores - PT) and other parties, as well as the return of parties

closed by the regime. The creation of the Workers’ party in 1982 epitomise the articulation of

the three groups mentioned beforehand, symbolising the end of the bi-party system. The party

9

was composed by union leaders linked to the "new unionism", liberation theology

participants, students, intellectuals, students of the left, and leaders of neighbourhood

associations and other forms of organization. In the party’s statute and in meetings and

conferences documents in the 80’s, it is possible to observe its commitment to democratic

values (Souza 2011). The participation of civil society in decision-making processes,

incorporated in the Brazilian Constitution of 1988, has been a central principle in the political

project of the Partido dos Trabalhadores and, since its foundation in 1980, the party has tried

to implement participatory practices in different levels of the administration.

Until this point, the general feeling was that civil society would fight against the state,

identified as the promoted of repressive acts. A tense atmosphere between the good (civil

society) and the bad (state) was a good definition of this period. The relationship with the

state was seen as dichotomous: either maintaining the autonomy denying bureaucratic

structures, or it was understood as a process of co-option and therefore distorted the

collective interests (Souza 2011 apud Abrantes 1989). A new relationship between civil

society and state was the main goal. Gradually, civil society started to pressure the state to

create more spaces of participation and slowly it entered the institutional spaces. Starting with

the sanitation movement, which pressured the state for better health services – it was the first

social movement to have more spaces for participation in the direction of supervision and

control of public health policies. It was realised in 1986 the VIII National Healthcare

Conference and it was the first time in the Brazilian history that the government invited

organised civil society members to debate and elaborate public health policies. Before that,

conference attendance was very low and only attended by government officials. Another

victory for the movement was the formulation and approval of the document that would later

be included in the 88 Constituent as the Brazilian National Health System (Sistema Único de

Saúde – SUS) (CARVALHO 1995).

To create a new outline representing a new relationship between state and civil society was

one of the main demands of civil society in the pre-constitutional period. The gradual

response to the social demands brought new challenges to civil society: to understand their

role and great difficulties to move in this new arena. In this context, the idea of “community

councils“ took place and assumed its space in the civil society political agenda.

According to PÓLIS (2005) that is the context when the idea of management councils first

appear. Social movements and other popular organisations were in situation that allowed

10

them pressure the government on creating new spaces for popular discussion. According to

Abrantes (1989), the Committee of the Metropolitan Transport and the Popular Health

Council in special hold the conditions and experience to pressure the government. The

popular pressure on the government forced it to implement local healthy councils. Finally, the

proposals of the public health movement, which since the late 70’s proposed the creation of

spaces not only for civil society to be heard, but a public space where it could really influence

public policy-making, through decentralization of health services, with the effective

participation of the population (PÓLIS apud CEBES, 1980). Those were important references

for demands developed in the Constituent around institutional arrangements that would

permit a minimum participation of society in controlling, monitoring and proposing changes

in policy-making government decisions. (Teixeira 1996).

In the 80’s, especially after end of the dictatorial regime, as observed in the section above, the

Workers’ Party had a relative but stable success in the general elections, and from 1988 it

was heading a good number of cities around the country. The faced at this stage an important

challenge: to transform a set of principles and guidelines on concrete public policies (Rolnik

1990). Many of PT administrations, were inclined to popular participation and created the

Popular plenary and People's Councils (Plenárias Populares e Conselhos Populares) as

spaces for dialogues between civil society and government (PÓLIS 2011 apud Paz and Silva

1990).

Once the Workers’ Party had some state representation this debate about direct democracy

and social movements’ autonomy was intensified (PÓLIS 2011). Initially, those popular

councils emerged as space created for social movements to define their identity as a group

and their social demands. It was also as space of resistance to face the state and a strategy to

intervene in the institutional levels. In this sense, this initiative would be understood as a plan

to face the mistrust placed on the civil society by the state.

If the political context in the late 80’s made possible the inclusion of the notion of

participation and power sharing in the 1988 Constitution, this same context changed in the

90’s, after the election of Collor de Mello, the first president elected by direct vote. Collor

deepened the neoliberal process in the country, an attitude followed even further by his

successor, Fernando Henrique Cardoso (FHC). The neoliberalism project brought other idea

of participation to the scene (Dagnino 2014). As an expression of the neoliberal adjustment,

the focus on sharing some of the public burden from the state to civil society was moved

11

away from the original plan. It was reconceptualised - differently from what was included in

the national reform plan, conducted by Bresser Pereira – as a partnership. Social policies

duties were now shared trough partnerships between NGOs and private sectors to develop

and implement specific project in a national council called the “Solidarity Council“

(Conselho da Comunidade Solidária), a agency created by FHC that worked also as a think

tank, producing theoretical and empirical analysis to support the neoliberal project (Silva

2006, Dagnino 2014). It was also a way to justify state efficiency, by sharing the social

responsibilities among state enterprises, individuals and civil society. In this context,

participation is reduced to assume social responsibility individually by voluntary work or

through NGOs, while the real decision power remained under state control (Teixeira 2003).

The NGOs number grew in the period, considering that these entities served as stable and

reliable partners to the neoliberal state. As a consequence, civil society was reduced to those

organisation (NGOs) and social movements were marginalised and often criminalised

(Feltran 2005, Dagnino 2014). Those two radically different ways of understanding

participation are still existing in the Brazilian context nowadays, with all its tensions and

contradictions associated with this neoliberal model of participation.

3.1.1 – Worker’s Party and Lula’s election

After 3 attempts as presidential candidate, Lula da Silva was elected president in 2002, under

Workers’ Party umbrella and supported by a coalition of left-wing to central-left parties.

After his election, in his “letter to the Brazilian people” (Carta aos brasileiros) Lula

promised to keep the contracts with financial markets while the same time to apply an

alternative social project, which would not be applied abruptly, but gradually in the long run

(Dagnino 2014). He also reassured his commitment with the democracy and its institutions.

Some authors say that in his very first statement he left out the core ideas of his party’s

document “Program for a Democratic Revolution“, in which the party emphasizes civil

society participation and direct control over the state institutions (PT 1999). To Baiocchi

(2008), it was the first sign of moderate government.

Expectations on Lula’s government were high, mostly among the poorest citizens. Even if

using a prudent language, leftists groups still inspired by the Workers’ Party initial political

project, and Lula’s coming to power meant to those a change for the better. As we know well,

Lula’s government brought changes in many social policies, but it was not away from the

12

neoliberal model of government. In his term, Lula emphasised social policies centred on fight

poverty, promoting economic development and job creation. While his first term was focused

in develop backbone social policies, to remain in power was also a concern. So what happens

next is what Evelina Danigno calls ‘’PT’s power project” (Workers’ Party power project).

This new agenda is different from the original party proposal. We can add to that the

coalition supporting Lula’s election and the difficulty to accommodate different and

conflicting social projects under the same flag among Workers’ Party members. This

heterogeneous coalition brought about a set on different views in the eight years of Lula in

office and it is marked heavily the way civil society was included in policy making.

3.2 – Increasing participation in numbers and the inclusion of new voices

In the last 30 years, government and civil society organisations have taken advantage of a

series of political opportunities made available by the new democratic regime after 1985, in

order to offer new democratic institutions that directly include regular citizens in the process

of policy-making. Local governments in special have committed to those institutional

experiences and they have succeeded in many cases. One of the most apparent

accomplishments has been the increase and reinforcement of participatory institutions, both

in numbers and scope, represented by the great number of councils and popular conferences.

This process started just after Collor de Mello office, but it obtained a great impulse during

Lula’s term. During this period it is great the volume of institutional investments, government

resources and people involved on participatory democracy.

Figure 1 – Year of creation national council

13

Source: Inesc-Pólis Institute: Arquitetura da Participação no Brasil: avanços e desafios (2011)

It is possible to observe from the data released from a joined research between Pólis Institute

and Inesc Institute on democratic governance in contemporary Brazil, that at national level,

more than one third of the councils were created in Lula’s term. The second highest peak

happened at just after the new 88’s constitution, in a period that covers three presidencies

(Sarney, Collor and Itamar).

Most of the areas mapped are prior to the administration of president Fernando Henrique

Cardoso. Some of these councils were created in non-democratic periods, which appear to be

a contradiction. Most of the councils were created during the democratization process. In the

year of the promulgation of the 1988 Constitution, and in two following years were created

seven councils. But it was in 2003 when the highest number of national councils was created,

with eight new councils in total.

The types of councils are distinguished by their goals and ways of working. A “policy

council” is a council that contribute to the formulation of public policies for a given area,

such as policies for health, education, welfare, urban planning, and rural development, among

others. Out of mapped 40 councils, 29 are policy councils, that is, most of the council are of

this type.

0  

5  

10  

15  

20  

25  

before  1980   1980  to  1988  

1989  to  1994  

1995  to  1998  

1999  to  2002  

2003  to  2006  

2007  to  2010  

14

The rights councils are those that deal with the rights of a particular population, in general

marginalized groups that are supposed to need specific policies. Of course, all the councils

deal directly with the issue of rights, however; in this case the right of the population in

question is the focus of the council. In the Inesc-Pólis research, 11 councils are of this type.

Examples of this kind of council are the National Council for the Rights of the Elderly and

the National Council for Fighting Discrimination and Promote LGBT Rights.

Conferences have been one of the main focuses of the government to improving participatory

democracy. The numbers on national conferences are great: official data provided by the

secretary of the republic office informs that a total of 73 conferences were held between 2003

and 2010, in 40 different themes. Those conferences reunited more than five million people,

who took part in municipal, regional, state and national steps of the conferences.

We looked into those who composed the conferences. We found that 70% of the participants

are members of civil society organisation and the remaining 30% were government officials

from local, state and federal level. In the national councils, 52% of the members are from

civil society and 48% from government. Some conferences established quotes to guarantee

the attendance of women and LGBT activists.

An important manner to decide the effectiveness of those councils regarding their influence

on public policies is to identifying, by checking its decree of creation or regulatory law, if it

is a consultative or deliberative council. If the council is only consultative, decisions made by

the council do not necessarily have impact in public policies. In deliberative councils,

decision becomes resolutions. Once this happens, resolutions need to be complied by the

government (INESC and PÓLIS 2011).

However, those are relative roles. Even if the status of the council is relevant, this

characteristic does not always respect the scope of the board's decisions. Deliberative

councils may decide on specific, operational issues and do not always meet the task of

guiding public policy, while consultative councils can discuss complex issues and relate to

the policy template wanted (INESC and PÓLIS 2011). One should consider that the fact the

council is only consultative does not mean it has no political power. Depending on the

political strength of its members of the council and the theme of centrality for a government

project, consultative boards may be more powerful than a deliberative council.

15

New councils reflected new thematic areas and also the inclusion of new voices. The Food

Security Council was created during Collor de Mello term and closed when FHC took office.

It was reactivated as soon as Lula took office in 2003, as a strategic part of his nationwide

program against extreme poverty, Zero Hunger (Fome Zero). This council brought together a

number of representatives of civil society. It also pervade another correlated topics, such as

family farming, school food programs and the creation of new committees to reunite civil

society and government together to formulate public policies in the area. Space was also

opened for the participation of a variety of social groups – human rights activist, women,

black, indigenous people, food businesses and many other – in a attempt to broad social

participation in this particular set (Dagnino 2014).

A second good example of the expansion of policy themes and the inclusion of was in the

cultural area, which received a great boost with the creation of the National Council of

Cultural Policy. This council came as demand from popular artists and cultural producers

sectors involved in Lula’s electoral campaign. Before that cultural policies where defined by

an unequal and unclear funding distribution (Souza 2008).

Civil society and social movements were not limited to pressure government only in

institutional space. Their mobilisation brought them beyond these spaces. As example of that

we can cite the creation and implementation of the Maria da Penha law10, that increased

punishment for violence against women, a long time demand from NGO’s and groups

fighting for women’s rights. In the same way, groups defending racial equality were included

in participatory processes to formulate policies for the Afro-descendant population, including

quotas in third level institutions and more rigid laws to curb racism.

The important outcome of those processes was the inclusion of social groups that had been

systematically excluded from the sphere of decision-making. Their inclusion did not come as

a gift; this inclusion came as a result of a strong pressure exerted by the popular sectors. The

engagement of those social groups in new policy-making venues helped to broad relevant

themes and extends the right of participation and social control to popular groups.

3.3 The issue of quality and other challenges

10 Explain Maria da Penha law briefly here – only to give some context. (Mention international human rights

courts – Human rights watch)

16

Taking in consideration the increase in the number of participatory institutions in previous

years, it is not difficult to conclude that, quantitatively, the number of council and

conferences created reached an impressive level. In addition to the significant quantitative

increase in new participatory spaces (showed in the previous topic), an important point of

analysis still ahead of us. It is important to consider the quality of this participation and some

of the challenges posed to civil society organisations.

If one achievement was to promote democratisation by extending new participatory spaces to

new thematic areas, including food security, people with disabilities, etc. in order to promote

meaningful changes in public policies; the remaining challenge is to understand how can we

determine that quality of participation and how far it can get. Quality of participation here is

understood as effectiveness of participation. In order words, the way decision power is shared

with civil society organisations.

It is not easy to identify this level of effectiveness, as different contexts with different actors

brings distinct results; too many variables might be at play. Some authors as Wampler (2010)

and Stone (200) helped to developed the concept of “policy communities“, in order to

identify the increasing association between civil society and government in different

administrative levels, by defining which actors and events are responsible for decisions in

public policies.

The idea of participatory democracy was one of main social compromises of the Workers’

Party before it came to power. If one looks at the figures, it is possible to observe that more

participatory spaces were created, more people were mobilised and new public policies and

new voices were included in process of decision-making. However, those newly created

entities did not have the impact they initially proposed to. Instead of spaces for debate and

new policy proposals, in many cases it turned out as a space for dialogue and public demands

hearing. A good example to sustain this claim is that 58% of the councils are only

consultative and not deliberative (INESC and PÓLIS 2011).

Without understanding the meaning of power sharing, governmental agencies and councils

have different concepts of this idea. Contradicting the expectations civil society organisation

had to gain access and influence in public policies, in most of the cases participatory

institutions developed a fragmented relationship with those movements. Many Workers’

Party supporters were invited to join those institutions, fact the brought hash criticism to the

administration. In governmental agencies responsible for an area where social movements

17

have a strong composition and are well organised politically, the government relationship is

close and power sharing is enforced (Dagnino 2014).

The absence of coordination and the non-application of the concept of power sharing – that

eventually became a “space for dialogue” carried as a result the co-existence of different

practices. While some government agencies would consider CSO participation in their

administration, others offered great resistance to the idea of popular participation in public

policies. This new participatory project, promoted by the Worker’s Party, clashed with old

traditional forms of governability that exclude the poor. Quality of participation was

compromised by that, and for this and other reasons11 many activists and Workers’ Party

members left their government official jobs and some even created an “alternative” party

named “Socialism and Freedom Party“ (PSOL – Partido Socialismo e Liberdade), more

faithful to the original political project of popular participation developed by the Workers'

Party.

Advances in the creation of new governmental agencies to promote popular participation

were not aligned with concrete changes in power sharing. New policy areas were included

and attention was brought for new social themes. However, no power sharing actually

happened. The inclusion of civil society in those spaces and the acknowledgment of their

demands by the government were not followed by action to promote change in a substantial

way. Despite Lula’s term has created a great number of changes in participatory institutions

over the years, the notion of participation has changed, but still not attending civil society

desire for effective participation and concrete decision power in public policies.

3.4 - Advances and setbacks: what is ahead for civil society organisations

Considering the period prior to the end of the military regime – and potentially before that -

civil society organisations have achieved great success, especially because of their presence

in stances of decision and also its capability to pressure the governments to put their demands

forwards. CSOs contribution to expand participatory democracy has been significant, but not

without equally important challenges.

11 In 2008, Frei Beto, long term social activist recognized internationally, left the government and the Worker’s

Party claiming disagreement with the Workers’ Party “power project“ and for promote the “Depoliticization of Brazilian society” (Brasil de Fato, 2014). Another important fact is the context of creation the PSOL party. After the election of Lula da Silva in 2002, member of PSOL claimed that Worker’s Party took a sharp turn to the right and began a implementation a neoliberal program. Because of that, a section of the party's more committed to the initial party political positioning (left-wing) exit the party and founded PSOL, in an attempt to create an anti-capitalist alternative to the Workers’ Party.

18

The inclusion of CSOs organisation in participatory institutions offered to the groups

involved a formidable chance to voice their demands and pressure the government from a

different level. Once gained access to those spaces of participation, CSOs members also have

access to specialist knowledge, either from close connection with government official in

charge of formulate and implement a given public policy or by attending specific conferences

on their areas of interest.

This learning process reinforces the ability of CSO members to participate properly, by

collaborating to the improvements of public policies in a more assertive way. Once they can

definitely collaborate and understand the processes that command those structures, they are

capable of influence the outcomes of public policies. The level of influence is related to

government attitude towards civil society participation, and, as discussed here before,

different government sectors are more or less resistant to popular participation.

On the other hand, CSOs obtained relative success. Currently, organisations that are more

active usually receive a repressive attitude from governments, including physical repression.

Obviously one cannot compare the current level of repression with the levels during the

military regime, but what still in place in the current government, specially at state level, is

the brutal mode its is handling public demonstrations, opposition and localised acts of

vandalism. It is true that acts of vandalism occur, but the police have demonstrated an

enormous incapability in dealing with irritated masses. A good example of that was the

extreme police repression committed against street demonstrator in June 2013 before the

World Cup. Using isolated actions of looting and vandalism as motivation, state police

officers took a violent approach to spread the demonstrators.

These demonstrations started as small protest against a hike in bus fares in Sao Paulo capital

and it turned into one of the largest popular demonstrations that the country has seen in the

last 20 years, when people went to streets to claim the impeachment of the former president

Collor de Mello. A single hike in bus fares plus the violent approach of the police against

demonstrators sparked a public outrage and it spread all over the country. Other forms of

popular dissatisfaction (violent police repression, corruption, poverty, inequality) also

collaborated to the general feeling of protesting. The movement had no clear political and

ideological direction but it showed that, although Brazil has a weak and distrusted political

sphere, civil society still is strong and aware of its potential of promoting social justice

(Levine and Molina 2011).

19

The message sent by those demonstration – and others that happened after that around

country – was that people still waiting and demand for participation, more transparency and

less corruption. Despite Dilma officially saying she was listen to the people, her government

has done very little to promote the changes people on streets were claiming. It is unfair to

blame president Dilma Rousseff or the Workers’ Party alone: the conservative sectors of the

Brazilian society have their share in curb the access of popular movements to higher spheres

of power.

CSOs still face other challenges, such as financial dependency, as many of those are financed

by external sources. After the 90’s the relationship between governments and non-profit

entities was changed. While some entities kept social activities, other entities, such as NGOs

which offered social services, moved away from social movements and connected themselves

with the state and assumed the role of partner (with government agencies). Those NGOs were

mostly offering social services in partnership with the state (IPEA 2012).

Also according to the IPEA survey, in 2005 the 338,000 existing NGOs (excluding profit

organizations) represented 5.6% of total public and private entities and employed 5.3% of

Brazilian workers. What has also grown significantly over the recent years has been the

dependence of NGOs of government resources. Data published in 2010 by Abong revealed

that while 16.7% of its slightly more than 200 members had associated 41% to 100% of their

budgets come from federal funds in 2003, in 2007 this percentage increased to 37.4%. (IPEA

2012)

On the other side, entities that have no partnership with governments, struggle to survive and

constantly seek alternative sources of funding. This lack of funding and opportunities are a

menace to entities social projects. Full dependency on external funding may also lead

contributors or sponsor to control the agenda of the CSOs; this control in may affect the

entities political autonomy.

Especially for entities depending on external sources, transparency and accountability

appears as important issues. The Transparency Portal website offers information on the

public resources passed to NGOs every year. In 2011 the activities of NGOs came to

attention in the national media. The central point of the reports were cases of possible

irregularities in transfers of public funds for those entities, which, again, raised the debate

about the blurred of the lines between the public sphere, private companies and state in

Brazil.

20

Civil Society organisations probably face many more challenges than listed here. Those

challenges impacts they way those entities function. Despite some advances over time,

especially in the number of participatory institutions, CSOs still have a great deal of

challenges to overcome regarding the political context they operate.

3.5 Conclusion

As home of both the richest and poorest people in the world, Brazil is in true a country of

contradictions. While there is one of the most social Constitutions in the world, the difference

between the legal country and people actual behaviour is striking. The corruption scandals

that overrun the news everyday brought increasing levels of distrust and dissatisfaction with

democracy, as the public demonstrations showed pretty clearly.

The blatant levels of violence and remaining extreme poverty are challenges to both state and

civil society. Disregarding the law, the power of decision is still in the hands of traditional

elites. The initial euphoria of the first years of Lula’s term has, now, faded. As time passes,

social movements and citizens in general become conscious that despite some concrete social

advances, much work still to be done for a more transparent, accountant and open democratic

regime.

If we consider the size of the country and the deep social, one can observe that most of the

poor Brazilian citizens still excluded from the political processes. The challenge for social

movements now is to keep the channels of popular participation open and try to convert the

social innovation into meaningful state public policies. More than just including more

citizens in the public sphere, the challenge here is to create a more inclusive public sphere by

promoting citizenship, defending accountability and avoid re-clientisation.

The message sent by the demonstration on the streets in June 2013 was clear: people are still

wanting participation, concrete participation. Those participating in social mobilisation

nowadays endure the great challenges ahead, to overcome the obstacles posed by the political

fragmentation and inconsistencies of those participatory process, and tensions and

contradictions that limit the effectiveness of participation, as it was confirmed by events on

the streets.

21

Bibliography

Abrantes, P. R. (1989). Sao Paulo: vetores de uma quebra cabeca. (Sao Paulo: parts of a puzzle (Vol. 39). Fase.

Avritzer, L. (2009). Participatory Institutions in Democratic Brazil. Washington,DC: Woodrow Wilson Center Press.

Avritzer, L. (2010). Living under a Democracy: Participation and Its Impact on the Living Conditions of the Poor. Latin American Research Review, 45(4), 166–185. http://doi.org/10.1353/lar.2010.0044

Baiocchi, G. (2005). Militants And Citizens: The Politics Of Participatory Democracy In Porto Alegre. Stanford University Press.

Baiocchi, G., & Checa, S. (n.d.). The New and the Old in the Brazil’s PT. In Leftovers: tales of the Latin American Left (pp. 105–128). New York: Routledge.

Boff, L. (1986). Ecclesiogenesis: The Base Communities Reinvent the Church (5th edition). Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books.

Carvalho, A. I. de. (1995). Conselhos de Saude no Brasil (Health Councils in Brazil). Rio de Janeiro: Fase: Ibam.

Carvalho, M. do C. (1998). Participação social no Brasil hoje. São Paulo: Instituto Pólis.

CEBES, C. B. de E. da S. (1980). A questao democratica na area da saude (The democratic issue in health). Rio de Janeiro.

Dagnino, E. (2005). Meanings of citizenship in Latin America (Vol. 258). Institute of Development Studies, University of Sussex.

Dagnino, E. (2007). Dimensions of Citizenship in Contemporary Brazil. Fordham Law Review, 75, 2469.

Dagnino, E. (2014). The Participation of Civil Society in Lula’s Government. Journal Of Politics In Latin America, 6(39-66).

Feltran, G. de S. (2006). Deslocamentos: trajetórias individuais entre sociedade civil e Estado no Brasil (Dislocations: Individual Trajectories between Civil Society and the State in Brazil). In A disputa pela construção democrática na América Latina (The Dispute around Democratic Building in Latin America) (pp. 371–416). Sao Paulo: Paz e Terra.

Global public policy, transnational policy communities, and their networks - WRAP: Warwick Research Archive Portal. (n.d.). Retrieved from http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/1800/

Hagenaars, A. J. M. (2014). The Perception of Poverty. Elsevier.

Houtzager, P. P., & Gurza Lavalle, A. (2009). Participatory Governance and the Challenge of Assumed Representation in Brazil. IDS Working Papers, 2009(321), 01–32. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.2040-0209.2009.00321_2.x

IPEA (Brazilian Institute of Applied Economics). (2012). A complexa relação entre Estado e

22

ONGs (The complex relationship between states and NGO’s). Revista Desafios Do Desenvolvimento (Journal Challenges of Development)., 9(71). Retrieved from http://www.ipea.gov.br/desafios/

Jose Alvaro, M. (2012). Brazil, 25 years of democracy – a critical survey: public policies, institutions, civil society and political culture (1988/2013). Salamanca, Spain: Foundation for Research Support of the State of São Paulo - FAPESP.

Lamounier, B. (2006). Brasil, país de vários futuros. . Estudos e Pesquisas, (163).

Levine, D. H., & Molina, J. E. (2011). The quality of democracy in Latin America. Boulder, Colo.: Lynne Rienner Publishers.

Mkandawire, T. (2005). Targeting and Universalism in Poverty Reduction. United Nations Research Institute for Social Development, (23), 22.

Monroy, C. M. (2014, January 20). Frei Betto: Lula e Dilma foram “governo social-popular desenvolvimentista.” Retrieved from http://www.brasildefato.com.br/node/27128

Paoli, M. C. (1999). Privatizacao do publico, destituicao da fala e anulacao da politica: o totalitarismo neoliberal. In Sentidos da democracy (Democracy meanings). Sao Paulo: Vozes.

Partido dos Trabalhadores. (1999). (1999), O Programa da Revolução Democrática (Program of the Democratic Revolution). São Paulo: Fundação Perseu Abramo. Retrieved from <www2.fpa.org.br/ portal/uploads/resolucoes.pdf>

Paz, & Silva. (1990). São Paulo: privilegiar ‘a reprodução da vida. Fase.

PÓLIS /INESC. Projeto de Pesquisa Governança Democrática no Brasil Contemporâneo: Estado e sociedade na construção de políticas públicas: a arquitetura da participação no Brasil: avanços e desafios. Relatório Final. Pólis/Inesc, São Paulo, 2011. Disponível em: <www.pólis.org.br>. Acesso em: 28 Apr. 2015

Porto, M. (2012). Media Power and Democratization in Brazil: TV Globo and the Dilemmas of Political Accountability. Routledge.

Rafael Gustavo de Souza. (2011). Democracia Participativa: Resgate Historico e uma Aproximacao da Visao dos atores da sociedade civil. PÓLIS Institute.

Rolnik, R. (1990). Entrevista: Governar São Paulo: primeiros passos da gestão Luiza Erundina. (Vol. 45). Fase.

Rui Barbosa de Bolivar Lamounier na. (n.d.). Retrieved January 29, 2015, from http://www.estantevirtual.com.br/b/bolivar-lamounier/rui-barbosa/149488451

Sader, E. (1988). Quando novos personagens entraram em cena. (2aed ed.). Rio de Janeiro: Paz e Terra.

Santos, B. (1998). Participatory budgeting in Porto Alegre: toward a redistributive democracy. Politics and Society, 26, 461–510.

Souza, C. (2008). Partilha de Poder Decisório em Processos Participativos Nacionais (Sharing Decision Power in Participatory Processes). (Master’s Dissertation in

23

Political Science). University of Brasília, UnB., Brasília, Brazil.

Stone, D. (2008). Global Public Policy, Transnational Policy Communities, and Their Networks. Policy Studies Journal, 36(1), 19–38. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1541-0072.2007.00251.x

Teixeira, E. (1996). Democratização do orçamento público e os desafios do Legislativo Experiências de democratização do orçamento municipal. In Fórum Nacional de Participação Popular nas Administrações Municipais. Belo Horizonte: PÓLIS Institute.

The Third Wave of Democratization in Latin America Advances and Setbacks | Comparative politics. (n.d.). Retrieved January 29, 2015, from http://www.cambridge.org/gb/academic/subjects/politics-international-relations/comparative-politics/third-wave-democratization-latin-america-advances-and-setbacks

Townsend, P. (2002). Poverty, social exclusion and social polarisation: the need to construct an international welfare state. In World Poverty, New Policies to Defeat an Old Enemy. Briston: The Policy Press.

Wampler, B. (2010). Participatory Budgeting in Brazil: Contestation, Cooperation, and Accountability. Penn State Press.

Zucco, C., & Power, T. J. (2013). Bolsa Família and the Shift in Lula’s Electoral Base, 2002–2006: A Reply to Bohn. Latin American Research Review, 48(2), 3–24.