ABSTRACT Introduction: Between 2012 and 2025, Brazilian democracy faced a series of crises that tested the foundations of presidentialism, the judicial system, and federalism. This article examines how these tensions produced institutional change and revealed the regime's resilience. The central argument is that understanding democracy under stress requires integrating three dimensions: polity (the rules and institutions that structure the regime), politics (political competition and conflict among actors), and policy (public policy decisions and outcomes). Materials and methods: The study adopts a historical institutionalist approach, employing process tracing to identify causal mechanisms that link critical events, institutional choices, and changes in actors' behavior. The 2012-2025 period is analyzed across three arenas: the system of government, the judiciary, and intergovernmental relations. Results: Three major transformations were identified. In the system of government, the National Congress expanded its veto and policymaking powers - particularly through budgetary control - consolidating a form of “congressional government.” In the judiciary, the Supreme Federal Court (STF) broadened its protagonism: it redesigned political and electoral rules, ruled on the Mensalão scandal, and curtailed authoritarian initiatives under Bolsonarism, protecting state and municipal powers in the process. Within the federalist system, and despite the absence of formal reforms, subnational governments assumed a more prominent role - especially during the pandemic - enhancing their autonomous capacities and intergovernmental cooperation, albeit at the cost of exacerbating territorial inequalities. Discussion: The political crises between 2012 and 2025 not only tested but ultimately strengthened Brazil's institutions, prompting lasting adaptations and institutional learning. The interaction among polity, politics, and policy reshaped the political system - both formally and informally - revealing democratic resilience even under the risk of authoritarian rupture and threats of a coup. This interpretive framework contributes to comparative studies of how democracies under stress can adapt, endure, and transform.
更多
原文链接
分享
引用
