Brazil at a Constitutional Crossroads: The Global Consequences of the Far Right’s Resurgence
Brazil is once again facing one of the most consequential political moments in its recent democratic history
The country’s 2026 presidential election has placed the far right at the center of national politics. Senator Flávio Bolsonaro, the son of former president Jair Bolsonaro, finished first in the first round with approximately 47% of valid votes, ahead of President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, who received approximately 45%. The two candidates will face each other in the runoff scheduled for October 25.
The result is more than an electoral statistic. It represents the continued strength of a political movement that has fundamentally challenged Brazil’s institutions, its relationship with the judiciary and its understanding of the limits of executive power.
At the center of the debate is Brazil’s 1988 Constitution — the document that emerged after two decades of military dictatorship and that established the democratic framework of the modern Brazilian state.
The Constitution does not merely organize government. It explicitly defines Brazil as a democratic state governed by law and establishes citizenship, human dignity and political pluralism among its fundamental principles. Its Article 5 guarantees equality before the law and protects fundamental rights including life, liberty, security and property, as well as freedom of expression, religion and political conviction.
That historical context matters.
Brazil’s Constitution was written precisely to prevent the concentration of political power and to establish institutional mechanisms capable of protecting citizens against abuses by the state. The separation between the Executive, Legislative and Judiciary is not an administrative detail; it is one of the central safeguards of democratic government.
A promise to reform the Constitution
Flávio Bolsonaro has recently said that he intends to use the strengthened congressional position of his Liberal Party to pursue major institutional changes. In a speech in Goiânia, he said he wanted to “reform the Constitution” and argued that institutions should once again respect it. His political allies have also discussed changes involving the Supreme Federal Court and the broader balance between Brazil’s branches of government.
Constitutional reform is not, in itself, incompatible with democracy. Constitutions can evolve, and Brazil’s own Constitution has been amended many times.
The concern arises when constitutional change becomes part of a broader political project aimed at weakening institutional checks and balances.
That distinction is fundamental.
A democratic constitution is not designed to protect one government, one political party or one ideological group. It exists to protect citizens regardless of whom they support at the ballot box.
The question facing Brazil is therefore not simply whether the Constitution can be changed. It is whether institutional changes would strengthen democratic accountability or reduce the capacity of independent institutions to constrain political power.
The Bolsonaro legacy
The political environment surrounding the election cannot be separated from the legacy of Jair Bolsonaro.
In September 2025, Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court convicted the former president of crimes related to a conspiracy to remain in power after losing the 2022 election. Human Rights Watch reported that the case included allegations surrounding a broader plan to overturn the electoral result and attacks against democratic institutions.
The events of January 8, 2023, when government buildings in Brasília were invaded by supporters seeking to challenge the electoral result, remain one of the most serious institutional crises Brazil has experienced since the return to democracy.
The fact that the former president's political movement remains powerful demonstrates something important about contemporary democracies: democratic institutions can survive an attempted rupture while the political forces surrounding that rupture continue to enjoy significant electoral support.
Brazil is now confronting precisely that contradiction.
The larger international picture
What is happening in Brazil is not an isolated phenomenon.
Across different countries, political movements associated with nationalism, populism and the far right have gained influence by presenting themselves as alternatives to traditional political establishments. Their rise has frequently been accompanied by intense polarization, attacks on institutions, hostility toward established media organizations and disputes over the independence of courts and electoral authorities.
The phenomenon is global.
The V-Dem Institute’s 2026 Democracy Report found that democratic backsliding is occurring across multiple regions. According to the report, 92 countries were classified as autocracies at the end of 2025, compared with 87 democracies, while 74% of the world’s population lived under autocratic regimes. The report also identified freedom of expression as one of the areas experiencing the most significant deterioration.
These numbers place Brazil's political crisis within a much broader international transformation.
When democratic institutions weaken in major countries, the consequences rarely remain within national borders.
Brazil is the largest democracy and economy in Latin America. Its political direction influences regional diplomacy, environmental policy, trade, migration, human rights and international cooperation.
A substantial institutional shift in Brasília would therefore be watched closely not only throughout Latin America, but also in Washington, Brussels, Beijing and other global capitals.
Why the Constitution matters beyond Brazil
The Brazilian Constitution is ultimately about more than legal language.
It represents a promise made after authoritarian rule: that political power must have limits.
It establishes that governments are temporary, institutions are permanent and citizens possess rights that cannot simply depend on the political preferences of whoever occupies the presidency.
This principle is particularly important in periods of polarization.
When societies become divided into political camps that increasingly view one another as enemies rather than opponents, constitutional protections become even more important. They provide rules that apply to everyone — including political minorities and governments that may eventually find themselves in opposition.
That is why debates about constitutional reform deserve international attention.
The central issue is not whether Brazil should change its Constitution. It is whether constitutional change will preserve the principles that make constitutional democracy possible: separation of powers, judicial independence, political pluralism, individual rights and peaceful alternation of power.
A warning for the democratic world
Brazil's current political moment also carries a broader lesson.
The weakening of democracy rarely begins with the formal abolition of elections.
More often, institutions are gradually challenged. Courts are portrayed as political enemies. Journalists are accused of conspiring against the people. Electoral systems are questioned without evidence. Political opponents are presented as existential threats. Constitutional protections are portrayed as obstacles rather than safeguards.
Individually, each conflict can appear manageable.
Together, they can transform the relationship between citizens and the state.
The global democratic decline documented by institutions such as V-Dem demonstrates why this matters. In 2025, nearly a quarter of the world's countries were experiencing democratic backsliding or autocratization, according to the institute.
Brazil therefore finds itself at a crossroads that extends beyond its own borders.
The October runoff will decide who governs the country. But the deeper question is institutional: what kind of democratic system will Brazil enter the next chapter with?
The answer will affect more than the occupants of the Planalto Palace.
It will affect the relationship between the Brazilian state and its citizens, the strength of its democratic institutions and potentially the political direction of Latin America.
For a country whose modern democratic order was built after authoritarian rule, the lesson of 1988 remains particularly relevant: constitutions are not obstacles to democracy.
They are among the mechanisms through which democracy survives.
Comments