THE ROLE OF CONSTITUTIONAL COURTS IN CONFRONTING ATTACKS AND DEFENSING DEMOCRACY

Abstract

Democracies worldwide are strained, pushed to their limits. The scenario of uncertainty creates an almost perfect "storm" for the emergence of populist and authoritarian leaders, who, aware of antidemocratic recipes experimented elsewhere, exploit the democratic system itself to be elected as heads of the executive branch and, once in office, work in a multifaceted manner to erode the foundations of democracy and maintain or increase their powers. Through attacks on democratic institutions, subjectivities, freedom of the press, hate speeches spreading through social media, and lies (fake news) on various issues - including voting methods - autocratic leaders undermine the founding institutions of democracy. The objective of this study  is to map actions used by authoritarian and populist leaders to control or manipulate Constitutional Courts, frequent targets of attack, precisely because of the role they play as guardians of the constitution. Such attacks are sometimes successful, or not, depending on the resilience of the Courts, civil society, and legal operators. By identifying the dynamics that are characteristic of them, it contributes to the debate on what means would be necessary to resolve or mitigate the impasses caused, in order to promote a political realignment for social transformation. Thus, through hypothetical-deductive methodology and bibliographic review technique on the actions attempted by the Executive and counterpoising them to the role of Constitutional Courts in neoconstitutionalism, it is concluded that the examined phenomena represent institutional anomalies that, in turn, contribute to the breakdown of legal order and affect the traditional independence of the branches of the State, bringing consequences for the whole society.