A introdução da cláusula de barreira no sistema proporcional brasileiro: análise do contexto e dos impactos da alteração legislativa
| Ano de defesa: | 2020 |
|---|---|
| Autor(a) principal: | |
| Orientador(a): | |
| Banca de defesa: | |
| Tipo de documento: | Dissertação |
| Tipo de acesso: | Acesso aberto |
| Idioma: | por |
| Instituição de defesa: |
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais
|
| Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Não Informado pela instituição
|
| Departamento: |
Não Informado pela instituição
|
| País: |
Não Informado pela instituição
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: | |
| Link de acesso: | https://hdl.handle.net/1843/43253 |
Resumo: | The present research aimed to investigate, after the introduction of the barrier clause by the Law n. 13.105 of 2015, in what way the introduction of such mechanism of access control to Legislative seats has improved the proportional representation system and if, according to the desires of those who defended the barrier clause introduction, it has eliminated the figure of a vote puller. The operation and of what can be expected of an electoral system was comprehended by the theory of Dieter Nohlen (2008; 2012) about the electoral systems in their contexts. Also, in order to understand the Brazilian case, especially the open list proportional representation system, it were used the conceptions of Jairo Nicolau (2004; 2006a; 2006b; 2015; 2017), along with the work of others classic and present-day authors about the way the Brazilian’s proportional representation system works. The figure of a vote puller candidate was comprehended by the analysis of Rodolfo Viana Pereira and Lucas de Oliveira Gelape (2015), regarding it’s characteristics, and also the results and impact caused by this kind of candidate in an electoral process. In order to analyze the impacts caused by the legislation modification, which is the introduction of the barrier clause on the Brazilian’s proportional representation system, an empiric investigation was carried on, by a data collection in the Superior Electoral Court and the Locals Electoral Courts about the 2010’s, 2014’s and 2018’s general elections, comparing then with each other for the purpose of check, in first place, if and in what way the modification in the system’s operation has improved the quality of democracy or improved the political representativity and, at second, the figure of a vote puller candidate was eliminated, popular known as “Tiririca effect”. The logic of the research was to collect, understand and compare concrete data, gathered by empirical research, based on the theorical foundations and utilized authors in order to sustain the interpretation which it was concluded. At last, based on the essay of Eneida Desiree Salgado (2018) about the political reforms made in Brazil, which questioned about who implement the reforms, how, for whom and why, it was concluded that the introduction of the barrier clause didn’t attended to the modification supporters’ expectations, which was to eliminate the figure of the vote puller, and also didn’t improve the way Brazilian’s proportional representation system works, regarding Hanna Pitkin’s (1983) concept of representativity, considering that the impacts caused by vote puller candidates in 2018 (after the introduction of the barrier clause) were bigger than some previous cases, like 2010’s and 2014’s elections, what was proved by the data collected and comprehended during the conduction of the present research. |
| id |
UFMG_f3dca9fedc908391f2c57b1cbbffaf6d |
|---|---|
| oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.ufmg.br:1843/43253 |
| network_acronym_str |
UFMG |
| network_name_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFMG |
| repository_id_str |
|
| spelling |
2022-07-14T11:36:10Z2025-09-09T01:09:37Z2022-07-14T11:36:10Z2020-12-17https://hdl.handle.net/1843/43253The present research aimed to investigate, after the introduction of the barrier clause by the Law n. 13.105 of 2015, in what way the introduction of such mechanism of access control to Legislative seats has improved the proportional representation system and if, according to the desires of those who defended the barrier clause introduction, it has eliminated the figure of a vote puller. The operation and of what can be expected of an electoral system was comprehended by the theory of Dieter Nohlen (2008; 2012) about the electoral systems in their contexts. Also, in order to understand the Brazilian case, especially the open list proportional representation system, it were used the conceptions of Jairo Nicolau (2004; 2006a; 2006b; 2015; 2017), along with the work of others classic and present-day authors about the way the Brazilian’s proportional representation system works. The figure of a vote puller candidate was comprehended by the analysis of Rodolfo Viana Pereira and Lucas de Oliveira Gelape (2015), regarding it’s characteristics, and also the results and impact caused by this kind of candidate in an electoral process. In order to analyze the impacts caused by the legislation modification, which is the introduction of the barrier clause on the Brazilian’s proportional representation system, an empiric investigation was carried on, by a data collection in the Superior Electoral Court and the Locals Electoral Courts about the 2010’s, 2014’s and 2018’s general elections, comparing then with each other for the purpose of check, in first place, if and in what way the modification in the system’s operation has improved the quality of democracy or improved the political representativity and, at second, the figure of a vote puller candidate was eliminated, popular known as “Tiririca effect”. The logic of the research was to collect, understand and compare concrete data, gathered by empirical research, based on the theorical foundations and utilized authors in order to sustain the interpretation which it was concluded. At last, based on the essay of Eneida Desiree Salgado (2018) about the political reforms made in Brazil, which questioned about who implement the reforms, how, for whom and why, it was concluded that the introduction of the barrier clause didn’t attended to the modification supporters’ expectations, which was to eliminate the figure of the vote puller, and also didn’t improve the way Brazilian’s proportional representation system works, regarding Hanna Pitkin’s (1983) concept of representativity, considering that the impacts caused by vote puller candidates in 2018 (after the introduction of the barrier clause) were bigger than some previous cases, like 2010’s and 2014’s elections, what was proved by the data collected and comprehended during the conduction of the present research.porUniversidade Federal de Minas GeraisSistema proporcionalCláusula de barreiraPuxador de votosRepresentatividadeAlteração legislativaDireito eleitoralPoder legislativoSistema eleitoralRepresentação proporcional - BrasilA introdução da cláusula de barreira no sistema proporcional brasileiro: análise do contexto e dos impactos da alteração legislativaIntroduction of the barrier clause in the Brazilian's proportional system: analysis of the context and impacts of the legislative changeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesisGabriel Amaral Rocha Ferreirainfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UFMGinstname:Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG)instacron:UFMGhttp://lattes.cnpq.br/8398471974660503Adamo Dias Alveshttp://lattes.cnpq.br/2242753684555998Adriana Campos SilvaMarcelo Andrade Cattoni de OliveiraA presente pesquisa buscou investigar, após a introdução da cláusula de barreira pela Lei n.o 13.105 de 2015, em que medida a introdução de tal mecanismo de controle de acesso a cargos do Poder Legislativo aperfeiçoou o sistema de representação proporcional e se, atendendo às expectativas das instituições defensoras da introdução da cláusula de barreira, eliminou do contexto brasileiro a figura dos candidatos puxadores de voto. A compreensão do funcionamento e do que se deve esperar de um sistema eleitoral foi buscada a partir da teoria de Dieter Nohlen (2008; 2012) sobre o sistema eleitoral e o funcionamento dos sistemas em seus contextos. Ainda, para a compreensão do caso brasileiro, em específico o sistema de representação proporcional de lista aberta, partiu-se das concepções de Jairo Nicolau (2004; 2006a; 2006b; 2015; 2017), conjugadas com as publicações de diversos autores clássicos e contemporâneos sobre o modus operandi do sistema de representação proporcional no caso brasileiro. Compreendeu-se a figura do puxador de votos a partir da análise de Rodolfo Viana Pereira e Lucas de Oliveira Gelape (2015), no que se refere às características de tal candidato, bem como nos resultados e impactos que tal figura causa no processo eleitoral. Para averiguar os impactos causados pela alteração legislativa, qual seja, a introdução da cláusula de barreira no sistema de representação proporcional brasileiro, foi realizada investigação empírica, por meio da coleta de dados juntos aos sites dos Tribunais Regionais Eleitorais e do Tribunal Superior Eleitoral sobre as eleições gerais de 2010, 2014 e 2018, comparando-os entre si, para verificar, em primeiro lugar, se e em que medida a alteração no funcionamento do sistema melhorou a qualidade da democracia ou aprimorou a questão da representatividade política e, em segundo lugar, se foi eliminada a figura do candidato puxador de votos, popularmente chamado de “efeito Tiririca”. A lógica que a presente pesquisa seguiu foi a de coletar, interpretar e comparar dados concretos, obtidos por pesquisa empírica, com base nos marcos teóricos e nos autores utilizados para dar sustentação à interpretação a que se chegou. Por fim, a partir do ensaio de Eneida Desiree Salgado (2018) sobre as reformas políticas realizadas no Brasil, por meio do questionamento acerca de quem reforma, como, para que e para quem, constatou-se que a introdução da cláusula de barreira não atendeu às expectativas dos defensores da alteração, no sentido de eliminar a figura do candidato puxador de votos, além de não ter aperfeiçoado o funcionamento do sistema de representação proporcional brasileiro, no que se refere ao conceito de representatividade utilizado na pesquisa, trabalhado por Hanna Pitkin (1983), considerando-se que os impactos causados por candidatos puxadores de voto em 2018 (após a introdução da cláusula de barreira) foram maiores do que alguns casos anteriores, como 2010 e 2014, o que foi comprovado pelos dados coletados e interpretados durante a realização da presente pesquisa.BrasilDIREITO - FACULDADE DE DIREITOPrograma de Pós-Graduação em DireitoUFMGORIGINALVersao para deposito.pdfapplication/pdf847798https://repositorio.ufmg.br//bitstreams/c7b1a0bf-2d64-4bca-b848-f1d2f744cf50/download501f92985136fb1ea507491bc06e3a33MD51trueAnonymousREADLICENSElicense.txttext/plain2118https://repositorio.ufmg.br//bitstreams/49a235f0-81fa-4bea-ad51-c85be3de5096/downloadcda590c95a0b51b4d15f60c9642ca272MD52falseAnonymousREAD1843/432532025-09-08 22:09:37.407open.accessoai:repositorio.ufmg.br:1843/43253https://repositorio.ufmg.br/Repositório InstitucionalPUBhttps://repositorio.ufmg.br/oairepositorio@ufmg.bropendoar:2025-09-09T01:09:37Repositório Institucional da UFMG - Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG)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 |
| dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
A introdução da cláusula de barreira no sistema proporcional brasileiro: análise do contexto e dos impactos da alteração legislativa |
| dc.title.alternative.none.fl_str_mv |
Introduction of the barrier clause in the Brazilian's proportional system: analysis of the context and impacts of the legislative change |
| title |
A introdução da cláusula de barreira no sistema proporcional brasileiro: análise do contexto e dos impactos da alteração legislativa |
| spellingShingle |
A introdução da cláusula de barreira no sistema proporcional brasileiro: análise do contexto e dos impactos da alteração legislativa Gabriel Amaral Rocha Ferreira Direito eleitoral Poder legislativo Sistema eleitoral Representação proporcional - Brasil Sistema proporcional Cláusula de barreira Puxador de votos Representatividade Alteração legislativa |
| title_short |
A introdução da cláusula de barreira no sistema proporcional brasileiro: análise do contexto e dos impactos da alteração legislativa |
| title_full |
A introdução da cláusula de barreira no sistema proporcional brasileiro: análise do contexto e dos impactos da alteração legislativa |
| title_fullStr |
A introdução da cláusula de barreira no sistema proporcional brasileiro: análise do contexto e dos impactos da alteração legislativa |
| title_full_unstemmed |
A introdução da cláusula de barreira no sistema proporcional brasileiro: análise do contexto e dos impactos da alteração legislativa |
| title_sort |
A introdução da cláusula de barreira no sistema proporcional brasileiro: análise do contexto e dos impactos da alteração legislativa |
| author |
Gabriel Amaral Rocha Ferreira |
| author_facet |
Gabriel Amaral Rocha Ferreira |
| author_role |
author |
| dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Gabriel Amaral Rocha Ferreira |
| dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Direito eleitoral Poder legislativo Sistema eleitoral Representação proporcional - Brasil |
| topic |
Direito eleitoral Poder legislativo Sistema eleitoral Representação proporcional - Brasil Sistema proporcional Cláusula de barreira Puxador de votos Representatividade Alteração legislativa |
| dc.subject.other.none.fl_str_mv |
Sistema proporcional Cláusula de barreira Puxador de votos Representatividade Alteração legislativa |
| description |
The present research aimed to investigate, after the introduction of the barrier clause by the Law n. 13.105 of 2015, in what way the introduction of such mechanism of access control to Legislative seats has improved the proportional representation system and if, according to the desires of those who defended the barrier clause introduction, it has eliminated the figure of a vote puller. The operation and of what can be expected of an electoral system was comprehended by the theory of Dieter Nohlen (2008; 2012) about the electoral systems in their contexts. Also, in order to understand the Brazilian case, especially the open list proportional representation system, it were used the conceptions of Jairo Nicolau (2004; 2006a; 2006b; 2015; 2017), along with the work of others classic and present-day authors about the way the Brazilian’s proportional representation system works. The figure of a vote puller candidate was comprehended by the analysis of Rodolfo Viana Pereira and Lucas de Oliveira Gelape (2015), regarding it’s characteristics, and also the results and impact caused by this kind of candidate in an electoral process. In order to analyze the impacts caused by the legislation modification, which is the introduction of the barrier clause on the Brazilian’s proportional representation system, an empiric investigation was carried on, by a data collection in the Superior Electoral Court and the Locals Electoral Courts about the 2010’s, 2014’s and 2018’s general elections, comparing then with each other for the purpose of check, in first place, if and in what way the modification in the system’s operation has improved the quality of democracy or improved the political representativity and, at second, the figure of a vote puller candidate was eliminated, popular known as “Tiririca effect”. The logic of the research was to collect, understand and compare concrete data, gathered by empirical research, based on the theorical foundations and utilized authors in order to sustain the interpretation which it was concluded. At last, based on the essay of Eneida Desiree Salgado (2018) about the political reforms made in Brazil, which questioned about who implement the reforms, how, for whom and why, it was concluded that the introduction of the barrier clause didn’t attended to the modification supporters’ expectations, which was to eliminate the figure of the vote puller, and also didn’t improve the way Brazilian’s proportional representation system works, regarding Hanna Pitkin’s (1983) concept of representativity, considering that the impacts caused by vote puller candidates in 2018 (after the introduction of the barrier clause) were bigger than some previous cases, like 2010’s and 2014’s elections, what was proved by the data collected and comprehended during the conduction of the present research. |
| publishDate |
2020 |
| dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv |
2020-12-17 |
| dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv |
2022-07-14T11:36:10Z 2025-09-09T01:09:37Z |
| dc.date.available.fl_str_mv |
2022-07-14T11:36:10Z |
| dc.type.status.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
| dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis |
| format |
masterThesis |
| status_str |
publishedVersion |
| dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://hdl.handle.net/1843/43253 |
| url |
https://hdl.handle.net/1843/43253 |
| dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
| language |
por |
| dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
| dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais |
| publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais |
| dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFMG instname:Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG) instacron:UFMG |
| instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG) |
| instacron_str |
UFMG |
| institution |
UFMG |
| reponame_str |
Repositório Institucional da UFMG |
| collection |
Repositório Institucional da UFMG |
| bitstream.url.fl_str_mv |
https://repositorio.ufmg.br//bitstreams/c7b1a0bf-2d64-4bca-b848-f1d2f744cf50/download https://repositorio.ufmg.br//bitstreams/49a235f0-81fa-4bea-ad51-c85be3de5096/download |
| bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv |
501f92985136fb1ea507491bc06e3a33 cda590c95a0b51b4d15f60c9642ca272 |
| bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv |
MD5 MD5 |
| repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Repositório Institucional da UFMG - Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais (UFMG) |
| repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
repositorio@ufmg.br |
| _version_ |
1862105684754038784 |