Workers Party v. President of the Republic - Preliminary Decision
Brazil Supreme Federal Court
Direct Action of Unconstitutionality no. 1398-0 (1996)
- Written by Mary Katherine Cunningham, JD
Facts
The Workers Party (plaintiff) filed an action against the president of the republic (defendant) challenging the executive branch’s response to an economic crisis in Brazil. The Workers Party specifically challenged two National Monetary Council resolutions, which sought to create and regulate the Deposit Insurance Fund in Brazil. The president of the republic countered the suit, arguing that the measures were necessary to strengthen the economy under Article 192 of the Constitution. The Workers Party argued the resolutions were unconstitutional as Article 192 of the Constitution explicitly required Congress to pass a supplementary law, a law requiring an absolute majority for passage. The Workers Party argued the executive branch could not substitute resolutions by an executive-branch agency for a legislative enactment by Parliament. The National Monetary Council argued the council enacted these resolutions to supplement the supplementary law required under Article 192 VI of the Brazilian Constitution. In addition to its suit, the Workers Party sought an injunction suspending rules requiring the placement of public funds in the Deposit Insurance Fund until the final judgement of the case. The Supreme Federal Court specifically took up the issue of the injunction.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Rezek, J.)
Concurrence (Aurélio, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.