The constitutionalization of the Public Defender’s Office: disputes over space in the justice system

Abstract The 1988 Constitution inserted the Public Defender’s Office in the Brazilian justice system in order to provide legal aid to people in need. At this time, the institution was a novelty in many parts of the country, and other institutional arrangements for legal aid were available in various places. This paper has analyzed the Constituent Assembly’s debate to identify patterns of conflict concerning the constitutional provision of a Public Defender’s Office. The debates reveal three avenues of objection to the standardization of legal aid through the Public Defender’s Office, which are institutional effects from previous state arrangements and from the centrality that the Public Prosecutor’s Office was acquiring in the justice system. We observe that institutions and public policy, by influencing actors’ aims and strategies, affect processes of institutional development and change. These findings contribute to the literature on Public Defense, which stresses the institution’s potential to promote social justice and the democratization of the justice system in Brazil. In spite of observing the institution’s incapacity to live up to its potential in practice, it isn’t able identify that this limitation is, largely, a consequence of the difficulty of inserting a Public Defender’s Office into an existing justice system.

摘要 1988年巴西宪法将公共辩护办公室（Public Defender’s Office）纳入巴西司法体系，旨在为有需要的人群提供法律援助。彼时，该机构在国内诸多地区尚属新生事物，各地亦存在其他形式的法律援助制度安排。本研究通过分析制宪会议的辩论记录，梳理围绕宪法设立公共辩护办公室所引发的冲突类型。辩论内容显示，针对通过公共辩护办公室实现法律援助规范化的反对意见主要基于三类根源：既有国家制度安排的路径依赖效应，以及公诉办公室（Public Prosecutor’s Office）在司法体系中日益凸显的核心地位所带来的影响。本研究发现，制度与公共政策通过影响行动者的目标与策略，进而作用于制度的发展与变革进程。上述研究发现为公共辩护制度的相关研究文献提供了新的补充——该领域研究向来强调巴西公共辩护办公室在推动社会公平与司法体系民主化方面的潜在价值。尽管本研究观察到该机构在实践中未能充分发挥其潜在效能，但我们仍无法确认，这一局限性在很大程度上源于将公共辩护办公室嵌入既有司法体系所面临的重重困难。