CONSTITUTIONAL INDOCTRINATION IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS: LIMITS AND CHALLENGES OF LEGAL EDUCATION FOR YOUNG PEOPLE FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF THE 1988 FEDERAL CONSTITUTION

Abstract

This study aims to investigate the boundaries between civic education and potential ideological indoctrination in legal education provided in Brazilian public schools, particularly regarding the teaching of constitutional content. Based on a qualitative methodology supported by bibliographic review and critical analysis of legal documents, pedagogical theories, and real cases, the research examines the teacher's role, the freedom of teaching, and the principle of pluralism of ideas, highlighting the difference between critical education and indoctrination. Through the analysis of emblematic cases reported in the media, classroom recordings, the use of educational booklets, and public reactions, the study seeks to understand the impact of this debate on the perception of students, families, and teachers. It also explores the “Escola Sem Partido” (School Without Party) movement and the legal consequences of attempts to regulate “ideological neutrality” in education. Drawing from theorists such as Paulo Freire, Dermeval Saviani, and Hannah Arendt, the paper argues that the educational act is not neutral but must be ethical, dialogical, and committed to the development of autonomous thinking. The research concludes that legal education, when carried out with responsibility and plurality, is not a threat to neutrality but rather a legitimate instrument for democratic formation. Indoctrination is not defined by the content itself, but by the lack of space for disagreement, the imposition of singular viewpoints, and the suppression of debate. Therefore, defending legal instruction in basic education is to ensure the right to critical citizenship, as enshrined in the 1988 Brazilian Federal Constitution.