TIED SALES AND ABUSIVE PRACTICES IN CONSUMER RELATIONS IN BRAZIL

Abstract

To begin this analysis, it is fundamental to understand the context of the constitutional and legal protection of parliamentary immunities in Brazil, taking as a starting point Article 53 of the 1988 Federal Constitution, which guarantees members of the National Congress specific prerogatives in the exercise of their mandate. These immunities, both material and formal, were instituted to preserve the independence and free exercise of legislative functions, preventing undue pressure from the other branches of government. However, recent proposed amendments, such as the so-called "Shielding Amendment," reignite the debate about the limits of these guarantees and the risk of democratic regression should the distance between representatives and the represented increase. Now that we have established the origin and objectives of this article, it is appropriate to discuss how the proposed constitutional reforms are impacting the balance between parliamentary autonomy, transparency, and political accountability, especially given the possibility of re-establishing secret voting to authorize criminal proceedings against parliamentarians. We will focus on three main aspects: parliamentary immunities and their constitutional foundations, analyzing the prerogatives conferred by Article 53 of the Constitution and their limits in relation to the republican principles of morality and equality; the secret ballot and institutional transparency, examining the democratic implications of the "Shielding Amendment" and the conflict between the secrecy of the vote and the constitutional duty of publicity of public acts; and political responsibility and control, reflecting on the role of the Supreme Federal Court, the Public Prosecutor's Office, and civil society in containing potential abuses of parliamentary prerogatives. Finally, we will present clearly and objectively the impacts of these reforms on the functioning of the Democratic Rule of Law, inviting the reader to reflect on the challenges, tensions, and institutional consequences of altering constitutional guarantees historically intended to protect democracy, but which, in certain contexts, can become instruments of political impunity.