The Relationship between Politicians and Bureaucrats during the Bolsonaro Government: Authoritarian Management and the Reaction of Civil Servants - 12/23/22

Gabriela Spanghero Lotta

Michelle Fernandez

João Paschoal Pedote

Olívia Landi Corrales Guaranha

Mariana Costa Silveira

Iana Alves de Lima

Bureaucracy and democracy are concepts that go hand in hand. The construction of modern states is directly associated with the establishment of a bureaucratic administration guided by universal and impersonal rules and with the composition of a stable cadres of officials selected for their technical knowledge. It is in this sense, therefore, that bureaucracies establish themselves as safeguards of democratic institutions.

It is from this point of view that, in contexts of a democratic regression, such as what has occurred in Brazil in recent years, a new dimension of conflicts between politicians and bureaucrats can be observed, which is established outside the normality of democratic institutions. Bolsonarism presented a project to deconstruct the democratic social welfare state that had been foreseen by the Federal Constitution of 1988. To this end, it adopted different practices as a strategy of oppressive control of and attacks on public servants. As a result, the federal public bureaucracy began to play an active role in defending the preservation of institutions, public policies, and order within the democratic state through the establishment of practices in reaction to attempts at control and curtailment that were employed by governing politicians.

After conducting interviews with nearly 200 civil servants from different areas of the Brazilian federal government during 2021 and 2022, we identified a relational dynamic between the oppressive practices employed by politicians and the reactions presented by bureaucrats. We evidenced the establishment of a feedback and learning dynamic between both groups. We found oppressive practices (carried out by politicians) and bureaucratic reactions of different types, which were classified according to two dimensions: (i) their nature: formal or informal and (ii) their scale: individual or collective.

The oppression of politicians in relation to the bureaucracy differs insofar as it is based (or not based) on normative acts or formalized in official processes of the organization in question. To the same extent, oppressive practices can occur on an individual or collective basis. Individual oppression is that which directly affects the individual working in a bureaucracy with the goal of either molding the person or forcing him or her out of their position. In oppression directed at a group of people, the object is to target career civil servants, for example, who work in the same organization or in managing the same public policy, or generically against the government bureaucracy as a whole and in a different way. 

With regard to the role of the bureaucracy, formal reaction strategies are those that are organized around institutional options, such as seeking out the judiciary to solve conflicts, while informal strategies are those organized “under the radar,” which may even materialize in acts of sabotage against the current government. On the other hand, the individual reaction is carried out by a single public servant, such as voicing a disagreement or refusing to sign documents with which one does not agree. Collective reactions can be organized by public servant from the same government body or in a specific career, who, for example, plan and coordinate strategies. Both the nature and scale of reactions depend to an extent on the nature and scale of oppressive practices, which are also molded over time based on relational experiences that are learned as a result of bureaucrats' responses.

Table 1 summarizes the typology we found. Despite being presented in different quadrants, the strategies coexist in the day-to-day experiences of people working in public administration.

Table 1. Typology of oppressions and reactions according to means/mechanisms and scale.

Means/mechanisms

Scale

Individual (direct)

Collective (indirect)

Formal

Oppression/Formal individual reaction

Oppression/Formal collective reaction

Informal

Oppression/Formal individual reaction

Oppression/Formal collective reaction

Source: Lotta et al (2022).

Although the control of public servants and the redirection of practices are part of the democratic governance and changes in governments, we draw attention to the obvious abnormality that the Brazil federal bureaucracy experienced between 2019 and 2022. The process of building a stable and qualified bureaucracy, in addition to building a relationship of respect and appreciation for these public servants, must be priorities in order to guarantee the delivery of services to citizens, the promotion of the fight against inequalities, and, ultimately, the strengthening of Brazilian democracy.

Gabriela Spanghero Lotta holds a PhD in political science from the University of São Paulo (USP) and is professor of public administration at Getúlio Vargas Foundation (FGV/EAESP).

Michelle Fernandez holds a PhD in political science from the University of Salamanca and is a

researcher at the Institute of Political Science/University of Brasília.

João Paschoal Pedote is a Master's student in public administration and government at FGV/EAESP.

Olívia Landi Corrales Guaranha holds a Master's degree in public administration and government from FGV/EAESP.

Mariana Costa Silveira is a doctoral student in public administration and government at FGV/

EAESP with a Master’s degree in political science from USP.

Iana Alves de Lima is a doctoral candidate in public administration and government and a professor at FGV/EAESP.