While Amazonas has taken a decisive step toward resolving its political crisis, Rio de Janeiro remains mired in uncertainty. On Monday (4), state deputies from Amazonas held the indirect election that defined the new governor of the state, Roberto Cidade (União) in a clear and already regulated process.
The election took place in the Legislative Assembly of Amazonas, with voting among the 24 state deputies, as stipulated in the local Constitution following the resignation of the governor and vice-governor. The election was open, by name, and followed pre-defined rules.
Process defined in Amazonas
The political landscape in Amazonas is considered institutionally stable from a legal standpoint. The vacancies occurred within the last two years of the term, which, according to the legislation, allows for indirect elections conducted by the state legislature.
Five candidates were registered to compete for the leadership of the Executive branch until the end of the term, without any significant legal disputes that would impede the progress of the process.
Rio faces a legal and political impasse.
The reality in Rio de Janeiro is the opposite. Despite also facing a vacancy in the leadership of the Executive branch following resignations, the state has not yet been able to move forward with the selection of a new governor.
The planned indirect election was called, but was ultimately suspended by a decision of the Supreme Federal Court. The impasse revolves around a central question: whether the successor should be chosen by indirect vote in the Legislative Assembly or by direct election by the population.
The uncertainty has completely stalled the political process. Currently, the state is governed on an interim basis by the president of the Court of Justice, while awaiting a final decision from the Supreme Federal Court (STF) regarding the election model.
Differences that explain the scenario
The main difference between the two states lies in the legal security of the process. In Amazonas, the rules were applied directly, with clear constitutional backing and without significant contestation.
In Rio, the judicialization of the issue has led the dispute to the Supreme Federal Court (STF), where justices are analyzing different interpretations of the electoral model applicable to the case. The lack of consensus in the Court—aggravated by the possibility of a tie in votes—further prolongs the uncertainty.
Immediate political impact
In practice, Amazonas is moving towards quickly resolving its succession, ensuring administrative predictability until the end of the term.
Rio, on the other hand, remains in a state of instability, with direct effects on governance and the political environment. Without a defined format for the election, the state remains in a holding pattern, awaiting a decision from the Supreme Federal Court (STF) to unblock the process.
The contrast between the two cases highlights how the clarity of the rules and the absence of legal disputes can accelerate — or stall — fundamental decisions in the Brazilian political landscape.
Leave a comment