Can you give any examples?

[soniya55531]

A recent example involving citizens is provisional measure 910, known as the MP da Grilagem (Land Grabbing Provisional Measure). There are two examples; the first is that supermarkets in England decided, although I do not know what the motivating factor was, to send an open letter to the Brazilian Congress saying that if the Provisional Measure were approved, they would boycott Brazilian products in supermarkets.


Going further, in Germany, an NGO from Berlin organized a petition and collected more than 400,000 signatures to pressure German supermarkets to do the same thing.


We have pressure from German citizens on a topic being discussed in the Brazilian Congress. This is what digital lobbying is all about; borders disappear , first the idea of ​​locality and then the national scope has been lost. Now, the stakeholder has become international. Applying the logic of traditional lobbying to this new world does not work.


In the past, you would go to a professional association to pressure the romania mobile database American government, so that it could pressure Itamaraty, so that it could pressure the Ministry of Agriculture. Now, citizens go there and pressure them. Things have changed. There is no longer a base , there are no Grassroots.



There are numerous discussions in Brazilian Constitutional Law about participatory democracy. How do you understand digital lobbying and the participation of the community, civil society, through petitions, engagement in agendas of economic or social interest as a way of building a participatory democracy?

I use the term “democratization of lobbying.” When citizens have the opportunity to sign a petition, send an email, post on a congressman’s Facebook page, use hashtags , speak out and express their views on a topic without being in Congress, they have become part of the debate on public policies.

I am not only talking about the democratization of lobbying itself, but I am arguing that the debate on public policies has become public . Again, the logic changes. The way of discussing the topic becomes different from the one-on-one meeting . When the debate on public policies is democratized and is there for everyone to participate in, it changes substantially.