Brazil Supreme Court Justice Cancels Lisbon Forum Trip After Foot Injury

Brazilian Supreme Court Justice Flávio Dino cancelled his in-person appearance at the Lisbon Forum after suffering a domestic accident that left him with a fractured foot and a torn ligament, according to his office.

Dino, a former justice minister and governor of Maranhão who joined Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court, or STF, in 2024, had been due to speak at the 14th edition of the forum, held from June 1 to 3 at the University of Lisbon’s law school. His office told G1 that he was well, but would remain at rest in São Luís, the capital of Maranhão and his hometown.

In a letter published by Jota and sent to the event’s organizers, Dino said he had not received medical clearance for the long-haul flight to Portugal. He had been scheduled to join a panel on “transformative constitutionalism,” coordinated by STF Justice Gilmar Mendes, the court’s longest-serving member.

The Lisbon Forum is promoted by IDP, Lisbon Public Law and FGV Justiça, and brings together Brazilian and foreign jurists, politicians, academics and public officials. This year’s theme is “New international order, technology and sovereignty: democratic, economic and social challenges.”

Although absent, Dino sent the paper he said he would have presented. In it, he argued that Brazil’s 1988 Constitution should be understood not only as a charter that limits state power, but also as one that directs public authorities to deliver social rights.

His text set out four theses. First, Dino said transformative constitutionalism requires a constitution that imposes concrete duties on the state, including the judiciary. In his view, countries such as Brazil, which are not embedded in a dense supranational legal order like the European Union, rely more heavily on their own constitutions as instruments of social change.

Second, he defended the use of “structural measures” by constitutional courts to address long-running state failures. Dino cited STF cases involving Indigenous health and territory, Brazil’s prison system, homelessness, environmental crimes in the Amazon and Pantanal, and the transparency of congressional budget amendments.

That last subject has placed Dino at the centre of one of Brasília’s most sensitive institutional disputes. As rapporteur in cases over the so-called “secret budget,” “PIX amendments” and mandatory congressional spending amendments, he has pushed for rules on transparency, traceability and public oversight. Those mechanisms allow lawmakers to direct federal funds to local projects and have become a major source of tension between Congress, the federal government and the court.

Third, Dino argued that constitutional courts should sometimes act as agents of change and sometimes as shields against political majorities that threaten fundamental rights. He rejected the idea that counter-majoritarian judicial review is inherently anti-democratic, citing cases on environmental participation and gun policy.

Fourth, he said 21st-century constitutionalism must subject digital platforms, algorithms and private information-control systems to democratic constitutional limits. Dino linked that argument to Brazil’s debate over online disinformation, hate speech and platform responsibility, citing STF decisions on the country’s Internet Civil Rights Framework.

Dino closed the article by saying transformative constitutionalism should not be confused with judicial voluntarism or with courts replacing the political branches. Rather, he wrote, it offers a framework for identifying unconstitutional omissions and enforcing rights within the limits of law.

He said he expected to return to the debate at the 2027 edition of the Lisbon Forum.