The unconstitutionality of 96/2017 Amendment as regards of constitutional environmental protection

Abstract

The animal abuse has become a recurring theme in legal conflicts, as well as have become the subject of assessment of the judiciary, including, having judged the Supreme Court on the subject. However, with Constitutional Amendment number 96, this kind of treatment is no longer considered cruel as long as it is the result of cultural manifestations. Facing the exposed, and taking the Vaquejada as a practice that is considered sportive and cultural, was made an analysis of this manifestation in front of the fundamental right to an ecologically balanced environment and the protection of animals, as well as taking into account the judgments of the Supreme Court on the subject. Starting from this, the present study had as problematic the following question: would be unconstitutional the constitutional amendment number 96? Therefore, it was sought to describe what establishes the doctrine, legislation and jurisprudence on the Vaquejada, in addition to making historical and cultural considerations about it. Consequently, it was necessary to establish the relationship of the Vaquejada and its content according to law and jurisprudence to review the ADIs 4.983, 5.728 and 5.772. To this end was used the qualitative research, with descriptive purpose of document analysis. According to what will be exposed, it will be possible to verify the unconstitutionality of the amendment n. 96.