Law Programs, Ethno–Racial Relations Education, and Confronting Racism in the Brazilian Judiciary
Bernd Reiter
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe authors present a good case that the teaching of ethno-racial relations education (ERER) in undergraduate law programs could have a positive anti-racist impact on legal education and legal practice. Why is ERER necessary? Because some judges explicitly cite the race and/or color of defendants in their rulings in a white racist and prejudicial manner. The author cites the example of Judge Ines Marchalek Zarpelon, of Curitiba, Parana, and her notorious decision in 2020. The authors imply that racism influenced Judge Zarpelon's ruling leading to widespread protest and condemnation. Zarpelon claimed that her words were misinterpreted. She avoided any formal punishment or reprimand.
To explore possible sources of racism in the legal profession, the authors conducted a survey of 69 federal universities and their law programs. Only 23 universities had ERER courses (most were optional, a few mandatory) even though these courses are required by higher education legislation, rules, and regulations, especially Resolution CNE/CP no. 01/2004. This survey was an impressive piece of empirical research and confirmed that most of Brazil's best universities are not implementing an educational requirement that could help law students understand the deleterious role that race, racism, and ethno-racial discrimination have played in Brazilian history, society, and law.
Toward the end of the article, the authors make two points that merit elaboration. On page 15, lines 392-394, "We do not think ERER teaching in law programs can solve all the problems raised in the issues above; it is not a panacea. However, it is certain that without this education, the problems will continue and will not be alleviated in the least." The authors should discuss the portion of the problems that will be solved by ERER.
Second, on page 15, lines 412-414, "This consideration is important because it shows that the difficulties we are observing in ERER teaching implementation in law programs may be something common to all Brazilian higher education program, not just law." Should it be stated directly and earlier in the essay that African and Afro-Brazilian history and culture and ERER are not being taught consistently and adequately in elementary, secondary, and higher education? If this lack of implementation is the widespread reality, the non-teaching of ERER in law programs is part of a larger problem and should be stated as such.
Are university leaders (i.e., presidents, provosts, deans, and others) explaining why they are not implementing ERER? Do they lack resources such as qualified instructors and teaching materials? Or are university leaders not implementing ERER because they disagree with the educational content or mandate?
Finally, it would be helpful if the authors were able to cite another CNE resolution or two that were implemented or are being implemented without hesitation or problems. This brief comparison would confirm that federal universities are implementing some CNE requirements but not others.
The authors assume that racism is alive and well in Brazilian society and that leaders, individuals, and institutions should do more to confront and challenge it. I agree with the authors that anti-racist education and legislation could reduce racial discrimination and lead to a more democratic and egalitarian society.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageThe English is good and clear but could use more editing. For example, are there better words or translations than "unbailable" and "imprescriptible" on page 3, line 72?
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
First, thank you for your comments, suggestions, and positive/constructive criticism. I think they help to improve the article. Again, thank you so much.
Second, below, you will see our comments and/or answers.
Sincerely,
1) As I state in the article, ERER is not a panacea. I indicate that it can help minimize the racist opinions of Brazilian judges. Furthermore, because of our training in the social sciences, we do not make predictions. But we think it is plausible to state, first, that the teaching of ERER in law programs could have a positive anti-racist impact on legal practice. Second, anti-racist education is useful to any society and not just Brazilian society, something that the reviewer agrees with when she/he states at the end of her opinion that: "anti-racist education and legislation could reduce racial discrimination and lead to a more democratic and egalitarian society".
2) I do not think that the statement should be indicated at the beginning of the text, as suggested by reviewer, for several reasons, among which the focus of this article is the teaching of ethnic-racial relations education (ERER) in higher education, especially in law courses. I must clarify that I agree that the lack of this teaching is widespread; that is, it is also not being implemented in primary and secondary education. However, for ERER to be taught in these last two levels of education, it is necessary for it to be taught in higher education because it is the university that trains elementary and secondary education teachers. Therefore, if ERER is not taught at the university, there will be no teachers capable of teaching it in primary and secondary education. Therefore, it is essential to research the implementation of ERER in higher education, a place that trains teachers who teach classes in elementary and secondary education.
3) To answer this question and/or for us to analyze this topic, we have to do another and/or more research. Our research did not focus on the reasons for the non-implementation of ERER but on whether or not there was implementation in universities. But our hypothesis is that the deans (or most of them) are against this teaching. However, only research on the topic can adequately answer the question.
4) As with the previous answer, to answer this reviewer's suggestion, I would need to do research. In reality, in this case, I would need to carry out two investigations: one at the CNE and another with the 69 universities to verify. In other words, something impossible considering the time to respond to reviewers' suggestions and/or criticisms.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThis is an important contribution to the study of racial bias in the Brazilian judiciary. It is well written and based on sound empirical research. Only minor editing is required.
Some minor comments and suggestions I have:
- Footnote 1: The fact that race is a social construction can hardly be attributed to Santos (2014). It is much older. DuBois comes to mind.
- p.6, lines 194-195: bad example / illustration. We know that intentions matter and outcomes matter and it is common practice to consider both for the amount of punishment.
- p. 6, line 207 and line 224: apprehended is the wrong term. Better: perceived.
-p. 9-13: This table should be formatted in such a way that it fits one page.
- p.18, line 524: you are saying it, so it is not between the lines.
- p. 18, lines 525-551: This sentences becomes unintelligable after such a long list. Reformulate.
-p. 19, line 559: typo: to being deconstructing. Reformulate.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageVery minor mistakes.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
First, thank you for your comments, suggestions, and positive/constructive criticism. I think they help to improve the article. Again, thank you so much.
Second, below, you will see our comments and/or answers.
Sincerely,
1) We completely agree that Santos (2014) did not create the concept of race as a social construction, as well as we agree its definition is old. We could mention dozens of Brazilian and foreign authors who work with the concept of race as a social construction. We could quote them, but it would not change or affect the objective of the article or the arguments presented throughout the text. Citing them would only increase the size of the bibliographic reference. That is why we only cite Santos (2014), especially because we use this author throughout the article. There are other authors that I used in preparing this article who also work with the definition of race as a social construction, such as Almeida (2018), Gonzalez (2020), Moreira (2019 and 2017) and Munanga (1996). Therefore, as these authors are also mentioned in the text, I will also refer to them as authors who mobilize the definition of race as a social construction so as not to assume that Santos (2014) was the author who created this definition. We do not quote Dubois because we did not read him to construct this article and/or did not use him in the preparation of this article.
2) We do not disagree that intentions and their outcomes are important. However, many Brazilian judges believe that there is no racism in Brazil. As mentioned in the text, Judge Fábio Esteves, one of the creators and organizers of the Encontro Nacional de Juízas e Juízes Negros (Enajun, National Meeting of Black/Brown – pretos – Judges), states and at the same time proposes that “there is a need to change the education of our judges. There are those who say that racism does not exist. We must demand that judges, even those who do not believe it, have knowledge of racial issues in Brazil” (p. 14). If we don't understand this, we won't understand why the denial of intention is so important for not punishing racist practices in a racist country (Brazil) where most judges don't believe in racism. Therefore, we do not think that our example is a "bad example".
3) We accepted the reviewer's suggestion and changed terms/words.
4) We have divided the table into two smaller tables and shortened it as another reviewer advised. This seems to address the idea made by the current reviewer.
5) Ok, we deleted the expression "between the lines" from the text.
6) Ok, we've rewritten this paragraph, as you and another reviewer suggested. We made a significant cut from the institutions mentioned earlier in this paragraph.
7) OK. It's done.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe proposed article is an interesting piece, covering an important issue related to how thr law operators are prepared at higher education level in Brazil, focusing on federal universities.
I have two main comments/suugestions to improve the article.
1) Table 1, which covers 4 pages of the text, should be summarized in one short table, focusing on the 23 universities which have ERER in their PPC. The table should be presented only with totals and not naming the 23 institutions. A second table can be included only quoting the names of the classes created to address ERER.
2) Two parts of the text should be summarized: a) the footnote 1 (there is no need of all the long explanation about racial categories and their translation); b) the paragraph in page 18 that starts with: "to conclude....". There is no need to quote all the institutions after OAB, they maybe referred in a footnote or simply deleted.
Other short comments: a) explain what OAB is in the first time it appears; b) part of footnote 20 repeats the content of footnote 1; c) in footnote 22, may refer to the concept of whiteness, which helps to understand the white racial protection network concept.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageMinor review required.
Author Response
Dear Reviewer,
First, thank you for your comments, suggestions, and positive/constructive criticism. I think they help to improve the article. Again, thank you so much.
Second, below, you will see our comments and/or answers.
Sincerely,
1) I reformulated the table. In fact, I transformed it into two tables, as suggested by the reviewer. However, the first table indicates the 23 law courses that included the teaching of ethnic-racial relations education (ERER) in their PPC (and their respective universities). The second table indicates the 18 law courses that did not include the teaching of ethnic-racial relations education (ERER) in their PPC. Because of the construction of these two new tables that will replace the old table 1, I had to rewrite and/or introduce some new parts or wordings to the first version of my text.
2) I summarized paragraph 18 as suggested by the reviewer. I think it got better. Regarding cutting footnote 1, I personally think it is necessary, as we do not only write for people new to the topic of ethnic-racial relations. People who are not familiar with the topic generally do not know how race relations are operationalized in Brazil, and without the clarifications in this footnote, they may not fully understand the arguments and objectives of the article. Furthermore, the other two reviewers did not criticize this footnote. In other words, I believe that they agree with this clarification note.
3) Ok, I followed the reviewer's suggestion and included a footnote explaining what the OAB is.
3.1. I Delete the portion of former footnote 20 that was contained in footnote 1.
3.2. Regarding the reviewer's suggestion regarding the old footnote 22, I remember that we indicated the reference by Santos (2021b) for information on the subject.
Author Response File: Author Response.pdf
