Residency period: August 1, 2017 to July 31, 2018

Resident at IEAT, Professor Andityas Soares de Moura Costa Matos holds a degree in Law from the Federal University of Minas Gerais (2002), a Masters in Philosophy of Law from the Federal University of Minas Gerais (2004), a PhD in Law and Justice from the Federal University of Minas Gerais (2009) and Post-Doctorate in Philosophy of Law from the Facultat de Dret de la Universitat de Barcelona (2016, Spain). He is currently Adjunct Professor IV of Philosophy of Law and related disciplines at the Faculty of Law of the Federal University of Minas Gerais (Undergraduate and Graduate Permanent Staff). He was Visiting Professor at the Universitat de Barcelona (Spain) from 2015 to 2016. Collaborating Researcher at the Department of Philosophy at the State University of Campinas (UNICAMP) from 2014 to 2015. He coordinates the Research Projects Radical Philosophy of Law and the State, O Estado de exception in contemporary Brazil: for a critical reading of the emergency argument in the national political-legal scenario and Civil disobedience and democracy: non-violent citizen participation as a strategy to fight for rights in contexts of permanent economic exception. Has experience in the area of Law, with emphasis on Philosophy of Law, Theory of Law and Ancient Philosophy, working mainly on the following subjects: normativism, theory of justice, decisionism, state of exception, biopolitics, Kelsen and Schmitt debate, authoritarianism and democracy, civil disobedience, ancient philosophy, pre-Socratic philosophy and Stoicism.


With the present work I intend to demonstrate the potential for social transformation related to the idea of civil disobedience, which go beyond the traditional functions of such an institute as conceived by constitutionalism and political liberalism. Indeed, such currents understand civil disobedience as a mechanism for correcting established law, in the case of public, collective and non-violent action that intends to question a certain norm or specific government policy. However, such characteristics need to be rethought in view of the historical moment in which we live. Without giving up tradition, it is necessary to go one step further and understand civil disobedience as a legitimate expression not only of constituted power, but mainly of popular constituent power. In this sense, civil disobedience can be understood as a specific form of interpretation of the Constitution by organized civil society. With this, I assume that the interpretation of law, in democratic societies, cannot be a privilege or monopoly of professional bodies that integrate the sphere of constituted power, such as the Judiciary and Public Administration. As social movements and public questioning of state legitimacy and economic dominance have demonstrated in recent years, it is necessary to move forward and conceive a democracy that is not only formal and procedural, but effectively inclusive, that is, capable of understanding the ever-present tensions and contradictions in the field of law and politics. In this perspective, civil disobedience is an instrument of the highest value for the deepening of democracy, as it allows organized society to discuss with the State, in order to reconcile negotiated solutions on issues that affect fundamental rights and the very understanding of the political pact. contained in the Constitution. It should be noted that, as a collective and non-violent movement, civil disobedience represents a way not only for the punctual reform of a certain policy or legal norm, being also an original space of popular constituent power through which the demands of society for more inclusion, justice and reasonableness can be inserted in the public debate in a direct way. In an era of increasingly violent conflicts between society, the State and capital, with the consequent deepening of misunderstanding between these spheres due to the predominance of authoritarian and privatist demands arising from the economic state of exception, civil disobedience understood as a form of Constituent power represents an important alternative path for the re-signification of the Constitution and its libertarian and democratic potential, deserving, therefore, to be studied and discussed in view of considerations that go beyond traditional studies and are, at the same time, transdisciplinary and advanced.