The constitutional tension between animal protection and cultural manifestations

vaquejada (a traditional brazilian rodeo-like event) in ADIs 5,728 and 5,772

Abstract

Background: The constitutional tension between animal protection and cultural expressions has been a central theme in Brazilian legal debate, particularly since the Federal Supreme Court's ruling in ADI 4,983 (2016), which declared the Vaquejada (a traditional Brazilian rodeo-like event) unconstitutional. The National Congress's response through Constitutional Amendment No. 96/2017, and the subsequent judgment of ADIs 5,728 (2025) and 5,772 (2026), reveal the dynamics of institutional dialogue in contemporary Brazilian constitutionalism.

Objectives: To analyze the legal foundations and constitutional implications of the decisions rendered in ADIs 5,728 and 5,772, examining how the STF reconciled the constitutional prohibition on animal cruelty (art.225, §1º, VII) with the right to cultural expressions (arts.215 and 216), in light of Constitutional Amendment No. 96/2017, and how ADI 5,772 established interpretive parameters for the infraconstitutional norms recognizing the Vaquejada (a traditional Brazilian rodeo-like event) as intangible cultural heritage.

Methods: The study, based on bibliographic, documentary, and case law research, combines analysis of judicial decisions, statutes, and constitutional amendments with a review of domestic and foreign scholarship on the tension between fundamental rights, the limits of derived constituent power, legislative response, and institutional dialogue, as well as a comparative analysis of experiences in other countries.

Results: The analysis demonstrates that ADI 5,728 consolidated the constitutional legitimacy of Constitutional Amendment No. 96/2017 as a dialogic response to the precedent set in ADI 4,983, while ADI 5,772 granted a constitutionally conforming interpretation to the challenged statutory provisions, conditioning the constitutionality of the Vaquejada (a traditional Brazilian rodeo-like event) on compliance with minimum animal welfare standards.

Conclusions: Taken together, the decisions reveal a model of regulated coexistence between culture and animal protection, shifting the debate from outright prohibition to the effectiveness of regulation and enforcement, and reaffirm the role of the STF as guardian of the Constitution in permanent dialogue with the derived constituent power and society.