Questão nº 31
Questão de Língua Inglesa · CEBRASPE Câmara dos Deputados 2025 - NS (nº 31)
Little attention has been devoted to legislation’s point of origin — the legislative drafting process. Such commentary as has been offered is essentially technical in nature. However, the relationship between drafter and text is the furthest thing from a technical, value-neutral enterprise.
For example: a question confronted by every drafter and one with obvious ethical and political implications is, “How much is to be left to the drafter’s discretion?” Obviously, the drafter who less frequently inquires about the client’s desires will have greater latitude to exercise discretion and accordingly can play more of an “advocacy” role in shaping the legislation, a situation which can lead to his or her sidesteping the duty of abiding by a client’s decisions concerning the objectives of representation.
But this is not to paint too malevolent a portrait of legislative drafting personnel. They are not a fifth column of subversives who pursue personal advocacy objectives in everything that they do. Indeed, many may even be unaware of their power. They are, though, continually called upon to exercise personal judgment in the performance of their duties. Such judgments are frequently policy judgments, and drafting decisions are often influenced consciously or subconsciously by the advocacy agenda of the individual drafter. The legislative drafter plays a more active role in the process than is generally accorded to the stereotypical scribe, laboring in nameless and faceless obscurity to produce a bill draft.
About the preceding text, judge the following items.
The main point of the text is to reveal how drafters can deliberately manipulate the drafting process according to their own interests.
Resposta comentada
O texto defende que o processo de redação legislativa não é neutro: o redator exerce discricionariedade (margem de escolha pessoal) e seus julgamentos podem ser influenciados, consciente ou inconscientemente, por sua própria agenda. Mas o autor não afirma que isso é feito de propósito, de forma deliberada e em benefício próprio — ele diz explicitamente que muitos redatores "may even be unaware of their power".
- Correta: Errado. O item distorce o sentido ao afirmar que os redatores podem manipular o processo "deliberately" (deliberadamente) e "according to their own interests" (conforme seus próprios interesses), mas o texto diz que muitos podem até estar inconscientes desse poder e que a influência ocorre "consciously or subconsciously".
Como ficaria certo: O ponto principal do texto é mostrar que o redator legislativo exerce um papel ativo e discricionário, podendo ser influenciado — consciente ou inconscientemente — por sua própria agenda, e não que ele manipula deliberadamente o processo em benefício próprio.
Fonte: CEBRASPE Câmara dos Deputados 2025 - NS Conhecimentos Comuns. Reproduzida para fins de estudo.