Mock Jury: Should the State create environmental protection measures?

Yesterday, July 11, the Mock Jury took place with the theme "If we consider a scenario in which the State's actions function without failure or corruption, is it desirable for the State to create environmental protection measures?" The event was conducted by leader Felipe Calente, Associate III, and had two groups to present, one for and one against.

The first was made up of members Bruno Buback, Honorary Associate, Ivan Oikawa, Associate I, and João Pedro Pires, Associate II. They defended that it is desirable for the State to create environmental protection measures. The group against had in its composition Leonard Batista, Associate II, Mário Miranda, Associate Alumni, and Matheus Amorim, Associate I. They defended that the creation of environmental measures by the State is not desirable.

Despite defending totally opposite points, it is worth pointing out that each group's defense does not express their personal opinion. The purpose of the panel is precisely to raise opposing hypotheses, even if they do not represent the opinion of the participants, so that the debate can be richer and the content can be more in-depth.

Felipe introduces the event with his briefing: "On one side, there are those who argue that the protection of the environment is the responsibility of the State, which should implement them through Public Policies (...) On the other side, there are those who argue that these environmental protection measures curtail the freedom of individuals. After all, individuals who are acting independently, rationally and according to their own interests, may exhaust the uses of common good and conflict against the interests of the collectivity".

After the exposition of ideas and debate among the groups, the associates present voted for the group that best defended its point of view, with arguments that were the most grounded and coherent with the assigned theme. Thus, the winning group was in favor, which defended that yes, it is desirable that protection measures for the environment should be created by the State, the result being 62% against 38%.