The emergence of debate on the current Brazilian political scene, its crisis, proposals and themes of the political reform in the House and the Federal Senate, motivated the Brazilian Association of Political Science (ABCP) - Regional Southeast to hold the "Political Reform Seminar: who and for whom? ", an event that occurred on September 20.

The seminar was attended by several researchers from important universities, research institutes and consultants, in addition to having important support: Grupo Opinião Pública (UFMG), Programa de Pós-graduação em Ciência Política, Instituto de Pesquisas Sociais e Políticas (IPESPE), Instituto Vox Populi, Instituto Análises e Instituto Pólis.

The opening of the event was carried out by the Director of ABCP - Sudeste Regional, Mara Telles, followed by ABCP Deputy Director-Regional Sudeste, Felipe Borba, and the Deputy Executive Secretary of ABCP, Claudia Feres.

At the opening conference, the professor and former Minister of Education, Renato Janine Ribeiro, brought as a theme "Philosophy and Political Science: what we have to say". In his speech, Renato Janine reconnected Philosophy and Political Science from modernity and presented a rereading of classics of philosophy, like Machiavelli to think about the conquest and maintenance of power and governability in Brazilian contemporaneity.

Following this, the first table included the theme "Political reform in public opinion and in the media", coordinated by Érica Anita Batista (UFMG), and as speakers, Professor Mara Telles, and Professors Cláudio Penteado (UFABC), João Feres (IESP-UERJ) and the researcher João Francisco Meira (Pitágoras University and Vox Populi). The invited guests presented data and discussed topics such as the absence of a public debate on political reform, the importance of resumption of political theory to think about the democratization of the media, the impacts of political reform initiatives on elections, polls and voter information and the need to rescue party trust as a way to reduce the representation gap.

Then, the table coordinated by Paulo Victor Melo (UFMG) discussed political reform from representation and political participation. Professors Cláudia Feres (UFMG) and Esther Solano (UNIFESP), and professors Felipe Borba (UNIRIO) and Vitor Peixoto (UENF) participated. In this table were discussed topics such as representation and representation, the upward and downward conjuncture of participatory spaces, the participation and the deficit of women's representation in politics, legislation and free time for electoral propaganda and cyclical crises and reforms.

The third table was coordinated by Thiago Coacci (UFMG) and debated the theme "Political reform for who: how are the minorities." The exhibitors were Professors Adriana Gomes (UFVJM), Marlise Matos (UFMG) and Marta Mendes (UFJF), and Professors Cristiano Rodrigues (UFMG) and Tiago Silame (UFV). The table brought to the discussion the dilemma of representation, representativeness and participation spaces for traditional, black, indigenous, women, and sexual minorities, as well as the layers of challenges that arise with the intersection of these minority frameworks that constitute a large majority of the Brazilian population.

Table four discussed the so-called "district", campaign funding, and direct democracy mechanisms. Coordinated by Noelle del Giúdice (UFMG), Bertha Maakaroun (Polis Institute), researcher Alberto Almeida (Analysis Institute) and professors Bruno Reis (UFMG) and Oswaldo Amaral (UNICAMP) participated as exhibitors. Presenting a vision of the market of research and consulting, journalism and academia, the table contemplated the main points of political reform in the process of discussion and voting in the Chamber and Senate and its echoes in society.

At the closing of the seminar, the debate "Parliamentary and coalition presidentialism: solutions or crises?" Was held by professors Antônio Lavareda (UFPE / Ipespe) and Leonardo Avritzer (UFMG), and was mediated by Mara Telles (UFMG). The guests presented the importance of corrections in Brazilian presidentialism, at the same time as they made considerations about the low viability of parliamentarism in the Brazilian context.

The "Political Reform Seminar: Why and for Whom?" Qualified the debate on political reform by bringing the positioning of the academy and informed positions on the subject and at the same time widening the scope of the debate by deepening in several dimensions the importance and impacts of a political reform, beyond the institutions and the actors and thinking the Brazilian society as a whole.