Brazils Legal Bridge to BRICS: Interview with Dr. Emilio Mendonça Dias da Silva

How Did BRICS Legal Specialization Become His Professional Focus?

My specialization emerged from the intersection of legal scholarship, international relations, and a broader concern with how international power is structured. By combining training in Law and International Relations with sustained engagement in national, international, and transnational normative frameworks, I developed a way of reading the deeper structures that shape international economic and political life.

I belong to a generation that examined critically the cognitive frameworks historically dominant in international law while also seeking a more democratic global order. BRICS became strategically important to me because, especially after the 2008 global financial crisis and the institutional development of the grouping from 2006 onward, it appeared as one of the few initiatives with real potential to strengthen the voice of developing countries in global governance.

The most valuable insight has been that comparative legal understanding improves practical legal communication and judgment. Regular study of international and transnational regulatory developments, especially from a comparative-law perspective, has helped me identify how specific legal functions operate inside different BRICS jurisdictions.

That research also exposed me to the legal cultures and historical conditions of the original BRICS countries, including South Africa. In practice, this allows me to explain Brazilian law to foreign clients with more precision and sensitivity because I understand more clearly the intellectual traditions and institutional assumptions from which they are approaching the problem.

For clients, the practical lesson is that risk assessment begins with structural understanding, not with a checklist. My doctoral research examined how international law shapes areas often treated as purely domestic, especially administrative law, through preventive anti-corruption measures tied to transparency, accountability, public participation, and related principles.

One important conclusion was that BRICS countries reflect the influence of international conventions through different constitutional arrangements, administrative models, and sanctioning systems. That means foreign investors need qualified local counsel who can explain how regulatory exposure actually operates inside a specific state structure before risk becomes an active legal problem.

The most significant evolution has been the decision to focus my practice on companies from BRICS countries. My earlier work across a broad range of legal fields in Brazil gave me a practical base for supporting foreign clients on multiple aspects of business operations, but over time I saw a specific gap in the market.

Large foreign corporations could usually retain leading Brazilian firms, while small and mid-sized foreign companies often entered Brazil without trusted local legal support. That creates a structural disadvantage, because without independent counsel they may accept legal arrangements that do not reflect their best interests even when better alternatives are available.

That role reinforced the importance of preventive legal strategy. Working inside a public institution gave me a clearer understanding of how corporate conduct is investigated and assessed, especially in highly sensitive constitutional labor matters such as collective labor rights, forced labor, child labor, and severe workplace accidents.

It also showed me how serious collective exposure can become for companies, both financially and reputationally. Just as important, I learned how few practitioners are deeply prepared to structure strategy during investigative and administrative stages rather than only after litigation begins, which is why I emphasize early legal advisory for foreign investors.

Founding the firm in 2025 was both a market response and a strategic decision shaped by the international environment. I had already identified an underserved segment of foreign companies from BRICS jurisdictions that needed independent local legal support in Brazil, especially those without the resources of major multinationals.

At the same time, I believe the current phase of international relations has made stronger BRICS trade and investment ties more important not only commercially but also structurally. In that context, building a firm focused on BRICS countries became a way to respond to both a clear legal-services gap and a changing global landscape.

“It is strongly inadvisable for foreign companies to commence business activities in Brazil without the support of trusted local legal counsel.”

Why Do Foreign Clients Need Different Legal Support in Brazil?

The core gap is that BRICS-to-BRICS legal work requires practical coordination across legal systems that are structurally very different. Those differences in legal traditions, constitutional arrangements, state models, and legal cultures become concrete when businesses try to structure transactions, operations, or disputes across jurisdictions.

No lawyer in one BRICS country can realistically master the institutional complexity of all the others alone. My firm was created to respond to that reality, especially because many business operations still begin without independent local legal counsel even when those legal differences directly affect commercial outcomes.

Small and mid-sized enterprises face the same structural legal risks as large corporations, but with fewer institutional protections at the entry stage. Large companies usually secure corporate, tax, labor, compliance, and regulatory advice from the outset, while smaller businesses often do not allocate those resources early, especially when their initial presence in Brazil is still limited.

That creates a high-risk situation. I have seen foreign companies rely entirely on explanations from local commercial partners and then formalize arrangements that disproportionately favor the Brazilian side, including structures that may even jeopardize ownership of the goods being commercialized in Brazil.

There is no single standard client profile in terms of size or transaction scope. I have advised large foreign corporations, sometimes through partnerships with foreign law firms, including work related to the structuring and implementation of the legal department of a Brazilian entity.

More commonly, clients come with focused and practical needs. They may need pre-litigation or litigation support, employment agreement review, regulatory guidance, or preventive legal structuring so they can begin operating in Brazil on a more secure foundation.

How Should BRICS Investors Approach Legal Strategy and Compliance?

For BRICS investors, those principles translate into legal strategy that is context-aware, tailored, and grounded in real geopolitical conditions. Legal work cannot be separated from the current international environment, which includes uncertainty, protectionist measures, armed conflict, sanctions, and asymmetrical economic dependence.

That is why our firm works through strategic partnerships in other jurisdictions. The goal is not only technical accuracy, but advice that is culturally informed, commercially usable, and better aligned with the economic and institutional environment of each client.

A practice aligned with South-South cooperation begins by taking the development priorities and structural realities of emerging economies seriously. That changes how transactions are assessed, because it requires more careful attention to bilateral instruments, cooperation frameworks, and the legal choices that may better serve clients from BRICS jurisdictions.

It also demands legal advice that is not only technically correct, but genuinely usable across cultural and institutional differences. In my view, that is one of the practical ways legal work can support the broader cooperation agenda of the Global South.

My first recommendation is diversification. BRICS countries should deepen trade and investment relationships among themselves in order to reduce vulnerability to sanctions and other external pressures.

At the same time, each transaction requires careful legal assessment of applicable law, comparative advantages, the permissibility of foreign law, domestic sector regulation, and all relevant compliance requirements. Legal cooperation among professionals in different jurisdictions is essential because transnational business depends on accessible and trusted expertise, not only on political declarations.

Labor law generates significant demand because foreign investors often perceive the Brazilian labor framework as complex, politically sensitive, and subject to change. Clients need support in structuring employment policies, drafting contracts, and reducing exposure to future labor disputes.

There is also strong demand in taxation, advertising compliance under consumer protection and competition law, outsourced legal department support for Brazilian subsidiaries, and administrative law matters involving licensing and regulatory compliance. In judicial cooperation, clients frequently need to understand whether they may bring claims in Brazil, under what conditions, and at what cost.

One of the most common misconceptions is that Brazilian legal counsel is not necessary during contract negotiation and execution. In that situation, a foreign investor often relies on legal explanations given by the Brazilian partner’s lawyers, whose duty is naturally aligned with the partner rather than the investor.

By the time those matters reach my firm, they are often already in conflict, either in pre-litigation discussions or in active litigation. The underlying problem is usually the absence of independent preventive legal advice at the moment when the transaction was originally structured.

What is most often overlooked is the centrality of legal risk in the overall investment assessment. Many investors focus primarily on financial opportunity without building a sufficiently grounded understanding of the regulatory framework that governs their sector in Brazil.

That is why I strongly recommend obtaining a formal legal opinion before entry. Investors should seek a baseline understanding of the legal rules that shape their business model in Brazil before administrative or judicial proceedings force that learning under pressure.

“For foreign investors in Brazil, legal risk should be assessed as early as commercial opportunity.”

What Investment Frameworks and Cooperation Mechanisms Matter Most?

Brazil’s CFIA model offers an international framework for investors while avoiding strict adherence to the more intrusive logic traditionally associated with classic bilateral investment treaties. Brazil’s historical reluctance toward traditional BITs was shaped in part by concern over the degree of exposure that investor-state arbitration can create, a concern that also finds a useful comparison in South Africa’s own trajectory.

Within the BRICS context, this model is attractive because it reflects a preference for arrangements that show greater respect for domestic law while still recognizing the need for legal protection and cooperation. Brazilian law already provides stable protections for foreign investors, and the CFIA framework seeks to complement that reality without reproducing the full architecture of older treaty models.

The BRICS framework already contains relevant cooperation mechanisms, including a dedicated anti-corruption forum, but those mechanisms can still become broader and more useful. My own research has focused more on preventive anti-corruption measures, especially transparency, accountability, and public participation across different administrative systems.

To the best of my knowledge, the BRICS Anti-Corruption Forum places strong emphasis on international cooperation, particularly in relation to asset recovery. I believe the next step is to expand participation and deepen the agenda so that civil society, academics, and researchers are more directly involved and both preventive and enforcement dimensions receive fuller attention.

Those differences can only be addressed effectively through structured comparative engagement rather than through assumptions. In my view, businesses need stronger platforms where legal scholars and practitioners from different BRICS jurisdictions can examine one another’s systems together and build practical mutual understanding.

Universities and cooperative academic structures are well positioned to support that process, and legal education itself should prepare professionals for comparative and international thinking. That is also part of my own ambition for the firm: to help connect legal professionals across BRICS jurisdictions so more effective cross-border legal integration becomes possible.

How Will BRICS Expansion Change the Legal Services Landscape?

BRICS expansion will make the legal-services landscape more complex, and that complexity will require more deliberate international coordination. Every enlargement brings a wider range of legal traditions and institutional models into the framework, which increases the need for reliable professional networks rather than isolated local execution.

For a law firm that wants to become a relevant hub for BRICS-related matters, international partnerships are therefore not optional. They are a core operational requirement, because high-quality transnational legal service depends on shared information, mutual trust, and the practical ability to implement solutions across multiple jurisdictions.

“Specialized BRICS legal practice increasingly depends on trusted international partnerships rather than isolated local execution.”

About the Expert

Dr. Emílio Mendonça Dias da Silva is the Founder and Managing Partner of Emílio Mendonça Dias da Silva Advocacia in Brazil. He holds a Ph.D. and a Master’s degree in Public International Law from the University of São Paulo, along with degrees in Law and International Relations.

His work combines academic research on BRICS legal systems with practical advisory for foreign investors and companies operating in Brazil. His areas of expertise include foreign investment advisory, labor law, administrative law, tax law, regulatory compliance, judicial cooperation, and broader cross-border legal strategy within the BRICS framework.

For B2BRICS readers, his relevance lies in the combination of comparative legal scholarship and operational experience with real market-entry risk. His perspective is particularly valuable for foreign investors entering Brazil, SMEs exploring BRICS-to-BRICS transactions, law firms building cross-border capabilities, and institutional readers tracking the legal infrastructure behind BRICS cooperation.

Key Points

Q: Why is independent local legal counsel essential for entering Brazil?

Independent local counsel is essential because foreign investors often underestimate how quickly legal structure affects ownership, compliance, labor exposure, and enforceability in Brazil. When a company relies on explanations provided only by its local commercial partner or the partner’s lawyers, it risks formalizing arrangements that do not protect its own interests from the beginning.

Q: What do foreign investors most often underestimate when entering Brazil?

They most often underestimate legal risk at the pre-entry stage. Many businesses focus on commercial opportunity first and only later discover that sector regulation, contract structure, labor rules, administrative exposure, or documentation choices have already created constraints that are harder and more expensive to correct after capital has entered the market.

Q: How do legal differences across BRICS countries affect cross-border business?

They affect cross-border business directly because BRICS countries operate through different legal traditions, constitutional structures, administrative models, and legal cultures. Those differences influence how contracts are interpreted, how disputes are handled, how compliance is designed, and how business expectations should be translated from one jurisdiction to another.

Q: Why do SMEs need local legal support in Brazil as much as large corporations?

SMEs often need local legal support just as urgently because they face many of the same structural risks as large corporations without the same institutional safeguards. Large companies usually build legal, tax, labor, and compliance support from the outset, while smaller companies may postpone that investment and expose themselves to avoidable contractual and regulatory vulnerability.

Q: What is the practical significance of Brazil’s CFIA model for BRICS investors?

The practical significance of the CFIA model is that it offers an international cooperation framework for investment without fully replicating the traditional bilateral investment treaty model associated with more intrusive investor-state arbitration structures. For BRICS investors, it reflects an approach more consistent with domestic-law sensitivity and pragmatic treaty design.

Q: How will BRICS expansion reshape legal services over the next few years?

BRICS expansion will increase legal diversity and therefore raise the importance of trusted international partnerships among law firms and legal professionals. Specialized BRICS-focused practices will need stronger cross-border coordination, more comparative expertise, and deeper professional networks if they want to deliver legal advice that is genuinely operational across multiple jurisdictions.