Women, drug trafficking, and legal discourse: implications for the formulation and improvement of public policies

Abstract

This article presents a critical analysis of the discursive representations of women accused of drug trafficking in decisions issued by the Court of Justice of Santa Catarina, aiming to demonstrate how legal language participates in the reproduction of social inequalities and can be mobilised as an instrument of punitive control. The research is grounded in Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA), particularly drawing on the theoretical contributions of Fairclough (2003), Halliday and Matthiessen (2014), and van Leeuwen (2008), with special attention to transitivity systems, the representation of social actors, and presuppositions present in judicial texts. The empirical analysis of twelve appellate decisions revealed recurrent discursive patterns that associate female defendants with criminality through affective relationships, motherhood, territorial belonging, and presumed ties to criminal groups, often without objective demonstration of their actions. These discourses construct moral and stigmatising narratives in which the domestic space is no longer protected, and motherhood is treated as a symbolic aggravating factor. The article argues that such representations reinforce penal selectivity and limit access to alternative measures, disproportionately affecting poor and racialised women. It concludes that CDA can contribute to the formulation of more equitable public policies by exposing the ideological effects of legal discourse and promoting interpretative practices committed to constitutional principles and to gender and class equity within the justice system.