Understand the difference between the two government agencies, what their functions are, what they are responsible for, and how they act
You’ve probably heard of Detran, Senatran, Contran, Denatran, Jari, ANTT, DNIT and other traffic-related organizations. But, with this large number of names and acronyms, it is easy to get lost and not understand what each one does.
Two of these bodies, Senatran and Contran play a fundamental role in regulation at the national level, so they can be confused. In this article you can see the difference between these bodies and how traffic structures work in Brazil.
SEE ALSO:
The National Traffic System is composed of a broad structure of bodies, attributions and decision-making levels, which often raises doubts. Each organization is defined by the Brazilian Traffic Code (CTB) and performs specific functions, divided into normative, executive, advisory, educational and inspection activities.
Standards and advisory bodies:
Executive traffic bodies and entities:
Road traffic agencies and entities:
Inspection institutions:
Appellate Bodies:
What is the difference between Contran and Senatran?
When new rules aimed at traffic are announced, such as the CNH do Brasil and the changes in the licensing process, Contran and Senatran are among the most cited names, because, although they act in an integrated way, the two bodies perform different functions and have different degrees of decision-making power.
Understanding this difference is essential to correctly interpret recent changes in Brazilian traffic, such as those promoted by Contran Resolution No. 1,020, which significantly altered the training of drivers and reignited the debate about the limits of Contran’s normative power.
The National Traffic Council is the highest regulatory body of the National Traffic System. It is up to him to establish general guidelines, issue resolutions, standardize procedures and complement the Brazilian Traffic Code (CTB). Its resolutions are binding throughout the national territory and guide topics ranging from driver licenses to inspection criteria, signaling and vehicle safety.
Although Contran has legal competence to issue resolutions that apply to the entire country, from a legal point of view, the body only has normative competence. From an institutional and democratic perspective, however, the discussion is more complex.
Profound changes in consolidated systems require not only legal support, which is incumbent on it, but also technical dialogue, predictability and adequate time to adapt with other traffic agencies and with society itself. It is important to differentiate between standardization and operationalization.
Although Contran has to change rules, the effectiveness of these rules depends on the ability of executive bodies to implement them with clarity, security and adequate structure. When rules are published without a transition period, without systemic integration and without prior dialogue with those who execute public policies and with those who will be directly impacted, the risk goes beyond the administrative field and affects institutional trust itself.
Therefore, it is very important that there is dialogue with Detrans, Cetrans and other organizations, so that any changes are applied at the right time and in an assertive way.
The National Traffic Secretariat, in turn, performs an essentially executive and coordination function. Among its attributions are:
In practice, the division of responsibilities between the two bodies mentioned is clear: Contran defines the standard; Senatran works to make its application viable. However, this technical separation is not always reflected in a balanced way in the daily life of the system, especially when decisions with great social and economic impact are adopted without a broader process of dialogue with the sectors directly affected.
