Navegando por Assunto "Teoria do direito"

Agora exibindo 1 - 2 de 2

Acesso aberto (Open Access)
A legitimidade da participação processual na tutela dos direitos difusos
(Universidade Federal do Pará, 2007) GATO, Gisele Augusta Fontes; MAROJA, Ângela; http://lattes.cnpq.br/9078629034100575
The theoretical approach of the procedural participation is found at a point of intersection between a social-political theory and a legal theory, in order to achieve that it was necessary to initiate from Habermas social theory, proceeding to his political theory and only then to his legal theory. In terms of a discursive theory, the perfection of judicial sentences derives not only from the rationality of the legislation, but also from the reproduction, in the scope of the legal speech, of the conditions of the rational speech, bearing in mind the pragmatic limitations that occur on the legal speech, limitations that arise from the specifics of the legal speech whose main purpose is resolving decision making issues, cannot be developed under the same basis of the ethical speech. Even though the Legal speech is limited by the pragmatic impositions in it, the same way the practical speeches in general, the argument is necessary to the rational justification and the perfection of the sentence, and it is in this aspect that the legal speech connects with the participation, essential for the rational justification and legitimacy of the sentence. Thus, the procedural legislation must be submitted to critics in order to verify if the procedural participation prescribed in the legislation is capable of guaranteeing a legitimate procedure. In our national legislation two situations are not justifiable rationally. First, the one that refers to the current judicial procedure, based in the individual paradigm, insufficient for processing deals formulated based on diffuse rights for they hinder the necessary argument about the legal paradigms and adequate representation that will be presented at court. Second, the restriction to the individual participation in the majority of the procedural actions involving the protection of the diffuse rights, which cannot be rationally justified. Although there is an indicative of change consisting of a first draft of a code of collective process considering legitimate the participation of any member of society. This extension of legitimacy does not apply to all actions that can be used to tutor diffuse interests and rights; the constitutional control was not among the changes. Therefore the discussion over the subject of procedural participation cannot be closed, not even after the promulgation of the code of collective process, due to the importance of the participation of all the interested parties, or of its legitimate representatives, in any judicial procedure where its interests or rights are being questioned. Only by continuing the discussion around the insufficiencies of the judicial procedure in the liberal paradigm for protecting the diffuse rights will we be able to create a rational argument on the subject, whose conclusion represents the victory of the best reasons.
Acesso aberto (Open Access)
Precedentes no direito brasileiro: uma análise crítica sobre a utilização do “distinguishing” no Supremo Tribunal Federal
(Universidade Federal do Pará, 2013) GARCIA, André Luis Bitar de Lima; COSTA, Rosalina Moitta Pinto da; http://lattes.cnpq.br/5469957203750291
The paper discusses judicial precedents in the Brazilian reality, to contribute to a better understanding of the distinguishing through the analysis of cases the Federal Supreme Court. The Brazilian system needs the force of precedent, especially given our control of constitutionality, the presence of open procedural clauses and of content of the principle of equality. However, we emphasize that the implementation of stare decisis in Brazil will not occur automatically, either via legislative imposition. From the contrast of two general theories of precedent (as previous rule Frederick Schauer principle and precedent as Ronald Dworkin), we discuss two decisions of the Federal Supreme Court, in order to establish criteria for the use of the technique of distinguishing. In the research, the precedents are considered principles, with space for a possible distinction and for the protection of fundamental rights. The theory of law chosen to support the conclusions of the study wasth at of Ronald Dworkin.