O presente estudo busca investigar se a institucionalização de práticas de mediação pelo Poder Judiciário, por meio da Lei 13.140/15, pode ser considerada um benefício para superar as consequências advindas de uma sociedade brasileira supostamente hiperjudicializada. Para tanto, a pesquisa foi organizada em três capítulos. O primeiro cuida de elucidar a existência de um fenômeno denominado protagonismo judicial que se desdobraria em outras facetas, qual seja; o ativismo judicial, a judicialização da política e a juridificação das relações sociais – todas essencialmente relacionadas ao aumento da ingerência do Poder Judiciário nas esferas da vida. A partir disto, busca-se expor a construção de um senso comum sobre a judicialização da sociedade brasileira, especialmente após as condições institucionais criadas pela Constituição de 1988 e, em seguida, valendo-se dos dados divulgados pelo Conselho Nacional de Justiça, esta pesquisa visa questionar o suposto diagnóstico. Já o segundo capítulo tem por escopo apresentar os argumentos de autores que defendem a mediação judicial como uma proposta de solução à ideia de uma cultura do litígio, traçando seu percurso legislativo até alcançar o marco processual e legal com as Leis nº 13.105 e 13.140, respectivamente. Objetiva-se, ainda, expor as concepções de mediação judicial e extrajudicial com destaque às suas diferenças. O último ponto deste trabalho busca apresentar alguns fundamentos históricos e filosóficos sobre as facetas do protagonismo judicial mediante a exposição das ideias de Axel Honneth, Jürgen Habermas, Ingeborg Maus e Antoine Garapon, e, assim, relacioná-las com a institucionalização da mediação judicial. A dissertação concentra-se, ao cabo, em questionar a capacidade da Lei de Mediação para dirimir os problemas para quais ela foi pensada, sobretudo, porque o Poder Judiciário mantém-se como protagonista na resolução dos conflitos. / This paper aims to investigate whether institutionalizing mediation practices by the Judiciary, through the Law 13.140/15, could be considered beneficial to overcome the consequences from an a supposedly “hyper judicialized” Brazilian society. For this purpose, the research was organized in three chapters. The first one elucidates a phenomenon known as judicial protagonism which would unfold in other facets,, such as: the judicial activism, the judicialization of politics and the juridification of social relationships – all of them essentially related to the increase of Judiciary interference in people’s lives. From this point, the paper aims to expose the construction of a common sense about judicialization of the Brazilian society, especially after the institutional conditions created by the Federal Constitution of 1988 and after that using the data disclosed by the National Justice Council, this paper aims to question the revealed diagnostic. The second chapter aims to present arguments from authors who defend the judicial mediation as a solution to the culture of litigation, tracing its legislative course until the procedural and legal framework with the Laws nº 13.105 and 13.140, respectively. This paper also intends to expose conceptions of judicial and extrajudicial mediation, highlighting their differences. The last topic of this essay aims to show some historical and philosophical grounds about the facets of the judicial protagonism by bringing the ideas of Axel Honneth, Jürgen Habermas, Ingeborg Mausand Antoine Garapon, and, with that, connect them with institutionalization of the judicial mediation. The dissertation focus, at last, on questioning the capacity of Mediation Law to solve the problems it was developed to solve, especially since the Brazilian Judiciary is still the main character of conflict resolutions.

Esta tese empreende uma análise genealógica das estratégias narrativas presentes no processo de criminalização da pedofilia no Brasil. O principal foco de análise foi a produção discursiva do judiciário e da psiquiatria que constitui objetividades sobre a pedofilia e busca definir o sujeito pedófilo. Para realizar esta pesquisa, foram analisadas diversas fontes de conhecimento que formam os discursos sobre a pedofilia no Brasil e em outros países , tais como textos históricos e teóricos das ciências humanas, uma bibliografia especializada sobre o assunto, manuais prescritivos de ações de combate ao abuso sexual infantil, legislações, e a jurisprudência disponível no Tribunal de Justiça de São Paulo (TJSP). Visando realizar uma história crítica do presente, foram ainda problematizadas as representações sobre a criança e o sexo, os pânicos morais em torno das sexualidades dissidentes e a fabricação de subjetividades contemporâneas. / This dissertation undertakes a genealogical analysis of the narrative strategies present in the criminalization process of pedophilia in Brazil. The primary focus of analysis was the discursive production of the judiciary and psychiatry, which creates objectivity about pedophilia and defines the subject pedophile. To accomplish this research, I analyzed the various sources of knowledge that form the discourses on pedophilia in Brazil and other countries such as historical and theoretical texts of human sciences, the specialized literature on the topic pedophilia, prescriptive manuals to prevent child sexual abuse, the legislations, and the jurisprudence available at the São Paulo Justice Court (TJSP). In order to achieve a critical history of the present, I also problematized representations about children and sex, the moral panics around dissident sexualities, and the construction of contemporary subjectivities.

O presente trabalho tem como objetivo identificar as práticas de assédio moral mais recorrentes no mundo corporativo. Verificou-se a forma que o judiciário, os sindicatos patronais e os de trabalhadores entendem sobre essa prática, em especial no que se refere às diferenças de tratamento entre homens e mulheres e às diferenças de entendimento entre o primeiro e segundo grau de jurisdição, com relação a procedências e improcedências das respectivas demandas judiciais. Trata-se de pesquisa qualitativa exploratória, realizada com a análise de 85 (oitenta e cinco) processos judiciais, através da qual se averiguaram as decisões tanto de 1º (primeiro), quanto de 2º (segundo) grau, o que totalizou 170 (cento e setenta) decisões prolatadas desde o ano de 2005 até o ano de 2012. Fez-se, igualmente, coleta de dados por meio de oito entrevistas semiestruturadas, cujos sujeitos são membros do judiciário e também líderes sindicais, tanto dos sindicatos dos empregados, como dos patronais. A posterior análise dos dados coletados foi feita baseada na literatura tida como referencial teórico. Os conceitos de Freitas, Hirigoyen, Barreto e Soboll são utilizados no fundamento do assédio moral. A análise da pesquisa demonstra divergências não apenas entre o entendimento do judiciário e dos administradores e líderes sindicais, mas também entre estes, dentro de suas próprias categorias. Considerando-se, ainda, os resultados encontrados, observa-se a evolução em espiral das práticas de assédio, onde se mantêm basicamente as mesmas práticas, porém com evolução na forma de aplicá-las. Evidenciou-se a dificuldade não somente na identificação e demonstração do assédio moral, como também na parametrização do valor de seu ressarcimento, de modo a compensar o lesado e, ao mesmo tempo, inibir a repetição da conduta. / The objective of the work here presented is to identify the most frequent ways in which moral harassment occurs in a work place, verifying and comparing the different understandings, regarding this practice, of the judiciary (both in the first and in the second degree of jurisdiction), the labor union and the employers associations, especially regarding how different men and women are treated in the working place. It is a exploratory qualitative research, more precisely, the analysis of 85 lawsuits, examining their decisions both at first (1st) as well as at the second (2nd) degree, totalizing 170 judicial decisions handed out from 2005 to 2012. Data was also collected by performing eight semi-structured interviews, whose respondents were members of the three classes whose understanding about moral harassment I was comparing, i.e., members of the judiciary, union leaders, and employers association. Posterior data analysis was made based on the theoretical framework given by leading dominant literature on the subject. The concepts of Freitas, Hirigoyen, Barreto e Soboll are used to characterize moral harassment. The analysis shows divergences on the understating and how the subject is dealt not only between the classes analyzed, but also among members of the same class. The results also show that occurred a spiral evolution of the moral harassment practices, i.e., the same harassments still happens, only the way they are inflicted changed/evolved. From our research, it became evident the difficulty not only in identifying and demonstrating moral harassment, but also in stipulating the amount of the compensatory damages to be paid, so that this kind of practice in inhibited.

Judicial Corruption has been one the most serious problems in Latin America and particularly, within the Peruvian state for a long period of time. Accordingly, many judicial reforms were attempted by different governments –democratic and non democratic- in order to definitively resolve the problem. However, none of such attempts succeed and judicial corruption is now chronic in the Peruvian society. Taking into account this scenario, the following investigation proposes the application of the Economic Analysis of Law in order to find concrete ways to fight and end judicial corruption. For that purpose we will mainly apply the economic concepts of incentives and human behavior in order to detect the causes of judicial corruption, the obstacles to achieve a real reform, and principally, to propose concrete measures aimed to address the problem.

Judicial Corruption has been one the most serious problems in Latin America and particularly, within the Peruvian state for a long period of time. Accordingly, many judicial reforms were attempted by different governments –democratic and non democratic- in order to definitively resolve the problem. However, none of such attempts succeed and judicial corruption is now chronic in the Peruvian society. Taking into account this scenario, the following investigation proposes the application of the Economic Analysis of Law in order to find concrete ways to fight and end judicial corruption. For that purpose we will mainly apply the economic concepts of incentives and human behavior in order to detect the causes of judicial corruption, the obstacles to achieve a real reform, and principally, to propose concrete measures aimed to address the problem.

When the Judiciary Committee initiated its impeachment inquiry of Richard Nixon for his complicity in Watergate, it was the first time that the House of Representatives had commenced such a proceeding against a president since Andrew Johnson in 1868. Johnson’s impeachment and subsequent Senate acquittal was widely regarded as an example of Congress run amok, its partisanship so blatant and its failure so grand that many Americans assumed that presidential impeachment had become obsolete. But impeachment, by its nature, is political, and each Congress defines the bounds of high crimes and misdemeanors in light of the current political climate. For the House in October 1973, Nixon’s Watergate scandal threatened to breach those limits. From the outset, Judiciary Chairman Peter Rodino recognized that if his Committee were to recommend impeaching President Nixon without bipartisan support, the American public would interpret it as another Johnson-like fiasco, and a threat to the constitutional system of government. To thwart suspicion that the Democratic majority would impeach Nixon exclusively for its own political gain, Rodino preached fairness to the President, even as Nixon refused to comply with the Committee’s investigation. Despite Rodino’s assurances, however, his procedural proposals—designed in consultation with the Committee’s Special Counsel, John Doar—did not always seem fair enough to many Republicans. At the same time, many Democrats believed that Rodino and Doar had already accorded Nixon too many rights, which encroached upon the House’s constitutionally guaranteed “sole power of impeachment.” Ultimately, Rodino conceded that he could not marshal a bipartisan majority without making compromises with members who expected more fairness than he and Doar had initially offered. Despite pressure from their congressional leadership, constituents, and the White House, seven southern Democrats and moderate Republicans formed a “Fragile Coalition” to vote their conscience in favor of three articles of impeachment. In doing so, they convinced a fearful and cynical American public that impeachment could be just, and in the case of Richard Nixon, necessary. / text

An examination of Barack Obama's Legal Philosophy and the extent to which that is reflected in the decisions of his judicial appointees.

The aim of this paper is to examine Serbia’s democratic consolidation in the judiciary and public and state administration, as well as the  role of European Union and EU conditionality in this process. This paper discusses the democratic consolidation in the judiciary and public and state administration of Serbia between the years 2000 and 2010, the role of the EU in this process, and the effects of EU conditionality in these two areas. The theories applied are Linz’s theory of inter-relating arenas of consolidated democracies, and Whitehead’s international dimensions of democratisation. This paper is based on the method of qualitative study and through extensive reading and research, it has come to the conclusion that the judiciary and public and state administration between 2000 and 2010 have seen some improvement. However, democratic progress has been very slow due to remains from Slobodan Milosevic’s regime and communism. The EU, as one of the major actors in the region, has through various projects, agreements, cooperation, and conditionality, brought about improvements in the judiciary and public and state administration. Yet, EU involvement and conditionality have not had great democratic effects; they have been significantly slowed down by inefficiency, low professionalism and corruption.

abstract: This thesis examines the Mexican federal judiciary and the problem of corruption in this institution, particularly related to cases of drug trafficking. Given the clandestine nature of corruption and the complexities of this investigation, ethnographic methods were used to collect data. I conducted fieldwork as a "returning member" to the site under study, based on my former experience and interaction with the federal judicial system. I interviewed 45 individuals who work in the federal courts in six different Mexican cities. I also studied case files associated with an important criminal trial of suspected narco-traffickers known in Mexico as "El Michoacanazo." My study reveals the complicated nature of judicial corruption and how it can occur under certain circumstances. I conclude that the Mexican federal judiciary has become a more professional, efficient, and trustworthy institution over the past fifteen years, though institutionalized practices such as nepotism, cronyism, personal abuse of power, and gender inequalities still exist, tending to thwart the full professionalization of these courts and facilitating instances of misconduct and corruption. Although structural factors prevent full professionalization and corruption does occur in these courts, the system works better than it ever has before. / Dissertation/Thesis / Ph.D. Justice Studies 2012

O presente estudo busca investigar se a institucionalização de práticas de mediação pelo Poder Judiciário, por meio da Lei 13.140/15, pode ser considerada um benefício para superar as consequências advindas de uma sociedade brasileira supostamente hiperjudicializada. Para tanto, a pesquisa foi organizada em três capítulos. O primeiro cuida de elucidar a existência de um fenômeno denominado protagonismo judicial que se desdobraria em outras facetas, qual seja; o ativismo judicial, a judicialização da política e a juridificação das relações sociais – todas essencialmente relacionadas ao aumento da ingerência do Poder Judiciário nas esferas da vida. A partir disto, busca-se expor a construção de um senso comum sobre a judicialização da sociedade brasileira, especialmente após as condições institucionais criadas pela Constituição de 1988 e, em seguida, valendo-se dos dados divulgados pelo Conselho Nacional de Justiça, esta pesquisa visa questionar o suposto diagnóstico. Já o segundo capítulo tem por escopo apresentar os argumentos de autores que defendem a mediação judicial como uma proposta de solução à ideia de uma cultura do litígio, traçando seu percurso legislativo até alcançar o marco processual e legal com as Leis nº 13.105 e 13.140, respectivamente. Objetiva-se, ainda, expor as concepções de mediação judicial e extrajudicial com destaque às suas diferenças. O último ponto deste trabalho busca apresentar alguns fundamentos históricos e filosóficos sobre as facetas do protagonismo judicial mediante a exposição das ideias de Axel Honneth, Jürgen Habermas, Ingeborg Maus e Antoine Garapon, e, assim, relacioná-las com a institucionalização da mediação judicial. A dissertação concentra-se, ao cabo, em questionar a capacidade da Lei de Mediação para dirimir os problemas para quais ela foi pensada, sobretudo, porque o Poder Judiciário mantém-se como protagonista na resolução dos conflitos. / This paper aims to investigate whether institutionalizing mediation practices by the Judiciary, through the Law 13.140/15, could be considered beneficial to overcome the consequences from an a supposedly “hyper judicialized” Brazilian society. For this purpose, the research was organized in three chapters. The first one elucidates a phenomenon known as judicial protagonism which would unfold in other facets,, such as: the judicial activism, the judicialization of politics and the juridification of social relationships – all of them essentially related to the increase of Judiciary interference in people’s lives. From this point, the paper aims to expose the construction of a common sense about judicialization of the Brazilian society, especially after the institutional conditions created by the Federal Constitution of 1988 and after that using the data disclosed by the National Justice Council, this paper aims to question the revealed diagnostic. The second chapter aims to present arguments from authors who defend the judicial mediation as a solution to the culture of litigation, tracing its legislative course until the procedural and legal framework with the Laws nº 13.105 and 13.140, respectively. This paper also intends to expose conceptions of judicial and extrajudicial mediation, highlighting their differences. The last topic of this essay aims to show some historical and philosophical grounds about the facets of the judicial protagonism by bringing the ideas of Axel Honneth, Jürgen Habermas, Ingeborg Mausand Antoine Garapon, and, with that, connect them with institutionalization of the judicial mediation. The dissertation focus, at last, on questioning the capacity of Mediation Law to solve the problems it was developed to solve, especially since the Brazilian Judiciary is still the main character of conflict resolutions.