Submitted by William Justo Figueiro (williamjf) on 2015-07-27T20:40:25Z No. of bitstreams: 1 10d.pdf: 3963537 bytes, checksum: 5f2e51020af3fcf54a3afeeef9a5c12c (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2015-07-27T20:40:25Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 10d.pdf: 3963537 bytes, checksum: 5f2e51020af3fcf54a3afeeef9a5c12c (MD5) Previous issue date: 2013-07-19 / FUNDECT - Fundação de Apoio ao Desenvolvimento do Ensino, Ciência e Tecnologia do Estado de Mato Grosso do Sul / A pesquisa que originou a presente tese teve por objetivo investigar acerca da possibilidade de, no marco do constitucionalismo contemporâneo, e nos limites institucionais do Estado democrático de direito, condicionar a atuação da jurisdição para a proteção dos direitos sociais ao prévio esgotamento das instâncias democráticas ordinárias. O marco teórico adotado foi o constitucionalismo garantista de Luigi Ferrajoli. Ficou demonstrado no curso da investigação, que no âmbito desse paradigma vigora uma concepção tridimensional de democracia que, todavia, se acha vinculada à regra clássica da separação de poderes, além de atuar como condição de possibilidade para um maior protagonismo comunitário com vistas à efetivação dos direitos sociais. Concluiu-se que o prévio esgotamento das instâncias democráticas ordinárias, por meio da atuação de grupos e comunidades de destinatários dos serviços públicos, é elemento conformador da legitimidade democrática da jurisdição para a proteção dos direitos sociais, porquanto ao mesmo tempo em que preserva a integridade do princípio clássico da separação de poderes, assegura o espaço reservado à democracia política na sua dupla dimensão: representativa e participativa. Ademais, isso implica uma radicalização da democracia cuja consequência é o estabelecimento de uma nova gramática para o modelo de processo das ações coletivas, operando uma inversão na qual a ênfase deve passar das tutelas coletivas aos coletivos de tutela, o que aumenta as potencialidades de efetivação dos direitos sociais. / The research that led to this thesis aimed to investigate about the possibility of, in the context of contemporary constitutionalism and the institutional limits of the democratic State, conditioning the performance of jurisdiction for the protection of social rights to the prior exhaustion of ordinary democratic institutions. The theoretical framework adopted was the guarantor constitutionalism of Luigi Ferrajoli. What was shown in the course of the investigation was that within this paradigm is enforced a three dimensional view, however, it is found bound to the traditional rule of separation of powers, in addition to acting as a condition of possibility for a greater community role with a view to effecting the social rights. It was concluded that the prior exhaustion of ordinary democratic institutions, through the work of groups and communities of recipients of public services, is the conforming element to democratic legitimacy of jurisdiction for the protection of social rights, because at the same time it preserves the integrity the classical principle of separation of powers, it ensures the space for political democracy in its double dimension: representative and participatory. Moreover, this implies a radicalization in democracy whose consequence is the establishment of a new grammar for the process model of collective actions, operating a reversal in which the emphasis should move from collective tutelage to the collective protection, which increases the potential for fulfillment of social rights.

This thesis argues that pluralism and diversity pose a more fundamental challenge to liberal constitutionalism than is sometimes recognised by liberal political theorists. While the challenges presented by moral pluralism at the philosophical level, and by cultural diversity at the socio-cultural level, have received a great deal of attention in recent political thought, the background within which these themes become salient has not always been fully acknowledged. What is new in the modern world is not so much diversity of lifestyles, but the disintegration of frameworks that traditionally provided an unproblematic basis for political authority. What this modern challenge forces us to confront then, is the idea that ‘the people’ who are subject to law, are also, as citizens, the ultimate source of political authority. I consider in detail the work of two contemporary political theorists who have provided among the most sustained and far-reaching attempts to respond to this challenge, Charles Taylor and Jürgen Habermas. Both make a significant contribution to responding to the contemporary situation of pluralism by taking on board the ‘dialogical’ nature of identity, and the role of the ‘people’ as the ultimate source of political power. However each places a heavy reliance on a privileged standpoint that may shield political judgement from the full implications of modern pluralism: Habermas, by appealing to ‘post-conventional morality’ and Taylor, by appealing to an incipient teleology.

Esse trabalho se propõe a demonstração que o atual procedimento fiscal para o lançamento de ofício carece de um realinhado com os valores constitucionais da democracia e eficiência através da introdução do direito ao contraditório antes da constituição do crédito tributário. Apesar da redemocratização do país e o reconhecimento e valorização do constitucionalismo como sistema jurídico, ainda se adota no Brasil um sistema inquisitório no procedimento de constituição dos créditos tributários pelo lançamento de ofício. O que significa a vedação ao contribuinte da iniciativa de manifestação para demonstrar a inocorrência dos fatos lhe imputados pela fiscalização. A sua participação durante o procedimento se caracteriza pela passividade, quando se limita ao atendimento das intimações para a apresentação das provas e esclarecimentos do interesse da administração tributária; portanto, o contribuinte não participa da formação do ato administrativo de lançamento tributário, apenas cumpre deveres legais. Assim, procuramos demonstrar que apesar da existência de um processo administrativo fiscal após o lançamento e a suspensão da cobrança, o crédito tributário constituído provoca efeitos jurídicos imediatos negativos aos contribuintes, o que justifica o contraditório durante o próprio procedimento de lançamento e não apenas durante o processo que se forma posteriormente. Também enfatiza-se o reconhecimento desse direito ao apontar a contradição entre a necessária colaboração do contribuinte para a revelação dos fatos geradores de efeitos tributários contra si mesmo e a adoção no Brasil de um sistema inquisitório tomado emprestado dos inquéritos policiais. / This lecture aims to demonstrate that the current tax procedure for the assessment needs of realignement with the constitutional values of democracy and efficiency through the recognizing the right to contest before the tax levying. Despite the democratization of the country and the recognizing and valuing of constitutionalism as a right legal system, we adopts in Brazil an inquisitorial system in the procedure of assessment. What means the prohibition for the taxpayer to prove for authority the taxable event does not happen. His participation during the procedure is characterized by passivity, restricted for anwering legal notices targeting to produce evidences against himself, everything according for interest of tax authority; therefore, the taxpayer does not participate in formation of the administrative act of tax assessment, only accomplish juridical duties. So, we will try to demonstrate that despite the existing of a tax administrative process after assessment and the suspension of the collection, the tax liability has negative immediate effect to taxpayers, which justify the contesting during the assessment procedure instead of only during the process filed later. The recognition of this right is emphasized by pointing out the contradiction between the necessary cooperation of the taxpayer for the revealing of the tax events against himself and the adoption in Brazil of an one-sided investigation system like a police inquiry.

O objetivo do presente trabalho é demonstrar que uma releitura dos princípios do contraditório e do dever de motivar as decisões judiciais, sob a ótica da maior participação dos jurisdicionados, tem o condão de alcançar a esperada legitimidade democrática da atuação judicial. Para tanto, antes de adentrar ao cerne da questão, buscou-se analisar ordenamentos de tradições jurídicas distintas, civil law e common law, a fim de delinear as perspectivas que referidos sistemas enxergavam o dever de motivar a decisão judicial. O estudo convergiu para o momento atual do direito, iniciado na segunda metade do séc. XX com o movimento de constitucionalização e, consequentemente, judicialização dos direitos. Uma das maiores críticas ao momento vivido é o amplo espaço interpretativo do juiz, abrindo as portas para a discricionariedade, o que foi combatido e rechaçado tendo como parâmetro as origens do instituto. Passado referido ponto, discutiu-se sobre as evoluções e novas tendências que circundam os princípios do contraditório e do dever de motivar, cuja finalidade foi demonstrar a estreita conexão entre as normas. Conclusão inexorável foi que ambos compõem a base das garantias processuais que legitimam a atuação judicial democrática. Por fim, procurou-se tecer alguns comentários sobre os equívocos cometidos na interpretação do princípio do convencimento judicial, e como essa perspectiva pode ser alterada com as diretivas presentes no projeto do novo Código de Processo Civil, haja vista que suas previsões abraçam boa parte das ideias debatidas no presente trabalho. / This work aims to demonstrate the repercussion brought up by a rereading of the adversarial rule and the reasoning of the judicial decisions rule, from the perspective of the greater participation of the citizens, and its effects to achieve the expected democratic legitimacy of the judicial act. In order to reach the main point of this paper, the methodology adopted includes an analysis about legal systems of different traditions, civil law and common law, with the objective to outline the perspectives that those systems had seen the duty to reasoning a judicial decision. In this context, the present study converged to the current Law perspectives, started in the second half of the 20th century with the movement of a constitutionalisation and, therefore, an increasing judicialization of rights. One of the main criticism of the current moment, is the broad space for judicial interpretation, opening the doors for discretion, which was opposed and repelled, in light of the parameters leaded by the origins of the institute. After this aspect, it was discussed about the new developments and trends that surround the adversarial rule and the reasoning of the judicial decisions rule, all in order to prove the close connection between such rules. The conclusion demonstrated that both standards compose the basis of the procedural guarantees that legitimating the democratic judicial act. Finally, comments were made about the equivocal understanding of the motivated free conviction rule, and how this view can be changed with the perspectives in the bill of law that represents the new Civil Procedure Code, considering that their provisions enfold a great part of the ideas of this paper.

Esse trabalho se propõe a demonstração que o atual procedimento fiscal para o lançamento de ofício carece de um realinhado com os valores constitucionais da democracia e eficiência através da introdução do direito ao contraditório antes da constituição do crédito tributário. Apesar da redemocratização do país e o reconhecimento e valorização do constitucionalismo como sistema jurídico, ainda se adota no Brasil um sistema inquisitório no procedimento de constituição dos créditos tributários pelo lançamento de ofício. O que significa a vedação ao contribuinte da iniciativa de manifestação para demonstrar a inocorrência dos fatos lhe imputados pela fiscalização. A sua participação durante o procedimento se caracteriza pela passividade, quando se limita ao atendimento das intimações para a apresentação das provas e esclarecimentos do interesse da administração tributária; portanto, o contribuinte não participa da formação do ato administrativo de lançamento tributário, apenas cumpre deveres legais. Assim, procuramos demonstrar que apesar da existência de um processo administrativo fiscal após o lançamento e a suspensão da cobrança, o crédito tributário constituído provoca efeitos jurídicos imediatos negativos aos contribuintes, o que justifica o contraditório durante o próprio procedimento de lançamento e não apenas durante o processo que se forma posteriormente. Também enfatiza-se o reconhecimento desse direito ao apontar a contradição entre a necessária colaboração do contribuinte para a revelação dos fatos geradores de efeitos tributários contra si mesmo e a adoção no Brasil de um sistema inquisitório tomado emprestado dos inquéritos policiais. / This lecture aims to demonstrate that the current tax procedure for the assessment needs of realignement with the constitutional values of democracy and efficiency through the recognizing the right to contest before the tax levying. Despite the democratization of the country and the recognizing and valuing of constitutionalism as a right legal system, we adopts in Brazil an inquisitorial system in the procedure of assessment. What means the prohibition for the taxpayer to prove for authority the taxable event does not happen. His participation during the procedure is characterized by passivity, restricted for anwering legal notices targeting to produce evidences against himself, everything according for interest of tax authority; therefore, the taxpayer does not participate in formation of the administrative act of tax assessment, only accomplish juridical duties. So, we will try to demonstrate that despite the existing of a tax administrative process after assessment and the suspension of the collection, the tax liability has negative immediate effect to taxpayers, which justify the contesting during the assessment procedure instead of only during the process filed later. The recognition of this right is emphasized by pointing out the contradiction between the necessary cooperation of the taxpayer for the revealing of the tax events against himself and the adoption in Brazil of an one-sided investigation system like a police inquiry.

O objetivo do presente trabalho é demonstrar que uma releitura dos princípios do contraditório e do dever de motivar as decisões judiciais, sob a ótica da maior participação dos jurisdicionados, tem o condão de alcançar a esperada legitimidade democrática da atuação judicial. Para tanto, antes de adentrar ao cerne da questão, buscou-se analisar ordenamentos de tradições jurídicas distintas, civil law e common law, a fim de delinear as perspectivas que referidos sistemas enxergavam o dever de motivar a decisão judicial. O estudo convergiu para o momento atual do direito, iniciado na segunda metade do séc. XX com o movimento de constitucionalização e, consequentemente, judicialização dos direitos. Uma das maiores críticas ao momento vivido é o amplo espaço interpretativo do juiz, abrindo as portas para a discricionariedade, o que foi combatido e rechaçado tendo como parâmetro as origens do instituto. Passado referido ponto, discutiu-se sobre as evoluções e novas tendências que circundam os princípios do contraditório e do dever de motivar, cuja finalidade foi demonstrar a estreita conexão entre as normas. Conclusão inexorável foi que ambos compõem a base das garantias processuais que legitimam a atuação judicial democrática. Por fim, procurou-se tecer alguns comentários sobre os equívocos cometidos na interpretação do princípio do convencimento judicial, e como essa perspectiva pode ser alterada com as diretivas presentes no projeto do novo Código de Processo Civil, haja vista que suas previsões abraçam boa parte das ideias debatidas no presente trabalho. / This work aims to demonstrate the repercussion brought up by a rereading of the adversarial rule and the reasoning of the judicial decisions rule, from the perspective of the greater participation of the citizens, and its effects to achieve the expected democratic legitimacy of the judicial act. In order to reach the main point of this paper, the methodology adopted includes an analysis about legal systems of different traditions, civil law and common law, with the objective to outline the perspectives that those systems had seen the duty to reasoning a judicial decision. In this context, the present study converged to the current Law perspectives, started in the second half of the 20th century with the movement of a constitutionalisation and, therefore, an increasing judicialization of rights. One of the main criticism of the current moment, is the broad space for judicial interpretation, opening the doors for discretion, which was opposed and repelled, in light of the parameters leaded by the origins of the institute. After this aspect, it was discussed about the new developments and trends that surround the adversarial rule and the reasoning of the judicial decisions rule, all in order to prove the close connection between such rules. The conclusion demonstrated that both standards compose the basis of the procedural guarantees that legitimating the democratic judicial act. Finally, comments were made about the equivocal understanding of the motivated free conviction rule, and how this view can be changed with the perspectives in the bill of law that represents the new Civil Procedure Code, considering that their provisions enfold a great part of the ideas of this paper.

[pt] A centralidade assumida pelo STF na cena política brasileira tem suscitado diversas reflexões teóricas sobre o papel a ser exercido pela jurisdição constitucional e sobre sua legitimidade democrática. No âmbito latino-americano, muito tem se falado em um novo constitucionalismo caracterizado, dentre outros aspectos, pela ampliação da gama de direitos previstos e pelo fortalecimento do Judiciário. O presente trabalho tem por objetivo discutir a atuação do Supremo Tribunal Federal em face das perspectivas criadas pelas teorias que buscam justificar seu protagonismo. Para tanto, parte-se da premissa de que a análise crítica do fenômeno deve contemplar não apenas os elementos jurídicos, mas também a natureza política de muitas das escolhas realizadas pela corte e por seus membros. Nessa linha, são trazidos alguns julgamentos históricos do tribunal, escolhidos para demonstrar como ele construiu seu personagem ao longo do tempo, dando destaque tanto para as dimensões políticas como jurídicas de sua atuação. Em seguida, discutem-se as possibilidades de desenhos institucionais em países marcados por fortes desigualdades sociais, dentro de um contexto de entusiasmo com o desempenho das cortes constitucionais na efetivação de garantias básicas da cidadania. Após este panorama teórico, o trabalho se debruça sobre a realidade empírica da atuação do tribunal, verificando em que medida sua conduta corresponde às expectativas criadas em torno das capacidades institucionais da jurisdição constitucional. / [en] The central role assumed by the Federal Supreme Court in the Brazilian political scene has raised various theoretical considerations about the part that the constitutional jurisdiction will play, and about its democratic legitimacy. In the Latin-American context, a lot has been said about a new constitutionalism, which is characterized, among other aspects, by a greater scope of prescribed rights and by the strengthening of the judiciary. The present work intends to discuss the Federal Supreme Court’s practice, taking in consideration perspectives created by theories that seek to justify its protagonism. For this purpose, this work assumes that the critical analysis of the phenomenon must contemplate not only legal elements, but also the political nature of many of the choices made by the Court and its members. Therefore, historical judgments of the Court were selected to demonstrate how it has built its persona through time, highlighting both the political and legal dimensions of its action. After that, this work will discuss institutional designs possibilities in countries characterized by strong social inequalities, inside a context of social excitement about the performance of constitutional courts in implementing basic citizenship guarantees. After the theoretical overview, the research approaches the empirical reality of Court practices, verifying to what extent its conducts correspond to the expectationsvcreated around the institutional abilities of constitutional jurisdiction.

La question de l'intervention armée pour établir la démocratie avait été étudiée par les libéraux au XIXème siècle. Certains d'entre eux l'avaient combattue au nom du principe selon lequel la liberté devait être uniquement l'apanage des peuples qui la conquièrent eux-mêmes et non par le bon vouloir de nations étrangères. On a souvent parlé d'ingérence humanitaire pour défendre l'idée que l'assistance humanitaire imposait une intervention dans un État en dépit du fait que celui-ci ne l'avait ni sollicité, ni acceptée. Dans le même sens, d'aucuns ont fait référence à l'hypothèse de l'ingérence démocratique et donc à là démocratisation de l'État par la coercition militaire quand une assistance extérieure se prétend légitime pour renverser un régime puis instaurer une démocratie. La promotion de la démocratie a été invoquée à plusieurs reprises lors de la création de missions internationales de maintien de la paix et a pu justifier des opérations d'assistance et de vérifications des élections. Si la démocratie demeure un objectif légitime, pour autant, le droit international ne la consacre pas comme un droit objectif. À la veille de l'opération américaine « Liberté en Irak » du 20 mars 2003, il n'est pas démontré une opinio juris en faveur d'une nouvelle exception à la règle d'interdiction du recours à la force posée par la Charte des Nations Unies. À l'héritage brutal du régime baasiste d'antan a succédé tout aussi brutalement un héritage américain qui rythme désormais le quotidien irakien devenu otage des effets aléatoires d'une « greffe démocratique ». / The question of the armed intervention in order to establish democracy had been studied by the liberals in the XIXth Century. Some of them had fought it in the name of the principle according to which the freedom had to be only the privilege of peoples who conquer it themselves and not by the goodwill of foreign nations. We often spoke about humanitarian intervention to defend the idea that assistance imposed an intervention in a State in spite of the fact that this one did not have it either requested or accepted. In the same direction, some people made reference to the hypothesis of the democratic intervention and thus to the democratization of the state by the military coercion when an outside assistance claims itself justifiable to overthrow a regime then establish a democracy. The promotion on democracy it has been put forward several times during the creation of international missions of preservation of the peace and was able to justify operations of assistance and checks of elections. If democracy remains a legitimate objective, however, the international law does not dedicate it as an objective right. On the eve of the American operation "Iraqi Freedom" of march 20th 2003, it is not demonstrated that an opinio juris in favor of a new exception in the rule of ban on the resort to force laid down by the Charter of the United Nations. The rough inheritance of the baath regime of former days has been followed brutally by an American inheritance which gives rhythm from now on to the Iraqi everyday life which has become a hostage of the random effects of a "democratic transplant".

Aim of this Diploma Thesis is to have a closer look at current powers of National Parliaments of the Member States to influence legislative process of the European Union. The main question is how do National Parliaments control legislative process in practise. Theoretical Framework is based on a debate about Democratic Legitimacy of the European Union. First the term needs to be defined and basic arguments about the (non)existence of Democratic deficit need to be introduced, then the research question can be introduced. The main focus is on Early Warning Mechanism and a process of issueing of reasoned opinions. An assumption is that through a process of issueing those reasoned opinions by National Parliaments that consist of a democratic elected political parties a Democratic Legitimacy of the European Union could be strenghtened. It is a one-case study of Czech Parliament. All the reasoned opinions, that Czech Senate and Czech Chamber of Deputies issued, will be analysed.

Diploma thesis " Democratic deficit of the EU: options of evolvement" deals with democracy and democratic legitimacy of the European Union. It represents a particular concept of the EU's democratic deficit, which is ambiguous term, but generally indicates a lack of democracy- particularly the lack of popular participation in the governance or a lack of democratic legitimacy of EU institutions and decision-making. The aim of my work was, according to the hypotheses to determine what is causing the EU's democratic deficit, whether it is a serious problem that should be addressed at European level, and if so, what are the possibilities for minimizing or further evolvement. To explore this issue further, I examine the theory of democratic legitimacy in the introduction and divide it into the "input and output" legitimacy. Subsequently, I also introduced methodology and the current debate on democratic deficit in the leading periodicals, dealing with the EU and think tanks. The second part deals with the history of the democratic deficit and its various definitions, follows with a presentation of my two hypotheses dealing with the question whether or not the EU's democratic deficit is a problem. In the third part, my two hypotheses are tested on the project of the Single European Sky, which aims to...