This thesis deals with questions connected with the electronification of the judiciary in the Czech Republic majoring in the civil judicial proceeding. The first part focuses on the description of the background of electronization of judiciary in the Czech Republic, benefits and barriers associated with computerization. The author describes the conditions to implement e-justice (which are reform of judiciary, development of information society or technical readiness). Process of electronification of the judiciary is illustrated by introduction of eJustice project. There are disscused three basic elements of e-justice in the main part of thesis. These are the electronic judicial record, electronic filing and electronic delivery. Author describes the conditions to implement these features, ascertains the current situation and identifies assets and imperfections of actual solution. Main goal of this thesis is to provide reader with the view of the electronification of the judiciary in the Czech Republic and sum up the most importatnt parts of electonical civil judicial proceeding.

This thesis is focused on the performance of judicial power in Czechoslovakia in the period of 1948 -- 1953, that is characterized by almost unlimited influence of the ruling party, the Communist Party of Czechoslovakia, on the entire society. It was associated with a destruction of division of power in the state and with intentional limitations of the independence of judiciary. The aim of the work is to identify and analyse particular components of a specific mechanism that was introduced to enable to influence the judiciary decisions according to power and political interests of the Communist party of Czechoslovakia through administrative bodies, especially Ministry of Justice. For this purpose fundamental changes of the legislation, personnel and also organizational changes in the judiciary were carried out.

En droit français, l’inamovibilité est traditionnellement conçue comme une garantie d’indépendance statutaire attribuée au magistrat du siège de l’ordre judiciaire, afin de le protéger contre le risque d’éviction arbitraire par le Pouvoir politique. Elle est ainsi supposée faire bénéficier le magistrat d’une protection exorbitante par rapport au droit commun de la fonction publique. Déjà considérée comme un « antique et tutélaire principe » au milieu du XIXe siècle, cette garantie a traversé le temps et les régimes politiques, depuis l’époque médiévale jusqu’à aujourd’hui. Erigée en Loi fondamentale du royaume à la veille de la Révolution, elle a été reprise et consacrée par la presque totalité des Constitutions qui se sont succédées depuis 1791. Mais alors qu’elle semble offrir l’image d’un modèle de garantie susceptible d’inspirer le statut d’autres catégories d’agents publics, l’inamovibilité est de manière paradoxale, souvent décrite comme un « mythe ». La présente étude se donne dès lors pour objet de lever cette contradiction, en revenant de manière approfondie et comparative sur la condition et la finalité d’une garantie d’éviction, dont la particularité est d’être étroitement liée à la mission régalienne consistant à rendre la justice. / In French Law, irremovability is traditionally seen as a statutory guarantee of judicial judges’ independence that protects them from being arbitrary evicted by the Political power. Irremovability is then said to be a dispensatory status if compared to public servants normal one. Defined as an « ancient and tutelary principle » at the middle of the 19th Century, this guarantee ran through the ages and the political regimes from medieval times to today. Irremovability of judges was made a Kingdom’s fundamental Law just before the Revolution, and almost every constitution adopted since 1791 has made it a constitutionally sanctioned rule. In the meantime, whereas it could have been seen as a template for other civil servants legal status, irremovability of judges is, paradoxically enough, often described as a « myth ». This study’s aim is thus to solve this contradiction. It offers an in-depth and comparative analysis of the condition and goal of this legal guarantee against eviction – which distinctive feature is to be closely linked with one of the State’s main function: to administer Justice.

Submitted by Haroudo Xavier Filho (haroudo.xavierfo@ufpe.br) on 2016-04-19T13:37:12Z No. of bitstreams: 2 license_rdf: 1232 bytes, checksum: 66e71c371cc565284e70f40736c94386 (MD5) Thesis - doutorado - JOSÉ MÁRIO WANDERLEY GOMES NETO - PPGCP.pdf: 3518425 bytes, checksum: 444d5191f5baf897a0a79d96a01bf1c9 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-19T13:37:12Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 license_rdf: 1232 bytes, checksum: 66e71c371cc565284e70f40736c94386 (MD5) Thesis - doutorado - JOSÉ MÁRIO WANDERLEY GOMES NETO - PPGCP.pdf: 3518425 bytes, checksum: 444d5191f5baf897a0a79d96a01bf1c9 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-07-15 / Por que o Judiciário decidiria a favor do Executivo e contra as suas próprias decisões? Essa questão é explorada teórica e empiricamente com referência ao pedido de suspensão - um mecanismo pelo qual o Poder Executivo nos diversos níveis federativos pode pedir ao Presidente de um Tribunal para suspender os efeitos concretos de uma decisão proferida por órgão judicial de hierarquia inferior. Para responder a questão de pesquisa um conjunto de hipóteses formuladas à luz dos principais modelos teóricos existentes na literatura sobre os processos decisórios das decisões judiciais– legalista, atitudinal e estratégico – são testadas a partir de em uma base dados contendo uma amostra de 319 decisões sobre o pedido de suspensão no STF no período 1993-2012. Os achados dos modelos econométricos estimados (Logit) na tese são consistentes com a interpretação dos modelos estratégico e atitudinal: os juízes atuam como atores que buscam maximizar sua preferências em um contexto de separação de poder e seu padrão decisório é também marcado pela ideologia dos governos responsáveis por sua nomeação. / Why the Judiciary’s bodies would decide in favor of the Executive and against their own decisions? This issue is explored theoretically and empirically with reference to the writ of suspension - a mechanism by which the Executive branch may request the Chief Justice of a Court to suspend the concrete effects of a judgment given by another court of lower hierarchy. To answer the research question a set of assumptions were made based in the main existing theoretical models in the literature on decision-making processes of judicial decisions – legalistic, attitudinal and/or strategic – and were tested from in a database containing a sample of 319 decisions on writ of suspension filled in the Brazilian Supreme Court (Supremo Tribunal Federal) in 1993-2012 period. The findings of the estimated econometric models (Logit) in this thesis are consistent with the interpretation of strategic and attitudinal models: the judges act as actors seeking to maximize their own preferences in the context of separation of power and its decision-making pattern is also marked by the ideology of governments responsible for their appointment.

Made available in DSpace on 2017-06-01T18:17:58Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 dissertacao_flavio_roberto.pdf: 1468065 bytes, checksum: b0048ff6c11160b30e97a0846286e1ff (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008-10-21 / This essay has the objective to appraise, analyze and to interpret what is unconstitutional resiudicata, and in the practical application of jurisprudence of national courts in public law. The Institution of the res iudicata is treated in the Brazilian Law by the Constitutional Text, by the Brazilian Civil Process Code, besides the Law of the Introduction to the Brazilian Civil Code and sparse legislation. Due to the multiplicity of Law subjects taking care of the Institution, for one part of the doctrine, it would not have constitutional protection and it could be modified and even abolished under infraconstitutional norms. Under that premise, it was built the doctrine known as relativism of the judged thing , that links the effects of the resiudicata thing to its normative fundament of validity or the justice of decisum. Once the chosen subject has its very own characteristics of almost exclusive development in the national doctrine it was privileged the doctrine exam and national jurisprudence, not failing to remember, nevertheless, the contributions of the foreign doctrine, when, effectively, they could support the analyzes of the approached issues in this Essay. The text presents the origins of the res iudicata and classifies the essential process elements for the understanding of the Institution as a process-juridical category. It examines the principle of juridical reliability, its historical evolution and its interpretation in the current law, as well as, the nature of the judged thing as a normative category, to the Institution position in the Brazilian Constitutional text. It also mentions, the juridical nature of the formed sentences in rejoinder to the present Federal Constitution and the effects of the doctrinaire positioning that states the no existence of the unconstitutional res iudicata. Yet, it proceeds, to the study of the new writing of the articles 475-L § 1st and 741, single clause, of the Brazilian Process Civil Code, consolidated by the Law number 11.232/2005, that partially accepted, the above indicated theory. At last, it dedicates considerations on representative judicial decisions of practical difficulties that the application of the Institution has had in the brazilian jurisprudence / Esta Dissertação tem por objetivo conceituar, analisar e interpretar a chamada coisa julgada inconstitucional no campo doutrinário, no seu tratamento normativo e na aplicação prática da jurisprudência dos tribunais nacionais, no âmbito do direito público. O Instituto da coisa julgada é tratado no direito brasileiro pelo Texto Constitucional, pelo Código de Processo Civil Brasileiro e pela Lei de Introdução ao Código Civil Brasileiro, além de legislação esparsa. Ante a multiplicidade de esferas normativas cuidando do Instituto, para uma parte da doutrina, ele não teria proteção constitucional e poderia ser modificado e até abolido por normas infraconstitucionais. Por tal premissa, foi construída doutrina conhecida como relativização da coisa julgada , que vincula os efeitos da coisa julgada ao seu fundamento normativo de validade ou à justiça do decisum. Face as características muito próprias do tema escolhido, - de desenvolvimento quase que exclusivo na doutrina nacional -, privilegiou-se o exame da doutrina e jurisprudência nacionais, sem olvidar, no entanto, as contribuições da doutrina estrangeira, quando, efetivamente, puderam auxiliar na análise das questões abordadas nesta Dissertação. O texto apresenta as origens da coisa julgada e conceitua os elementos processuais essenciais para a compreensão do Instituto como categoria jurídico-processual. Examina o princípio da segurança jurídica, sua evolução histórica e sua interpretação no direito atual, bem como a natureza da coisa julgada como categoria normativa, face a posição que o Instituto ocupa no texto constitucional brasileiro. Aborda, também, a natureza jurídica das sentenças formadas em contrariedade à Constituição Federal vigente e os efeitos do posicionamento doutrinário que apregoa a inexistência da coisa julgada inconstitucional. Procede, ainda, ao estudo da nova redação dos arts. 475-L § 1º e 741, parágrafo único, do Código de Processo Civil brasileiro, cristalizada pela Lei nº 11.232/2005, que acolheu, ao menos em parte, a teoria acima indicada. Por fim, dedica considerações sobre decisões judiciais representativas das dificuldades práticas que a aplicação do Instituto tem gerado na jurisprudência brasileira

Made available in DSpace on 2017-06-01T18:17:58Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 dissertacao_isabela_lessa.pdf: 674891 bytes, checksum: ab40f36e026b29ab7db50af2aa8072e1 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2008-09-18 / We live in a time of redefinition of the significant, building new concepts ad equating with the complexity of modern life. In the same way, the comprehension we have from the jurisdiction is in a delay with the real transformation happened between the knowledge of modernity- secularization of law and the bourgeoisie revolutions- and the present date. The recognizing of the human character from the science of comprehension- hermeneutic- as well as the historical development of the human being lead us to question what is the judicial activism. We start analysing the separation of power mechanism who granted the political liberation, besides bourgeoisie liberty of thought, that therefore are constitutionals guarantees as individual rights. The second world war created a new concern about the implementation of fundamental rights, that since the begging of the twentieth century, thru the social rights, men`s economical liberation and brings the law`s sovereignty to crisis, therefore it`s evident the emergence of a review on the three powers theory since the greater effectiveness of those rights allowed a greater judicial control of the others powers, changing our pre-comprehension of judicature. Hence, the judicial activism is the doctrine defending a judicial activity not neutral but committed with the higher constitutional state - not more only democratic - intersubjective value: fundamental rights and a dignifying human condition / Vivemos uma época de redefinição dos significantes, construindo novos conceitos com adequação à complexidade da vida moderna. Assim, também, a denotação que nós temos da jurisdição está defasada em relação às alterações reais ocorridas no lapso temporal entre o arcabouço da modernidade secularização do direito e revoluções burguesas e a presente data. O reconhecimento do caráter humano da ciência da compreensão hermenêutica bem como da historicidade do homem nos levaram a perquirir sobre o que seria ativismo judicial. Começamos analisando o mecanismo de separação dos poderes que viabilizou a liberação política, além do livre pensamento da burguesia, que passam a ser assegurados como direitos individuais nas constituições. A segunda guerra propicia um volver de olhar para a necessidade de preocupação com a implementação dos direitos fundamentais, que no início do século XX também passam a prever, via direitos prestacionais, a liberação econômica do homem e coloca em crise o primado da lei, assim torna evidente a emergência de uma revisão da teoria tripartite já que a premência de efetividade de tais direitos fomentou um maior controle do judiciário sobre os demais poderes, alterando nossa pré-compreensão da judicatura. Assim, o ativismo judicial é a doutrina que defende uma atuação da magistratura distanciada da noção de neutralidade, mas comprometida com o valor intersubjetivo de maior importância em um Estado não mais democrático de direito apenas, mas, sobretudo constitucional o dos direitos fundamentais indispensáveis a uma condição humana digna

Made available in DSpace on 2017-06-01T18:18:21Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 hugo_vinicius_castro_jimenez.pdf: 2549326 bytes, checksum: 465be66ea5015fb25ca874234595ed78 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2013-04-05 / This Study, intended being accomplished, views, as an event, the judiciary power's challenges in Contemporaneity. One must take into account the fact that there is beyond an overburden concerning the above-mentioned power, here, in study, as well as a greater complexity in its lawsuits and so one demands from the Judiciary Power further than a differentiated and positive propense posture - one demands - dexterous instruments in order to confront postmodern society's new question's judicial liability and life judicialization function, derived from the abovementioned problematization, give, at the end, opportunity to a Constitution Judiciary Interpreter more careful Study whenever vindicated or not, so that this Study searches - tries - observing, beyond the controversy regarding to the new judicial posture whether it is favourable or not to the collectivity. First of all, one means finding out such a phenomenon and the role it develops in the so-called new constitutional construction. This present proposal consists in accurating the studies produced in doctrinal and academic level and verifying the phenomenology under allusion through jurisprudence and judged ones in proper annex. / É o estudo, proposto a ser efetivado, considera por evento os desafios do Judiciário na contemporaneidade, visto que existe além de uma sobrecarga ao poder em estudo, também uma maior complexidade nas demandas e assim exige-se do Judiciário a mais que uma postura diferenciada e proativa, instrumentos hábeis para confrontar os novos questionamentos da sociedade pós-moderna. A função do ativismo judicial e da judicialização da vida oriundas da problematização referida, ensejam, por fim, o estudo mais apurado de um Judiciário Intérprete da Constituição sempre que vindicado ou não, de modo que o estudo presente procura observar além da controvérsia de essa nova postura judicial ser favorável ou não a coletividade, antes disso objetiva-se constatar tal fenômeno e o papel que o mesmo desenvolve na construção da agnominada nova hermenêutica constitucional. A proposta presente consiste em acurar os estudos produzidos, em nível doutrinário e acadêmico, e constatar a fenomenologia em alusão, através de jurisprudência e de julgados, em anexo apropriados.

Submitted by Biblioteca Central (biblioteca@unicap.br) on 2018-08-21T17:26:18Z No. of bitstreams: 2 andre_galvao_vasconcelos_almeida_revisada.pdf: 932857 bytes, checksum: fc1c08288059699bbd6cf52f46d8ec68 (MD5) license_rdf: 0 bytes, checksum: d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-08-21T17:26:18Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 andre_galvao_vasconcelos_almeida_revisada.pdf: 932857 bytes, checksum: fc1c08288059699bbd6cf52f46d8ec68 (MD5) license_rdf: 0 bytes, checksum: d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014-05-22 / As a reaction to the hyper complexity that gripped acentric (or rather, polycentric) (post) modern society, the words of the legislator began to have character increasingly vague and imprecise, giving leeway to the judge in carrying out the law. These legislative techniques represent true pores/openings of the legal system in the search for greater dynamism and adaptability to social reality. Transfer the dogma of strict tight legal security codes, to the idea of "justice" built in the process context. While important, this opening may cause "side effect" of producing disparate decisions, raising the possibility that similar cases have different treatment, generating unpredictability, mistrust and especially violation of the principle of equality. Moreover, with the internalization of social contingencies at a high level, the legal system becomes potentially more complex and is having difficulties in their ability to complexity reduction, consistent generalization of normative expectations and, consequently, differentiated production of communication (legal). In the light of the theory of Niklas Luhmann, we seek to demonstrate the importance of judicial precedents in the Brazilian legal system, which would appear as able to promote (re) stabilization of normative expectations symbolically generalized media, restoring confidence and the legal system unit, representing at the same time, stability and dynamics, legal consistency and social adequacy. / Como reação à hipercomplexidade que tomou conta da sociedade (pós)moderna acêntrica (ou melhor, policêntrica), as palavras do legislador passaram a ter caráter cada vez mais vago e impreciso, dando margem de liberdade ao juiz na realização do direito. Essas técnicas legislativas representam verdadeiros poros/aberturas do sistema jurídico na busca por uma maior dinamicidade e adaptabilidade à realidade social. Transfere-se o dogma da segurança jurídica estrita cerrada nos códigos, para a ideia de “justiça” construída no âmbito processual. Embora importante, essa abertura pode provocar o “efeito colateral” de produzir decisões cada vez mais díspares, aumentando a possibilidade de que casos iguais tenham tratamento diferente, gerando imprevisibilidade, desconfiança e, sobretudo, violação ao princípio da igualdade. Além disso, com a interiorização das contingências sociais em alto nível, o sistema jurídico torna-se potencialmente mais complexo e vem apresentando dificuldades em sua capacidade de redução de complexidade, generalização congruente de expectativas normativas e, consequentemente, produção de comunicação (jurídica) diferenciada. Assim, à luz da teoria dos sistemas de Niklas Luhmann, busca-se demostrar a importância dos precedentes judiciais no sistema jurídico brasileiro, de modo que passariam a figurar como meios de comunicação simbolicamente generalizados aptos a promover a (re)estabilização das expectativas normativas, restaurando a confiança e a unidade do sistema jurídico, representando, ao mesmo tempo, estabilidade e dinamicidade, consistência jurídica e adequação social.

O objetivo desta tese é analisar como e por que a normatividade do sistema interamericano de direitos humanos sobre o tema da justiça de transição pôde exercer impacto sobre questões de direitos humanos no Brasil, Colômbia, México e Peru. Partindo da abordagem emergente na literatura de que os efeitos dos regimes internacionais de direitos humanos são condicionados por fatores domésticos dos países aos quais se dirigem suas normas e pressões, a pesquisa buscou delinear como a política doméstica influencia e medeia o impacto potencial dessas normas internacionais que compõem a cascata de justiça, salientando o papel de organizações não governamentais (ONGs) de direitos humanos e da cúpula do Judiciário local, já que tais atores são centrais tanto para o processo de justiça de transição quanto para a ativação e aplicação da normatividade do sistema interamericano. Nesse sentido, a partir de um desenho de pesquisa qualitativo que se baseou na realização de entrevistas semiestruturadas com atores da sociedade civil e magistrados envolvidos com a temática, além da consulta a fontes secundárias e sentenças judiciais, testamos a hipótese segundo a qual o sistema interamericano adquirirá aderência doméstica se e quando esses atores forem capazes de entendê-lo e instrumentalizá-lo como um mecanismo efetivo para o seu empoderamento. Assim, contrariamente à maioria dos estudos que privilegiam a ação do Executivo para explicar o impacto de normas e pressões internacionais de direitos humanos, nossas conclusões apontam para a necessidade de que as agendas de pesquisa sobre o regime internacional de direitos humanos e justiça de transição atentem mais para o papel e perfil dos atores judiciais e organizações litigantes de direitos humanos, pois os avanços em termos de direitos humanos passam muitas vezes pela mobilização de uma normatividade internacional que não pode ser entendida de maneira divorciada da agência de ONGs e magistrados. / The aim of this dissertation is to analyze how and why the norms of the Inter-American Human Rights System on transitional justice exerted an impact on human rights issues in Brazil, Colombia, Mexico and Peru. Based on the emerging theoretical approach according to which the effects of international human rights regimes are conditioned by domestic factors of the target-countries, our research seeks to unravel how domestic politics influences and mediates the potential impact of these international norms that comprise the justice cascade, highlighting the role of human rights non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and the local higher courts, since these actors are central both to the process of transitional justice and for the activation and enforcement of the Inter-American systems rules. In this sense, a qualitative research design based on semi-structured interviews with civil society actors and judges involved with the theme was adopted, in addition to the consultation of secondary sources and courts rulings. Then, from the analysis of this material, we tested the hypothesis that the Inter-American system will have a domestic impact if and when NGOs and local judges are able to understand and use it as an effective mechanism for their own \"empowerment\". Therefore, contrary to most studies that focus on Executives actions to explain the impact of international human rights norms, our conclusions urge the research agendas on the human rights international regime and transitional justice to pay more attention to the role and profile of judicial actors and domestic litigants, since human rights advacements are anchored on the mobilization of international norms that cannot be understood separately from the agency of NGOs and magistrates

"The judiciary in Zimbabwe used to be viewed as a progressive bench recognised for its activism, particularly its purposive approach in interpreting the Bill of Rights to ensure protection of human rights. It was one of the best Commonwealth judiciaries, which was inspired by international standards in interpreting human rights and at the same time contributed to the origination of normative standards through its decisions. Although Zimbabwe is a dualist system, the judiciary accepted and drew inspiration from international human rights treaties. The Supreme Court (SC) under Chief Justice (CJ) Gubbay (the Gubbay bench) made several progressive pronouncements that favoured the promotion and protection of human rights. In tandem with its tradition of judicial independence, the judiciary interpreted draconian legislation in favour of human rights often striking down the offensive clauses in legislation. Indeed the perception towards the judiciary by the common person was that of a protector of human rights. One landmark human rights decision on the Land Reform Programme (LRP) stated that farm invasions were unlawful and an affront to section 16 of the Constitution. The SC ordered the executive to take necessary measures to ensure that invasions were sanctioned. It further requested the executive to furnish a plan of action for the LRP. The execuitve did not welcome this ruling and the SC judges wre hounded out of office in a clear culmination of judiciary-executive tension. A new bench came in under CJ Chidyausiku (the Chidyausiku bench). This bench made several rulings that took away individual property rights without justification. In a clear shift of jurisprudential ideology, the current bench has not engaged in activism resulting in less, if not no, protection of human rights. The disparity in the jurisprudence is evident in other cases. The current bench seems to have abrogated its mandate to protect human rights. This study is thus prompted to investigate why the different benches in Zimbabwe have produced totally variant jurisprudence, particularly in light of the fact that the judiciary is operating under the same laws and is appointed under the same procedures as before. ... Chapter 1 sets out the focus and content of the study. Chapter 2 gives a national framework for human rights protection in Zimbabwe. This looks at the structure of courts in Zimbabwe. Special emphasis is placed on the SC as the court that has the prime mandate of protecting human rights. Constitutional guarantees for the independence of the judiciary and the Bill of Rights, among others, is analysed. Chapter 3 deals with human rights jurisprudence of the SC benches. The chapter focuses on approach of the benches to human rights protection. It examines the approach to procedural and technicalities that often hinder human rights litigation and protection such as standing, delay, interpretation, compliance with court orders and use of international instruments. Chapter 4 focuses on the experiences from Uganda and analyses the approach of the Ugandan courts. Chapter 5 consists of best practices from the two jurisdictions, conclusion and recommendations for the Zimbabwean judiciary." -- Introduction. / Thesis (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa)) -- University of Pretoria, 2005. / Prepared under the supervision of Professor Frederick Jjuuko at Human Rights and Peace Centre, Faculty of Law, Makerere University in Uganda / http://www.chr.up.ac.za/academic_pro/llm1/dissertations.html / Centre for Human Rights / LLM