Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:23:17Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Luciana Mellario do Prado.pdf: 845211 bytes, checksum: 65abdd77c5cd6f8c4f56aaf00cc09e07 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2014-09-26 / The current study aims at analyzing the phenomenon of the attorney s litigation in bad faith, which attorney, as an indispensable agent of the administration of Justice, must not only apply his/her best efforts to achieve a favorable solution for his/her client, but also act in order to correctly conduct legal proceedings. During an attorney s work, then, if the same employs his/her technical expertise to try and obtain an illegal advantage, through quirk means that might twist the regular proceeding or result of a lawsuit, that attorney s own litigation in bad faith may be characterized. Thus, the purposes of the current study are: a) to conceptualize the attorney and the legal discipline that regulates his/her work; b) discuss litigation in bad faith; c) analyze the many legal provisions refraining procedural disloyalty acts and their applicability to attorneys; and, finally, d) discuss the sufficiency or lack thereof of our legal order to provide an adequate response to that issue. This is a relevant theme because, at a time of juridical crisis, in view of the State s inability to adequately provide access to justice, within the timeframe and in the manner desired by the population, it is highly important to point what might be the hindrances to the proper access to sound legal proceedings. Therefore, the current study s ultimate purpose is to establish a parallel between an attorney s litigation in bad faith and the inefficacity of legal proceedings, exactly as both arise from condemnable attitudes that are also divorced from the actual function of providing a due legal procedure, and especially when derived from an attorney, hindering the exercise of legal counseling from achieving its utmost finality / O presente estudo objetiva analisar o fenômeno da litigância de má-fé do advogado, que, como agente indispensável à administração da Justiça, deve não só envidar seus esforços na obtenção de solução favorável ao seu cliente, mas também pautar pela correta condução do processo. Em sua atuação, pois, se utilizado seu conhecimento técnico para a obtenção de vantagem escusa, por meio de ardis que deturpem a regular marcha ou resultado do processo, pode vir a ser caracterizada sua própria litigância de má-fé. Assim, os objetivos deste estudo são: a) conceituar o advogado e a disciplina legal que regula sua atuação; b) discorrer sobre a litigância de má-fé; c) analisar as diversas previsões legais de coibição dos atos de deslealdade processual e sua aplicabilidade ao advogado; e, por fim, d) discorrer acerca da suficiência ou não de nosso ordenamento para fornecer a adequada resposta à questão. O tema é relevante porque, em tempos de crise da justiça, diante da impossibilidade do Estado prestar adequadamente o provimento jurisdicional, no tempo e modo ansiados pela população, é de importância se apontar onde estão as chagas da abusividade do acesso à justiça. Desta forma, o objetivo último deste estudo é traçar paralelo entre litigância de má-fé do advogado e a ineficácia da justiça, na exata medida em que atitudes reprováveis e divorciadas da efetiva função do processo, mais ainda quando oriundas do advogado, impedem que seja atingida sua elevada finalidade

O presente trabalho tem por objetivo analisar o julgamento colegiado dos recursos nos Tribunais de segunda instância, à luz das razões teóricas subjacentes à colegialidade e das garantias fundamentais do processo. Após a exposição das finalidades com que, em abstrato, a lei processual institui um órgão judicial colegiado para o julgamento dos recursos (i) reforço da cognição judicial, (ii) garantia de independência dos julgadores e (iii) contenção do arbítrio individual , é feita a análise pormenorizada das sucessivas etapas de que se compõe o procedimento recursal ordinário da apelação, conforme a disciplina prevista nas leis federais e em disposições regimentais, como a distribuição dos recursos, o papel do relator, a figura do revisor, a pauta da sessão de julgamento, o regime da sustentação oral, a mecânica da deliberação colegiada, a atividade de redação do acórdão e a intimação das partes quanto ao teor da decisão, a fim de identificar os pontos em que o regime formal do julgamento dos recursos termina por revelar um descompasso com as premissas por que deveria se guiar. Em todo o trabalho, o marco teórico utilizado deita raízes na concepção democrática do direito processual civil, fundada na máxima eficácia das garantias fundamentais do processo previstas na Constituição Federal de 1988. / The present study aims to analyze the collegial judgment of appeals in the second instance Courts, from the viewpoint of the theoretical reasons underlying the collegiality and the fundamental guarantees of the parties in the civil litigation. After the exposure of the purposes for which, in the abstract, the procedural law establishes a judicial collegiate body for judging appeals (i) strengthening of judicial cognition, (ii) ensuring the independence of judges and (iii) restrainting individual will , it is made a detailed analysis of the successive steps that comprise the ordinary appellate procedure, according to the disciplines provided by federal laws and regimental rules, as the distribution of appeals, the role of the rapporteur, the figure of the reviewer, the agenda of the Court, the oral argument, the collegiate deliberation, the elaboration of the decisions text and the partiess notice about the content of the decision, in order to identify the points where the formal scheme of the appellate procedure reveals a dissonance with the assumptions by which should be guided. The study is guided by a democratic conception of civil procedural law, founded on maximum effectiveness of the fundamental guarantees of the parties in civil litigation as proclaimed by the Brazilian Federal Constitution of 1988.

A Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos da América exige, para a configuração da sham litigation, exceção à imunidade antitruste do direito de petição prevista na doutrina Noerr-Pennington, que: (i) a ação ou petição objetivamente não tenha fundamentos, de maneira que nenhum litigante razoável possa esperar sucesso em seu mérito; e que (ii) o litigante possua motivação subjetiva que permita verificar se a ação ou petição camufla uma tentativa de interferir diretamente nas relações negociais de um concorrente. No Brasil, ao investigar e punir infrações anticoncorrenciais, o Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica CADE vem aplicando tais critérios, o que, além de cientificamente inadequado, carece de fundamentação legal no ordenamento jurídico brasileiro, em possível restrição injustificada dos princípios da livre iniciativa e livre concorrência. Propõe-se, neste trabalho, que o abuso do direito de ação e/ou de petição instituto consagrado no ordenamento jurídico brasileiro , poderá ser considerado uma infração à ordem econômica passível de punição pelo CADE, se produzir ou puder produzir os efeitos previstos no caput do artigo 36 da Lei nº 12.529/2011. / For the configuration of sham litigation an exception to the right of petition immunity created by the Noerr-Pennington Doctrine the Supreme Court of the United States of America established the following requirements: (i) objective baseless claim, so that no reasonable litigant might expect success on the merits; and (ii) subjective motivation of the litigant, which enables to verify whether the baseless suit conceals an attempt to interfere directly with the business relationships of a competitor. In Brazil, in order to investigate and punish antitrust infringements, the Administrative Council for Economic Defense CADE has been applying the aforementioned criteria, which is scientifically inappropriate and baseless under the Brazilian legal system, and may result in an unjustified restriction of the principles of freedom of enterprise and freedom of competition. This thesis proposes that the abuse of the rights of action and petition institutions already enshrined in the Brazilian legal system may be considered infringements of the economic order punishable by CADE, if they produce or are able to produce the effects listed in Article 36, caput, of Law No. 12.529/2011.

A conciliação judicial de conflitos previdenciários envolve, em geral, uma proposta de acordo baseada na renúncia pelo indivíduo de parte dos valores do benefício em atraso em um processo no qual a decisão contrária ao entendimento do Instituto Nacional do Segurado Social (INSS) é muito provável. Como regra, há um notório desequilíbrio de poder envolvendo, de um lado, um litigante ocasional (indivíduo) e, de outro, um litigante habitual (INSS). O presente trabalho pretende discutir qual o papel do terceiro facilitador nesse contexto, de modo a legitimar a prática existente e avançar para uma mudança de paradigma. Para tanto, parte-se da tese de que a conciliação deve ser adequada ao conflito que se pretende tratar, cabendo ao terceiro facilitador atuar de acordo com as peculiaridades desse conflito. Desse modo, propõe-se que, para o tratamento do conflito previdenciário, o conceito de conciliador deve ser entendido em termos amplos, abrangendo não apenas o conciliador leigo, mas também o juiz conciliador e o Judiciário como conciliador interinstitucional. Embora cada uma dessas atuações possua características próprias, sustenta-se que o ponto em comum é o respeito a um devido processo legal mínimo que possibilite a existência de uma base adequada de poder e que permita, assim, a tomada de uma decisão informada pelas partes. Dessa forma, a flexibilidade instrumental própria da conciliação não impediria o estabelecimento de parâmetros mínimos da atuação do conciliador. Por isso, tendo como limite a tomada de uma decisão informada, o conciliador atuaria por meio de estratégias variadas, aproximando-se e distanciando-se das partes, com maior ou menor interferência, de acordo com as características do caso apresentado. Conclui-se que, com a atuação conjunta e coordenada das diversas espécies de conciliador é possível aprimorar qualitativamente a conciliação de conflitos previdenciários. / The court-connected conciliation (or evaluative mediation) of pension funds conflicts in Brazil involves, generally, an agreement in which the individual plaintiff waives part of a benefit in a lawsuit that the defendant, a national government agency called Instituto Nacional do Seguro Social (INSS), will probably loose. As a general rule, there is a significant imbalance of power between a one-shotter (individual) and a repeat player (INSS). The present work aims to discuss the role of the conciliator (or evaluative mediator) in this scenario, in order to legitimate the current practice and to allow a paradigm shift. Firstly, it argues that conciliation should be appropriate to the conflict to be resolved and that the conciliator also should act according to the peculiarities of this conflict. Therefore, it proposed that the definition of conciliator might be enlarged to cover not only the lay person who acts as a conciliator, but also the judge as a conciliator and the Judiciary as an interinstitutional conciliator. Although each specie has its own characteristics, it is argued that the common point is that all must try to guarantee the observance of a minimal due process of law which allows the existence of an adequate basis of power and thus enable parties to make an informed decision. Consequently, the flexibility of the conciliation rules would not prevent the establishment of minimum standards of the conciliator\'s performance. Limited by the aim to allow parties to make an informed decision, the conciliator would act through a variety of strategies. It means being close or far from the parties, interfering in a greater or a smaller level, depending on the characteristics of a particular conflict to be dealt. To sum up, this work concludes that, if the three species of conciliator work together in a coordinated way, it could be possible to have a qualitative improvement in the conciliation of pension funds conflicts.

Cortes e sociedade civil na América Latina estão em transformação, assim como a sua relação. Casos de grande repercussão social, decisões judiciais que incidem sobre políticas públicas, concentração de efeitos das sentenças, mecanismos de deliberação dentro dos processos são fenômenos relacionados a essas transformações. A tese deste trabalho é de que tanto o desenho institucional das cortes influencia a mobilização social jurídica, quanto a presença de uma forte mobilização social em torno das cortes pode influenciar não só a sua agenda de casos, mas também o seu desenho institucional. E esta relação precisa ser estudada de modo dinâmico e funcional. Para tanto, foram realizadas entrevistas com organizações não governamentais, think tanks, acadêmicos, magistrados e agência financiadora na Argentina, Brasil e Colômbia. É a narrativa comparada desses atores que oferece as variáveis de desenho institucional e mobilização social jurídica relevantes para compreender essas transformações. O trabalho, por fim, aponta para a necessidade de reformulação das agendas dos atores envolvidos sobre como pensar a inter-relação entre cortes e sociedade civil, tanto em termos de experimentação prática, imaginação institucional, desafios teóricos e de legitimação. / Courts and civil society in Latin America are under transformation, as well as the relationship between them. Cases of great social repercussion, judicial decisions which affect public policies, concentration effects of judgments, deliberation mechanisms within the processes are phenomena related to these changes. The thesis of this work is that both the institutional design of the courts affect social legal mobilization and the presence of strong social mobilization around the courts can influence not only their cases agenda, but also its institutional design. This relationship needs to be studied in a dynamic and functional way. To this end, interviews were conducted with nongovernmental organizations, think tanks, scholars, judges and funding agencies in Argentina, Brazil and Colombia. It is the compared narrative of these actors that offers the \"variables\" of institutional design and of legal and social mobilization that are relevant to understand these changes. The thesis finally points to the need to reform the agendas of the actors involved on the reflections about the interplay between courts and civil society, in terms of practical experimentation, institutional imagination, theoretical challenges and legitimation.

<p>Učenje o načelima postupka je jedno od karakteristika germanske procesualistike, pod čijim uticajem postaje i neodvojivi deo domaće doktrine. U teoriji se veoma rano se za oblast prikupljanja procesnog materijala formiraju dva antipodna načela &ndash; raspravno i istražno. Prvo podrazumeva da su samo stranke ovla&scaron;ćene da unose procesni materijal, odnosno da su samo one odgovorne za to. Drugo stavlja u dužnost sudu pribavljanje procesnog materijala i prebacuje odgovornost sa stranaka na njega.</p><p>Od promena u srpskom parničnom postupku koje su usledile 2004. g. tvrdi se da je raspravno načelo afirmisano, a dono&scaron;enjem Zakona o parničnom postupku iz 2011. g. i da je promenjen koncept parničenja u smislu uloge suda. On je sada pasivan, i gotovo neodgovoran na planu prikupljanja procesnog materijala. Predmet istraživanja u disertaciji je postojanje raspravnog načela u sada&scaron;njem srpskom parničnom postupku.</p><p>Rezultati istraživanja pokazuju da se ne može govoriti o raspravnom načelu kao važećem u srpskom parničnom postupku. Takav zaključak je, pre svega, uslovljen teoretskim određenjem pojma raspravnog načela i njegovog odnosa prema sudijskoj dužnosti pitanja. Raspravno načelo zaista podrazumeva da samo stranke unose procesni materijal u postupak i da u tom pogledu imaju slobodu, odnosno odgovornost. U tom smislu njegova nužna posledica su tri instituta: teret tvrdnje, priznanje tvrdnji koje vezuje sud i subjektivni teret dokazivanja. Međutim, ukoliko uz ova tri instituta postoji i sudijska dužnost pitanja, onda se odgovornost delom prebacuje i na sud, &scaron;to dovodi do postojanja sasvim drugog načela &ndash; ublaženog raspravnog načela.</p><p>Na osnovu rečenog, promene koje su se desile napu&scaron;tanjem načela materijalne istine, i to pre svega ukidanjem ovla&scaron;ćenja suda da izvodi dokaze po službenoj dužnosti, nisu dovele do uspostave raspravnog načela. Sud i dalje ima dužnost da postavljanjem pitanja ukazuje strankama na deficite procesnog materijala; presuda na osnovu tereta tvrdnje, kao i presuđenje uprkos nepredlaganju dokaza može da usledi samo ako sud prethodno ispuni svoju dužnost. Sud je i u srpskom postupku saodgovorni subjekat postupka, i to ne proizilazi samo iz redakcije ZPP, već je takav smisao u skladu sa vrednovanjima slobode i odgovornosti stranaka, sa ciljem postupka, i na kraju sa osnovnim ljudskim procesnim pravima zagarantovanim Ustavom.</p><p>Određenje da raspravno načelo nije važeće, već da je to ublaženo raspravno, utiče na shvatanje niza instituta koji se tiču procesa formiranja činjeničnog stanja,<br />a spram toga se i svi drugi instituti koji se tiču procesa formiranja činjeničnog stanja moraju prosuđivati.</p><p>Veoma važan deo istraživanja, koji je i prethodio zauzimanju stavova, je uporednopravno istraživanje fokusirano na germanski pravni krug &ndash; Nemačku i Austriju. S obzirom da su srpsko procesno pravo i dogmatika gotovo pod isključivim germanskim uticajem, bilo je potrebno da se temeljno istraži pitanje raspravnog načela u ovim sistemima. Rezultati ovog dela su pokazali da je ideja o raspravnom načelu koje podrazumeva pasivan i neodgovoran sud davno prevladana; upravo obratno, moderan germanski model postupka podrazumeva saodgovornost suda i stranaka.</p> / <p>The doctrine of civil litigation principles is one of the key characteristics of the Germanic procedural theory. Under its influence the doctrine of the principles grew into the essential part of the Serbian theory as well. The theory has rather early developed two conflicting principles with regard to responsibility for collecting the facts and and evidence &ndash; the principle of party control of facts and means of proof (Verhandlungsmaxime) and principle of investigation by the court (Untersuchungsmaxime). First one entails that the parties only can provide facts and means of proof in litigation; court can not render its judgment upon facts or proof which are not introduced by the parties. Second one implies a duty of the court to ascertain and clarify the facts; by the same token, court has responsibility to do so.<br />It is the common opinion that principle of party control over facts and means of proof is effectuated in Serbian civil litigation since legislative changes in 2004. Moreover, after the introduction of the new Civil Procedure Act in 2011it is widely accepted that the paradigm of litigation is radically changed so the court is now rather passive and almost without any responsibility for gathering facts and means of proof. The subject matter of this doctoral thesis is the existence of principle of party control of facts and means of proof in current Serbian civil litigation.<br />The results of analysis show that the principle of party control of facts and means of proof does not exists in Serbian civil litigation. This conclusion is first of all determined by dogmatic examination of the principle&rsquo;s notion. Indeed it signifies that only parties produce facts and means of proof, and in that sense that they have disposition and, accordingly, responsibility for that. By the same token, its necessary consequence are three institutes: burden of facts, binding effect of non disputed facts and burden of production of proof. However, if these three institutes exist with the court&rsquo;s parallel duty to provide hints and feedback, then the responsibility is shifted partly to the court, which results in existence of a new principle &ndash; principle of soften party control of facts and means of proof.<br />Regarding to what is said earlier, the changes which resulted in abandoning the principle of seeking of material truth, basically abrogating the court&rsquo;s obligation to take the proofs ex offo, did not lead to the creation of principle of party control of facts and means of proof. The court still has a duty to give hints and feebacks, i. e. to suggest to the parties that they clarify or supplement their pleadings; dismissing the claim or striking defense as insufficient due to the lack of factual pleadings or production of means of proof can take place only if the court previously fulfills its duty. The court is also in Serbian civil litigation jointly responsible procedural subject. That conclusion is not warranted only by interpretation of wording of the Civil Procedure Code&rsquo;s provision, but rather and predominantly by evaluation of party autonomy and responsibility in Serbian civil procedure, purpose of a civil procedure, and last but not least, by basic procedural constitutional rights.<br />The conclusion that the principle of party control of facts and means of proof does not exist and that its place is taken by the principle of softened party control has fundamental consequences on set of institutes which refer to the process of determination of facts. In that sense all these institutes are analyzed by the virtue of existing principle of Serbian civil procedure.<br />Particularly important part of the thesis, which indeed precedes the main part, is a comparative study of the Germanic legal systems &ndash; Germany and Austria. Regarding the fact that Serbian procedural law and doctrine was and still is under almost entirely Germanic influence, it was necessary to conduct a thorough analysis of these systems. Results show that the idea of principle of party control of facts and means of proof, i. e. idea of passive and unliable court is abendoned. Directly opposite, modern Germanic procedural model is distinguished by joint responsibility of court and parties.</p>

The Priest-Klein model predicts that a decline in the plaintiff win rate might be explained by a change in stake asymmetry that favors the plaintiff; that is, the stakes for defendants increase. This lowers the plaintiff win rate because defendants increasingly look to settle cases they are less likely to win, leading them to only go to trial with cases they have a comparably higher probability of winning. We theorize a shift like this might have occurred between 1985 and 1995, as Lahav and Siegelman (2017) recently discovered that the plaintiff win rate fell from almost 70% in 1985 to just over 30% in 1995. Although they found that changing judicial caseloads and other factors represented a notable portion of the decline, they were unable to identify what drove the remaining 40%. We hypothesize that this unexplained decline was caused by increasing defendant stakes and examine two potential drivers of increasing stake asymmetry: changing judicial ideology and a rise in the number of Multi-District Litigation (MDL) cases, a type of case with higher defendant stakes. We find evidence consistent with the Priest-Klein model for MDL cases as these cases experienced lower adjudication rates, lower plaintiff win rates, and higher settlement rates. Additionally, we found that judicial ideology was substantially more important for MDL cases, suggesting that judges might make use of their greater influence in these cases to guide outcomes. Yet, while both MDL case status and judicial ideology were statistically significant predictors of plaintiff win rates, we found that neither explains a substantial portion of the decline. Thus, a large proportion of the decline found by Lahav and Siegelman remains a mystery.

Cette thèse se propose d’examiner et d’analyser les conditions d’application des règles françaises et européennes de compétence dans le domaine des litiges nés des opérations bancaires électroniques. De manière générale, le tribunal saisi vérifie sa compétence en analysant le différend, en déterminant les éléments du rapport de droit, en caractérisant les parties en conflit, et en établissant que les exigences de chacune des règles sont satisfaites. Mais, dans le cadre des relations bancaires électroniques, la juridiction exerce sa fonction en tenant compte des facteurs technologiques qui affectent la conclusion et l’exécution et de la relation litigieuse,et en prenant en considération le poids réel et juridique de la banque et du client.Pour que les critères juridictionnels et leurs liens de rattachement soient applicables de manière correcte, logique et équitable, la juridiction se doit appréhender avec un oeil neuf, des notions et concepts aussi variés que l’accord électronique d’élection de for, l’autorité de la banque, l’étendue de la protection des consommateurs, le domicile et la résidence, la notion de l’obligation bancaire, ainsi que le lieu de la conclusion et de la prestation de service, le lieu où se produit le fait dommageable, et le dommage économique. / This thesis examines the possibility of applying of relevant French and European rules in the field of litigations arising from electronic banking. The seized court checks its jurisdiction by analyzing disputed subject, identifying the elements of legal relationship, characterizing the parties of the dispute, and establishing that requirements of each rule are met. Once the court exercises its function, it considers the technological factors that may affect the fulfilling way of the legal relationship and dispute over it, as well as taking into account the actual and legal weight of both bank and customer. So that, in order to practice relevant criteria and connecting links in correct, logical and fair way, it is necessary for the court to reconsider it sunderstanding of different aspects of disputed subject. In other words, the court should renew its view on several issues, such as the electronic agreement on jurisdiction, the authority of the bank, the extent of the protection of consumers, the domicile and residence, the concept of bank obligation, the place of signing and fulfilling the contract, the place where the service is provided, as well as the place of occurrence of harmful event and economic damage.

A análise dos efeitos indiretos externos dos precedentes do STF e STJ (1996 a 2011) acerca da Lei de Diretrizes e Bases de 1996 (LDB-1996) parte do conteúdo e natureza do direito à educação que definem a posição jurídica dessa lei nacional materialmente constitucional, que tem promovido mutação universalizante-focalizante do direito à educação previsto na Constituição. Resultantes do caráter abstrativizado do precedente judicial das cortes superiores, os efeitos indiretos externos (indirect effect external) configuram o impacto político das decisões judiciais, no momento pós-decisões judiciais (the aftermath of judicial decisions), verificando-se nos casos em que o governo generaliza uma decisão da corte, mediante a alteração da política pública e, para alguns autores, têm a potencialidade de beneficiar aqueles que não têm recursos para litigar (GAURI; BRINKS). No ciclo de judicialização das políticas públicas (the life-cycle of public-policy litigation), a eficácia expansiva do precedente implica comandos que influenciam a ampliação do direito social àqueles potenciais demandantes. No contexto de ativismo judicial e buraco negro legislativo, a questão se o Judiciário prejudica ou contribui para a política democrática é analisada segundo os conceitos de accountability e responsividade diante dos impactos políticos dos precedentes judiciais a exigir o diálogo interinstitucional entre os poderes. Empiricamente, analisam-se os casos paradigmáticos das cotas raciais do STF de 2012 e os efeitos indiretos externos dessas decisões configurados na resposta política dada pela aprovação da Lei nº 12.711/12 e do Decreto nº 7.824/12. Metodologicamente, após o mapeamento temático dos acórdãos do STJ e do STF de 1996 a 2011 acerca da LDB-1996 (obtidos através da pesquisa com o critério legislativo nos sites www.stf.jus.br e www.stj.jus.br), afere-se a potencialidade desses efeitos políticos nos casos paradigmáticos do STF e STJ a evidencisar como/se promove: restrição/ampliação de políticas públicas; (des)consideração dos recursos financeiros; efeito multiplicador; e/ou acesso ou qualidade do ensino. / The analysis of indirect effect external of Supreme Federal Court STFs and Superior Court of Justice STJs cases in the period of 1996-2011 about the 1996 National Education Law (LDB-1996) begins with the right to education content and nature that define the substantial constitutional position, which has promoted informal interpretation changes based on the focalization and universalization of the constitutional right to education. Resulting from the abstract character of higher courts rulings and considering, the aftermath of judicial decisions, specifically its indirect effect external, shapes its political impact that and take place \"where government generalizes a decision of the court, by changing public policy\" and, for some authors, with the potential to benefit those who can not afford to litigate (GAURI; BRINKS). In the life-cycle of public-policy litigation the expansive compliance implies commands that influence the expansion of social rights to those potential plaintiffs. In the context of judicial activism\" and Congress \"black hole\", the question whether the judiciary contributes to democratic policy is analyzed with the accountability and responsiveness of those rulings that demand institutional dialogue between powers. Empirically, the 2012 STF racial quotas cases illustrate the indirect effect external by the approval of the Law No. 12,711 and Decree No. 7,824 of 2012. Methodologically, after the thematic mapping of STF and STJ rulings from 1996 to 2011 about the LDB-1996 (legislative research criteria on www.stf.jus.br and www.stj.jus.br websites) it is assessed its potential political effects with the following questions: the ruling promotes a restriction/extension of public policies?; does/not considers of financial resources?; has demonstratate \"multiplier effect\"; or/and decides about education access/quality.

廣播電視是人民表達思想與言論之重要媒體，具有反映公意，強化民主，啟迪新知，促進文化、道德、經濟等各方面之發展功能，並負有形成公共意見之社會責任。以廣播電視方式表達言論之自由，國家固應予以保障。惟基於權利不得濫用之法理，如有藉傳播媒體妨害善良風俗、破壞社會安寧、危害國家利益或侵害他人權利等情形者，國家亦得依法予以限制。（司法院釋字第364號解釋參照） 對於欲經營衛星廣播電視事業者，衛星廣播電視法係採許可方式以為管制，賦予主管機關得遂行事前審查之機制，以確保進入市場之經營者，能提供真實正確且未被操控之資訊、意見及娛樂，並促進人民對政府及公共事務之關心，進而引起公眾討論，善盡其增進人民知之權利及監督政府施政等公共責任。主管機關於遂行事前管制之相關作為時，應受到法治國原則之制約，依法行政則是最基本之要求，其他諸如平等原則、比例原則、以及行政法上一般原理原則等，亦應確實遵守。在行政決定之程序上，應符合形式及實質之正當性，以維護人民權益。 經營許可之法律管制規範內容，對於人民之基本權利，諸如言論自由、營業自由、財產權等影響甚為重大。本文擬透過學理及實務之見解，探討衛星廣播電視法律管制之規範內容，並以經營許可為本文研究重心。有關衛星廣播電視之行政爭訟，主要原因是行政處分之違法或不當所致。因此，本文擬從衛星廣播電視事業提起訴願及行政訴訟之案件中，挑選幾件較具代表性之個案，以為探討分析。 關鍵詞：衛星廣播電視、經營許可、行政爭訟 / Broadcasts is important media which enable people to state their ideas and commentary, thereby allowing public opinion to be expressed. By providing the platform for people to express themselves these media play crucial roles in terms of reinforcing democracy, advancing knowledge, and promoting cultural, moral and economic development. At the same time, broadcasting, with all their influential power, should take a certain social responsibility. The freedom of speech through these media is protected under the legal system. However, in order to prevent these media from abusing their privilege the state should restrain their freedom according to related laws and regulations if they spread immoral materials, disturb the public, endanger the state, or infringe upon the rights of others.（Reference：No.364. Justices of the Constitutional Court, Judicial Yuan.） The satellite broadcasting industry is regulated by the Satellite Broadcasting Act. The Act ensures that the operators provide truthful information, opinion and entertainment by enacting laws of operation permit, requiring standardized applications from the operators which will be evaluated by specialized regulatory agency. This Act can also enhance citizens’ care for the government and public affair, serving as the informer which triggers public discussion and therefore promote people’s right to know and to supervise the government and its policies. The regulatory agency should follow the law when they conduct the regulation ex ante. In addition to acting upon the principle of administration according to law, the regulatory agency should also follow other codes such as the egalitarianism, proportionality. The procedure should be justice in letter and in spirit so as to protect people’s right. The operation permit is very important in terms of protecting people’s fundamental rights such as the freedom of speech, freedom of business operations, and property right. Focusing on the regulations of operation permit, this research proposes to discuss the contents of the satellite broadcasting law from both theoretical and practical approaches. It is worth noticing that most of the administrative petition and administrative litigations are caused by illegal or inappropriate administrative sanctions. Therefore in this paper I will try to analyze the most representative cases. Keywords: Satellite broadcasting, Operation permit, Administrative petition and administrative litigation.