Submitted by Filipe dos Santos (fsantos@pucsp.br) on 2017-03-22T12:51:16Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Lucas Pessôa Moreira.pdf: 1326977 bytes, checksum: 8544dddcf0eaa77f544b893cb4b3f804 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-03-22T12:51:16Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Lucas Pessôa Moreira.pdf: 1326977 bytes, checksum: 8544dddcf0eaa77f544b893cb4b3f804 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-03-09 / An era of global expansion of the Judiciary is underway. However, it is questionable whether such expansion harmonizes with the separation of powers, the guarantee of individual rights and the need to legitimize government by the consent of the governed, through representative democracy, the three pillars in order to restrain the power of rulers in modern constitutionalism. The study will address the tension between democracy and judicial review, since the exercise of judicial review imposes problems for collective deliberation by extracting responses directly from the Constitution, through judicial interpretation, considering that such tensions can be observed through relations between the branches of government. The theme involves the understanding and distinction of the politicization of justice and judicial activism. The judicial activism has multiple faces, so its more precise delimitation is necessary. The study thus works in the delimitation of a space in which the position of the legitimate Judiciary should be one of self-restraint, in the form of a deference to the elected branches based on the separation of powers in a democratic and plural society, in order to analyze the recent expansion of the Judiciary in Brazil / Está em curso uma era de expansão global do Poder Judiciário. Contudo, é questionável se tal expansão se harmoniza com a separação dos poderes, a garantia de direitos individuais e a necessidade de legitimação do governo pelo consentimento dos governados, pela via da democracia representativa, os três pilares da contenção do poder dos governantes no constitucionalismo moderno. O trabalho abordará a tensão existente entre a democracia e a jurisdição constitucional, pois o exercício da jurisdição constitucional impõe bloqueios para a deliberação coletiva ao extrair respostas diretamente da Constituição, por intermédio da interpretação judicial, sendo que tais tensões podem ser observadas por meio das relações entre os poderes. O tema envolve a compreensão e distinção da politização da justiça e do ativismo judicial, sendo que o segundo possui múltiplas faces, pelo que é necessária sua delimitação mais precisa. O trabalho trabalha, assim na delimitação de um espaço no qual a postura do Poder Judiciário legítima deve ser autorrestritiva, na forma de uma deferência aos poderes eleitos fundada na separação dos poderes em uma sociedade democrática e plural, para que dessa maneira possa ser analizada a recente expansão do Poder Judiciário ocorrida no Brasil

O controle de constitucionalidade de leis sempre foi objeto de desconfiança da teoria democrática. Sob qual justificativa juízes não eleitos podem ter a última palavra sobre o significado de direitos fundamentais? É assim que a questão costumou ser formulada pela tradição. Alguns a responderam em favor desse arranjo, outros em defesa da supremacia do parlamento. Essa seria uma encruzilhada da separação de poderes e as teorias da última palavra se enfrentam nesses termos. A tese investiga uma saída alternativa para esse dilema, oferecida pelas teorias do diálogo institucional. Segundo essa corrente, a última palavra, na democracia, não existe. O trabalho defende que ambas as perspectivas, última palavra e diálogo, têm papel analítico importante a cumprir. Propõe que uma interação de caráter deliberativo, e não somente adversarial, entre os poderes, tem maiores possibilidades de, ao longo do tempo, produzir boas respostas sobre os direitos fundamentais. Torna a separação de poderes sensível ao bom argumento / The judicial review of legislation has always been under the distrust of democratic theory. Under what justification can unelected judges have the last word upon fundamental rights? Thats the way the question has been formulated by the tradition. Some are favourable to this institutional arrangement, whereas others defend the supremacy of parliament. This would be the crossroads of the separation of powers and theories of last word face the dispute under these terms. The thesis investigates an alternative response to this dilemma, offered by theories of institutional dialogue. According to it, there is no last word in a democracy. The dissertation defends that both perspectives last word and dialogue have an important analytical role to play. Is proposes that an interaction of a deliberative kind rather than adversarial is more likely, in the long term, to produce better answers about rights. It turns separation of powers sensitive to the quality of argument

O progressivo desenvolvimento das relações internacionais, acompanhado dos múltiplos reflexos da globalização, em especial do aparecimento de novos sujeitos que atuam, concomitantemente, nos âmbitos interno e externo, resultou na intensificação dos pontos de contatos entre Direito Constitucional e Direito Internacional. Esse cenário faz que, cada vez mais, as fronteiras entre o nacional e o exterior tornem-se rarefeitas, impondo significativas transformações em conceitos tradicionais consagrados pelo tempo. Assim, as Constituições nacionais abrem-se para o Direito das Gentes e as normas internacionais antes encarregadas de apenas possibilitar a coexistência entre soberanias ampliam seu campo de incidência na medida em que passam a disciplinar temas que eram objeto de estudo somente do constitucionalismo. É exatamente esse acentuado entrelaçamento entre as ordens jurídicas que inspirou a elaboração desta tese, cujo escopo principal é o de contribuir para que se conheça, ainda que de modo incompleto, os reflexos sentidos no Direito Constitucional brasileiro em decorrência do processo de internacionalização das Constituições. Apesar da ambivalência inerente à problemática tratada, na compreensão desse complexo quadro, primou-se por um enfoque centrado na perspectiva do Direito Constitucional. Essa opção demandou, pois, análises que evidenciassem como o constitucionalismo pátrio sem perder sua identidade e preservando suas conquistas tem enfrentado o desafio de assegurar a execução interna de uma infinidade de mandamentos provenientes do exterior. As conclusões obtidas apontam para a importância de cultivar um permanente diálogo entre Constituição e Direito Internacional como instrumento para que essa crescente interconexão resulte em aperfeiçoamento de ambas as ordens jurídicas. Do ponto de vista do Direito Constitucional, cabe antecipar que a aproximação sistêmica em questão já permite vislumbrar a revitalização do funcionamento do mecanismo de freios e contrapesos derivado do princípio da separação de poderes, a valorização dos mandamentos exteriores por parte das autoridades nacionais responsáveis por aplicá-los e, ainda, o fortalecimento da autonomia federativa em matéria de interações com o mundo externo. Embora os resultados finais desse processo sejam incertos, acredita-se que ele não acabará com o papel das Constituições para os Estados nacionais porque, se isso acontece, toda a dinâmica dos relacionamentos estudados restará severamente comprometida. / The progressive development of international relations, followed by the multiple reflexes of globalization especially the emergence of new subjects that act simultaneously in the internal and external spheres has resulted in the intensification of the intersections between Constitutional law and International law. Such a scenario makes the boundaries between national and international increasingly rarefied, imposing significant changes in traditional concepts consecrated by time. Therefore, national Constitutions open up to the Ius Gentium and the international rules originally in charge of merely enabling the coexistence of sovereignties expanding their scope as they shall regulate topics that were formerly approached only by constitutionalism. It is precisely this strong entwinement of legal systems that has inspired the development of this thesis, whose main aim is to contribute for the knowing, albeit incomplete, of the reflexes felt in the Brazilian Constitutional law as a result of the internationalization process of Constitutions. Despite the ambivalence inherent to the problem approached, we have chosen to focus on the Constitutional law perspective in the understanding of this complex scenario. Such an option has demanded, thus, analyses that would evidence how national constitutionalism without losing its identity and by preserving its achievements has faced the challenge of ensuring the internal implementation of a plethora of external commands. The conclusions drawn highlight the importance of cultivating a constant dialogue between Constitution and International law as a means for this increasing interconnection to result in improvement for both legal systems. From the point of view of Constitutional law, we should anticipate that the systemic approximation at issue provides insight into the revitalization of the functioning of the checks and balances mechanism deriving from the principle of separation of powers, the valuing of external commands by the national authorities in charge of their enforcement, and also the strengthening of federal autonomy in terms of interaction with the external world. Even though the final results of this process are still uncertain, we believe that it will not end the role of the Constitutions for the national States, because, if that happens, the whole dynamics of the relationships studied will ultimately be severely compromised.

No contexto constitucional pós-88, o princípio da separação de poderes ocupa posição de destaque, especialmente a partir dos avanços do Poder Judiciário na solução de conflitos envolvendo arenas antes reservadas ao Legislativo ou ao Executivo. Temas como o ativismo do STF, o (ab)uso das medidas provisórias pelo Presidente da República, a apatia do Legislativo, o controle judicial de políticas públicas, dentre tantos outros, são recorrentes na bibliografia jurídico-brasileira. Entretanto, de forma frequente, a recente produção científico-jurídica que se dedica ao tema no Brasil, observa-o a partir de substratos que já se encontravam presentes na teoria moderna do princípio da separação de poderes, edificada no final do século XVIII, não apresentando inovações. É nesse cenário que a presente pesquisa busca revisitar, à luz da teoria do diálogo institucional, a teoria do princípio da separação de poderes, explorando fundamentos que permitam uma interpretação adequada das complexas interações travadas pelos poderes instituídos e pela esfera pública no constitucionalismo brasileiro contemporâneo.Trata-se de pesquisa jurídico-bibliográfica que, além da revisão da literatura, analisou quatro cenários de interação: Legislativo-STF; Legislativo-Executivo; Executivo-STF e STF-sociedade civil. Ao final, faz-se algumas incursões de como esse novo sentido interage com a compreensão de identidade constitcional esboçada por Michael Rosenfeld. / In 1988 post-constitutional context, the separation of powers principle occupies a prominent position, especially since the advances of the judiciary in resolving conflicts involving spaces previously reserved to the Legislature or the Executive. Themes as the STFs activism, the (ab)use of provisory acts by the President, the apathy of the Legislature, the judicial control of public policies, among many others, are recurrent in the Brazilian legal literature. Nevertheless, frequently, the recent scientific-legal production that is dedicated to the theme in Brazil, watches it from substrates that were already present in the modern separation of powers principle theory, built in the late eighteenth century, not presenting innovations. It is in this scenario that this research seeks to revisit, in the light of the institutional dialogue theory, the separation of powers principle theory, by exploring foundations that allow an appropriate interpretation of complexes interactions fought by the powers and by the public sphere in the contemporary Brazilian constitutionalism. It is a legal bibliographic research which, beyond the literature review, examined four interaction scenarios: Legislative- TF; Legislative-Executive, Executive-STF and STF-civil society. At the end, some inroads of how this new sense interacts with the constitutional identity outlined by Michael Rosenfeld are made.

O presente trabalho questiona o papel da legislação na realização judicial do direito. Para responder a essa questão, empreende-se uma tese conceitual sobre a dinâmica jurídica, que pretende superar a tradicional dicotomia entre a legislação e a função judicial concebida pela doutrina clássica da separação dos poderes. De acordo com a argumentação desenvolvida aqui, o judiciário julga não somente fatos dos casos, mas também as próprias escolhas legislativas, de modo que já não é possível defender que a função judicial consiste em mera declaração da lei nos casos particulares ou ainda em subsunção lógica das lides que lhe são submetidas às normas previamente postas pelo processo legislativo. Assim, a realização judicial do direito não pode ser anteriormente determinada, uma vez que não está condicionada pelo conteúdo legislado. Contudo, os conteúdos da lei transmitem algum sentido para os cidadãos e, por isso, criam expectativas. Confirmar ou não essas expectativas é uma questão relacionada com a justificação e a legitimidade dos Estados racionais modernos, que estabelecem com os cidadãos uma relação de dominação legal-racional. Desse modo, a questão do papel da legislação (direito positivo passado) na realização do direito atual é posta em termos de legitimidade. Se, de um lado, constatamos que não é possível pretender controlar a discricionariedade judicial dentro dos próprios limites do direito, de outro lado defendemos que é legítimo pretender submeter o direito positivo à crítica e ao controle democrático. Isso porque interessa a todos os cidadãos que as decisões judiciais possam ser justificadas de modo razoável, graças a uma argumentação cuja força e a pertinência se reconheçam amplamente na sociedade. A partir dessa perspectiva, propomos um redimensionamento do argumento legal na prática jurídica e passamos a analisar as diversas implicações da questão central posta neste trabalho na realização judicial do direito. / This work questions the function of statutory law in the judicial realization of law. To answer this question, we undertake a conceptual thesis on legal dynamics, which aims to overcome the traditional dichotomy between the statutory law and the judicial function designed by the classical doctrine of separation of powers. According to the arguments put forward here, judges judge not only the facts of the cases, but also the legislative choices, so that it is no longer possible to argue that judicial function is a mere declaration of the statutory law in individual cases. Thus, the judicial realization of law cannot be previously determined, since it is not strictly conditioned by the legislated content. However, the statutory law content communicates meanings to citizens and therefore it creates expectations. To confirm or not to confirm these expectations is something related to justification and legitimacy of modern rational States, which hold a legal-rational domination relationship with citizens. Thus, the question of the function of statutory law is put here in terms of legitimacy. On the one hand, we find that we cannot intend to control judicial discretion within the proper limits of the law, on the other hand we argue that it is suitable to intend to submit the positive law to public critics and democratic control. All citizens seem to expect that judicial decisions can be justified in a reasonable manner, thanks to arguments whose strength and relevance are widely accepted in society. From this perspective, we propose a redefinition of the use of legal argument in legal practice and then we start to examine the various implications of the central question posed in this work in the judicial realization of the law.

Magister Commercii - Mcom (Political Studies) / This thesis focuses on the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) of South Africa between 1998 and 2017, by looking at whether it acts as an independent institution and if it strengthens the quality of democracy in the country. The research addresses various sub-research questions such as, what is independence? What is a quality democracy? Is the NPA able to foster democratic accountability? It further assesses to which extent executive influence and leadership instability affect the independence of the NPA, by looking at the relationship between the executive – the state Presidents’ and government officials – and the NPA, over the years, in terms of the law practiced. And lastly, whether the role of ANC has affected the NPA. These questions arise out of my interest to understand the NPA in terms of its constitutional mandate and how it impacts democracy. The principal concepts used to date indicates that democracy comprises several procedural norms. These democratic norms – accountability, the constraint of executive power, the separation of powers, and the rule of law form the bases for my research study; while other integral factors include independence, state capture, and dominant party systems. The research methodology for this thesis incorporated qualitative research, a case study, and triangulation. The research also included interviews, with Advocate Shaun Abrahams, Dr Silas Ramaite, Advocate Vusi Pikoli, Advocate Glynnis Breytenbach, Mr Steven Swart, Mr Lawson Naidoo, Mr Paul Hoffman, Dr Jeff Rudin, Professor Lukas Muntingh, Professor Lovell Fernandez, Mr Gareth Newham, and Advocate Mike Pothier as the interviewees. The data analysis and synthesis suggest that the lack of oversight of the NPA alongside the political dominance of the ANC has allowed for an infiltration of political influence within the institution resulting in the selective prosecution of high-profile cases. The data highlights the blurring of lines as a result of state capture which has tainted the NPA’s independence. The importance of this research study lies in the relationship of the NPA and democracy, as an erosion of the NPA essentially correlates with the weakening of democracy. Therefore it is vital to protect our independent institutions, like the NPA, as they strengthen our democracy, assist in upholding the rule of law and the Constitution.

Magister Artium - MA / This thesis focuses on the National Prosecuting Authority (NPA) of South Africa between 1998 and 2017, by looking at whether it acts as an independent institution and if it strengthens the quality of democracy in the country. The research addresses various sub-research questions such as, what is independence? What is a quality democracy? Is the NPA able to foster democratic accountability? It further assesses to which extent executive influence and leadership instability affect the independence of the NPA, by looking at the relationship between the executive – the state Presidents’ and government officials – and the NPA, over the years, in terms of the law practiced. And lastly, whether the role of ANC has affected the NPA. These questions arise out of my interest to understand the NPA in terms of its constitutional mandate and how it impacts democracy. The principal concepts used to date indicates that democracy comprises several procedural norms. These democratic norms – accountability, the constraint of executive power, the separation of powers, and the rule of law form the bases for my research study; while other integral factors include independence, state capture, and dominant party systems. The research methodology for this thesis incorporated qualitative research, a case study, and triangulation. The research also included interviews, with Advocate Shaun Abrahams, Dr Silas Ramaite, Advocate Vusi Pikoli, Advocate Glynnis Breytenbach, Mr Steven Swart, Mr Lawson Naidoo, Mr Paul Hoffman, Dr Jeff Rudin, Professor Lukas Muntingh, Professor Lovell Fernandez, Mr Gareth Newham, and Advocate Mike Pothier as the interviewees. The data analysis and synthesis suggest that the lack of oversight of the NPA alongside the political dominance of the ANC has allowed for an infiltration of political influence within the institution resulting in the selective prosecution of high-profile cases. The data highlights the blurring of lines as a result of state capture which has tainted the NPA’s independence. The importance of this research study lies in the relationship of the NPA and democracy, as an erosion of the NPA essentially correlates with the weakening of democracy. Therefore it is vital to protect our independent institutions, like the NPA, as they strengthen our democracy, assist in upholding the rule of law and the Constitution.

No description available.

Univ. Cheikh Anta Diop, Diss u.d.T.: La condition du pouvoir exécutif dans le nouveau constitutionnalisme africain--Dakar, 2001. / Literaturverz. S. 279 - 305.

Teismų ir teisėjų principas yra gana senas ir nemažai autorių nagrinėtas, bet ši tema yra aktuali ir šiandien, kadangi teisėjų vykdomam teisingumui neretai bandoma daryti įtaką, o taip pat nereti drausminių bylų iškėlimai rodo, kad vidinis teisėjų nepriklausomumas yra ne iki galo išgrynintas iki tobulos formos. Darbe analizuojamos Konstitucijos nuostatos, kurios reglamentuoja teismų ir teisėjų nepriklausomumą bei Konstitucinio Teismo nutarimai, liečiantys teismų ir teisėjų nepriklausomumo principą. Kadangi teismų ir teisėjų nepriklausomumo principas yra vienas iš esminių konstitucinės teisės principų, todėl jis yra įtvirtintas ne viename tarptautiniame dokumente. Darbe taip pat analizuojamos tarptautinių dokumentų nuostatos reglamentuojančios teismų ir teisėjų nepriklausomumą ir jos lyginamos su Lietuvos konstitucinėje teisėje įtvirtintomis nuostatomis. Be to, darbe remiamasi sociologinių tyrimų duomenimis norint išsiaiškinti visuomenės pasitikėjimo teismais lygį. Darbe iškelta hipotezė, kad teisėjų ir teismų nepriklausomumo lygis įtakoja visuomenės pasitikėjimą teismais pasitvirtina, kadangi kuo didesnis teismų ir teisėjų nepriklausomumo lygis, tuo bus didesnis visuomenės pasitikėjimas teismais ir teisėjais. Pirmoje darbo dalyje nagrinėjamas valdžių padalijimo principas, teisminės valdžios santykis su kitomis valdžiomis (įstatymų leidžiamąja ir vykdomąja) bei išskiriami teisminės valdžios požymiai. Antroje darbo dalyje analizuojama istorinė tesimų ir teisėjų nepriklausomumo... [toliau žr. visą tekstą] / The principle of court and judges is quite old and it has been studied by many authors but this topic is current nowadays as well. The justice supported by judges is often being tried to be influenced as well as frequent disciplinary proceedings show that inner independence of judges is not purified to a perfect form. The provisions of the Constitution which govern the independence of courts and judges are analyzed in the study together with Constitutional Court rulings that are connected with the principle of the independence or courts and judges. As the independence principle of courts and judges is the basic one in the constitutional law it is fortifies in many international documents. The provisions of international documents that regulate the independence of courts and judges are discussed in the study. They are compared to the provisions that are fortified in the Constitution of Lithuania. Besides, the data of sociological researches is used in the study in order to see the level of the trust of the public in courts. The hypothesis is raised in the study that the level of independence of courts and judges influence the public trust in the courts ad judges was confirmed. The higher level of the independence of courts and judges appears the bigger trust of public in courts and judges is. The principle of power division, the ratio of court’s authorities with other authorities (legislature and executive power) as well as the features of the court power are distinguished... [to full text]