Made available in DSpace on 2014-07-29T15:13:43Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Tese Raquel Priscila de Castro Oliveira.pdf: 2385507 bytes, checksum: 70f3aa3088e08bd364a210435717e331 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2010-04-30 / This study was developed in order to analyze productive performance, economic evaluation, bromotological composition of fish fillet, body components percentage and glucose level of two of Nile tilapia strains (chitralada and supreme) in three stocking densities (90, 120 and 150 fish/m3) in the raceway system. This work was carried out at the Fish Culture Sector from Universidade Federal de Goias. A total of 1,440 Nile tilapia fingerlings were produced in 24 polyethylene water tanks, adapted to raceway system. Each experimental unit had individual pipe for water supply and flow was regulated to allow total exchange every 30 minutes, regardless of stocking density. The animals were fed three times a day with commercial extruded ration, ad libitum, seven days a week. The design was completely randomized in a 2 x 3 factorial arrangement and four replications. The results were submitted to variance analysis and, in cases of statistical variance, to the Tukey test (5%). After the all variables analysis, it was concluded that both strains presented positive characteristics for production in Goias State in raceway system. Supreme strain, in higher water density, is the one recommended by this study due to greater profitability, and to positive performance aspects. / Esse trabalho foi desenvolvido com o intuito de avaliar o desempenho produtivo, a avaliação econômica, a composição bromatológica do filé, o percentual de componentes do corpo, e a glicemia de duas linhagens comerciais de tilápia-do-Nilo, a chitralada e a supreme submetidas a três densidades de estocagem 90, 120 e 150 peixes/m3 em sistema de alto fluxo de água. O estudo foi realizado no Setor de Piscicultura da Universidade Federal de Goiás. No total, 1440 alevinos de tilápia-do-Nilo foram estocados em 24 caixas d água de polietileno adaptadas ao sistema raceway. Cada unidade experimental era provida de tubulação individual para abastecimento e a vazão foi regulada para troca total a cada 30 minutos, independente da densidade de estocagem. Biometrias mensais foram realizadas e coletados dados para a avaliação. Os animais foram alimentados com ração comercial extrusada, até a saciedade momentânea, sete dias por semana. O delineamento utilizado foi inteiramente ao acaso em esquema fatorial 2x3 e quatro repetições. As médias dos resultados encontrados foram submetidos a análise de variância e, em caso de diferença estatística, ao teste de comparação de médias Tukey (5%). Após a análise de todas as variáveis concluiu-se que ambas as linhagens apresentaram características favoráveis de produção no Estado de Goiás em sistema raceway. A linhagem supreme, na maior densidade de estocagem, foi a recomendada após esse estudo devido a maior rentabilidade e aspectos positivos no desempenho.

[pt] A Constituição Federal brasileira fixou um desenho estrutural de competências que permite uma ampla atuação do Supremo Tribunal Federal sobre a vida social e os ramos de governo. Desde 1988, houve uma evolução gradativa no exercício efetivo deste poder em relação ao Congresso Nacional, principalmente, nos julgados sobre comissões parlamentares de inquérito, sistema político e omissões inconstitucionais, enquanto as temáticas do impeachment presidencial, do processo legislativo e da perda de mandato por quebra de decoro parlamentar apresentaram uma reticência interventiva maior. A experiência do institucionalismo norte-americano e a análise destes seis campos jurisprudenciais por diferentes enfoques da teoria institucional – atitudinal, estratégico, constitutivo e histórico – demonstram que não há um panorama assimétrico entre os departamentos estatais. Na verdade, o jogo entre Poderes pode criar cenários conjunturais que libertam decisões baseadas na preferência individual dos julgadores ou que restringem a autonomia da Corte quando críticas ou retaliações externas ameaçam sua permanência e autoridade. / [en] The Brazilian Federal Constitution established a framework of laws that allow for the Supreme Court to act over the social life and branches of the government. Since 1988 there has been a gradual evolution in the effective enforcing of this power over congress, mainly in judgements on parliamentary inquiry committees, the political system and unconstitutional omissions, while the topics of presidential impeachment, legislative process and removal from office for breach of congressional decorum met with greater reluctance to intervene. The North American experience in institutionalism and analysis of these six jurisprudential fields by different approaches to institutional theory - attitudinal, strategic, constituent and historical - demonstrate that the panorama among state departments is not asymmetric. In fact, the separation of powers game can create groups of scenarios that generate decisions based on the preference of individual judges, or that restrict the autonomy of the court when criticism or external retaliations threaten its authority.

No description available.

Le projet du gouvernement grec en 2006 d’introduire une Cour constitutionnelle pour remplacer le contrôle diffus pose le problème du choix entre le modèle américain et le modèle européen. Il n’y a pas de supériorité inhérente d’un modèle sur le plan axiologique, logique, technique et empirique. Les défauts du système américain sont amplifiés en Grèce par le contexte européen de sorte que le système grec assure la dépolitisation du contrôle mais n’assure pas la sécurité juridique. De même, il est activiste en matière socioéconomique mais il ne l’est pas concernant les droits individuels de premier rang. Par ailleurs, les mécanismes correctifs (Cour suprême spéciale, Cour plénière, Tribunal des Salaires) aggravent le problème d’irrationalité en raison du grand nombre des juges. Ils engendrent aussi des décisions provocatrices dans les domaines électoraux et judiciaires. D’autre part, la Cour constitutionnelle se heurte à l’existence d’un système américain actif, d’un contexte culturel non continental, à l’interprétation historique des principes irrévisables et à un contexte social clientéliste. Plus particulièrement, la Cour constitutionnelle proposée favorise la loi en raison de la désignation des juges uniquement par le parti majoritaire et aussi de la saisine de la Cour dans le cas de deux invalidations successives de la loi. En conclusion, il est opportun d’établir un système mixte selon la nature des lois contrôlées comprenant une Assemblée Plénière restreinte et une Cour constitutionnelle constituée parmi une liste triple. / The project of the Greek government in 2006 to introduce a Constitutional Court in order to replace the diffused control poses the problem of the choice between the American model and the European model. There is non inherent superiority of one model from axiological, logic, technical and empirical point of view. The defaults of the American system are amplified in Greece by the European context, so that the Greek system assures the depoliticization of the control but it does not assure the legal security. In addition, it is activist in the socioeconomic domain but it is self-restrained concerning the fundamental liberties. The remedial mechanisms (Supreme Special Court, Plenary Court, “Tribunal of Wages”) aggravate the problem of irrationality, because of the existence of lot of judges and they engender also provocative decisions in the electoral and judicial domain. On the other hand, the introduction of a Constitutional Court comes up against the existence of an active American system, a non continental cultural context, the historical interpretation or irrevisable principles and a clientelist social context. More particularly, the proposed Constitutional Court favors the law owning to the fact that the judges are appointed only by the majority party and that the Court intervenes after two invalidations of the law. In conclusion, it is convenient to establish a mixed system according to the nature of controlled laws including a restricted Plenary Court and a Constitutional Court constituted among a triple list.

This thesis examines the views of freedoms of press and speech held by the twelve earliest justices of the U.S. Supreme Court, as the Sedition Act of 1798 raised their earliest First Amendment questions including the breadth of those freedoms and of seditious libel. The thesis discusses three aspects of the early justices' views, which add to existing studies. First, the context of those justices' views was growing challenges to the restrictive Blackstone and Mansfield definition of freedom of press as only freedom from prior restraint (licensing) and as not also freedom from subsequent restraint such as seditious libel prosecution. Those challenges were reflected in broad language protecting freedoms of press and speech, and in the absence of language stating that the English common law of rights or of seditious libel was left unaltered. That crucial context of growing challenges has not been detailed in existing literature. (Chapter 3.) Second, the views of each early justice on press and speech are chronicled for the period 1789-1798. That discloses express commitments to those freedoms, which are absent from existing literature, and no adoption of the Blackstone definition before the 1798 crisis. (Chapters 4-5.) Third, the cases and reasoning of the six sitting justices upholding the Sedition Act of 1798 are chronicled and assessed, along with the views of the six remaining justices. That reveals that most remaining justices and also a significant minority within the Federalist party rejected the Sedition Act. Yet positions on the Sedition Act have been only cursorily discussed for four sitting justices and have been overlooked for the other eight justices, as well as for the Federalist party's minority, for the critical period 1798-1800. (Chapters 6-7.) The thesis proposes reasons for that divergence between the pre-1798 commitment of all justices to freedoms of press and speech, and the support given by most sitting justices to the Sedition Act, in contrast to apparent opposition by most remaining justices. The primary reasons are their opposing positions on several connected issues: the extent of rights to dissent, the challenges to the Blackstone definition and to seditious libel, the effect of new state and federal constitutions on seditious libel and on common law rights, strength of attachment to freedoms of press and speech and to seditious libel, and most sitting justices' changes of position to embrace the Blackstone definition. The thesis calls into question conventional views in existing literature on each of those three aspects. First, Levy and others express the dominant view that freedom of press in state declarations of rights and the First Amendment 'was used in its prevailing common law or Blackstonian sense to mean a guarantee against previous restraints and a subjection to subsequent restraints for licentious or seditious abuse,' so that contrary evidence 'does not exist,' and that 'no other definition of freedom of the press by anyone anywhere in America before 1798' existed. Instead, opposition to the essence of seditious libel had been mounting over the decades. Second, the early justices are usually portrayed as having nothing to say about freedoms of press and speech before 1798. Instead, nearly all exhibited commitment to those freedoms before that crucial year, though half the early justices upheld the Sedition Act during 1798-1800. Third, the Federalist party, the early justices, and the states except Virginia and Kentucky are all usually described as unanimously supporting the Sedition Act. Instead, the Federalists divided over the Act, and the early justices did as well, with an unrecognized but significant minority of the party, and nearly half of the early justices, opposing the Sedition Act, as did several additional states.

La théorie de la guerre juste a fournit les principes qui forment la base de nos intuitions concernant l’éthique de la guerre pendant plus de milles ans. Cependant, la nature de la guerre a changé drastiquement dans les derniers 50 ans. Avec les avancés technologiques, tous les aspects de la guerre, du champ de bataille aux armes utilisées, sont aujourd’hui très différents. Ce qui est proposé dans ce texte est que les principes de jus in bello sont malgré tout encore adéquats pour les guerres contemporaines. Spécifiquement, en utilisant une analyse historique, ce texte argumentera contre la condition de l’urgence suprême de Michael Walzer pour proposer une approche qui laisse les principes de bases du jus in bello intactes. Ce texte suggère que les théoriciens de la guerre juste se penchent sur la question des armes prohibées pour avoir un impacte positif dans le domaine de l’éthique de la guerre. / Just war theory has been provided the basis for thinking about the morality of war for the past thousand years of Western history. However, the nature of warfare has dramatically altered in the last 50 years alone. With the advent of new technologies all aspects of warfare from the nature of the battlefield to the types of weapons used have changed. What this paper will argue, through a historical analysis of these technological changes, is that the principles guiding actions taken in war, the principles of jus in bello, are well equipped to deal with these changes. More specifically, this paper will argue against Michael Walzer’s famous supreme emergency condition and suggests instead that just war theorists should instead be concerned with weapons prohibitions, not in undermining the established principles of jus in bello, in order to have a favourable impact on contemporary warfare.

This thesis assesses three United States Supreme Court opinions, engaging in an inductive approach to generic criticism, in an attempt to discover whether or not there are similarities and/or differences in these decisions. This study focuses on draft card, flag, and cross burning cases argued before the Court in order to discover the potential genre's characteristics.

Právní úprava kontroly Nejvyššího kontrolního úřadu Abstrakt Tato diplomová práce pojednává o právní úpravě kontroly Nejvyššího kontrolního úřadu České republiky. Součástí práce je také stručný popis historického vývoje kontrolních institucí na území České republiky, mezinárodní rozměr kontroly ve veřejné správě. Postavení Nejvyššího kontrolního úřadu a úprava jím prováděné kontroly je upravena zejména v Ústavě České republiky v její páté hlavě v článku 97. Podrobnější úprava je pak zakotvena v zákoně č. 166/1993 Sb. o Nejvyšším kontrolním úřadu. Nejvyšší kontrolní úřad je nezávislý orgán vykonávající kontrolu hospodaření se státním majetkem a kontrolu plnění státního rozpočtu. Organizační struktura Úřadu je tvořena prezidentem, viceprezidentem a členy Úřadu, kteří dohromady tvoří Kolegium Úřadu. Dále pak kárná komora, senáty Úřadu a kontroloři. Nejvyšší kontrolní úřad je navenek řízen jeho prezidentem, který současně předseda kolegiu Úřadu. Vzhledem k tomu, že Nejvyšší kontrolní úřad je koncipován jako úřad kolegiální, je kolegium Úřadu stěžejním orgánem, který schvaluje mimo jiné plán kontrolní činnosti Úřadu, zpracované kontrolní závěry, ze kterých vycházejí stanoviska ke státnímu závěrečnému účtu, výroční zprávu Úřadu a kárný řád. Faktickou kontrolu hospodaření se státním majetkem a plnění státního...

This thesis concerns the topic of legal reasoning in the judgements of European courts. The first part of the paper presents the analysis of the theoretical aspects of legal reasoning, specifically the legal obligation for this practice, as well as an examination of the origins and arguments for the existence of this obligation. Furthermore, the way that the legal reasonings are embedded in the law of the Czech Republic, and in EU legislation, is discussed and examined in detail. The final part of the paper consists of a comparison of legal reasonings of the Czech courts and the European Court of Justice. The relevant aspects of the legal reasoning are explained with regard to the practice of two European courts: European Court of Justice and Supreme Administrative Court of the Czech Republic, respectively.

The diploma thesis focuses on the approximation of law of compensation for bodily harm and death, and evaluation of its development especially in connection with the recodification of private law. The main objective of the thesis is to provide a comprehensive overview with emphasis on the most significant changes that occurred in connection with the recodification, and its evaluation. The first chapter deals with theoretical basis of the duty to provide compensation for harm, since the formation of such a duty is a prerequisite for granting compensation. Besides the reasons that lead to the formation of the duty, individual pre-conditions of the duty are discussed as well. These pre-conditions are unlawful act, formation of the damage, causality and fault. The second chapter deals with the concept of harm which replaced the previously more often used term damage. In addition, the second chapter also includes a general introduction to the compensation for bodily harm and death, which is related to the following chapters. The third chapter is a key point of the whole thesis, as the recodification of private law influenced the most compensation of non-pecuniary damage for bodily harm and death. The principle of full compensation for suffered harm, hence the expiation of such harm according to the...