This diploma thesis attends to activities of the District Court in Hradec Králové in the period 1918 - 1938 with the incorporation in the context of the overall development of the judicial organization in the Czech lands and also historical evolution of the Hradec Králové region. The opening part deals with the First Republic's judiciary and legislature, as formed from the 19th century. After that follows an overview of organizational development judicial administration in the Czech lands in the era 1848 - 1938 and section devoted to history of the Hradec Králové region. The second part of this thesis is concretely aimed at scope of the District Court in Hradec Králové in the interwar period, in the process of the action in court, in the structure of the court, domains and distribution of judicial work with an analysis of the model cases. Keywords: district court, judicial administration, Hradec Králové, regional history, legislation, judicial ordering, common plea, surrogate court, penal offence, the First Czechoslovak Republic

Philosophiae Doctor - PhD / The primary basis of this construction is that one of the roles of the judiciary is that of enhancing and protecting human rights. This is an important function which is best implemented through judicial independence. Across Africa and most notably in Zimbabwe, political interference has been noted as a factor that limits judicial independence. The judiciary‘s lack of independence has made it impossible for it to protect human rights in Zimbabwe. This signifies that a new approach to judicial protection of human rights in the country is required. Constitutional reform could be the appropriate legal tool to achieve this objective. Zimbabwe has undertaken constitutional reforms which may help in addressing the human rights situation in the country. These reforms have captured legal principles which will ensure an improvement in the human rights situation. Key to the reforms, has been the independence of the judiciary. The Constitution guarantees the independence of the judiciary. Despite such guarantees there are a number of challenges with regards to this independence. The aim of this research is to show what measures need to be taken for the judiciary to adequately protect human rights and to establish other measures that can be taken to address the human rights issues in Zimbabwe

The dissertation conducts a comparative analysis of the roles of the Inspectors-General of Intelligence with specific reference to South Africa. The analysis assessed the roles, functions and structures of the office of the Inspectors-General in the following countries: Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the United States of America, South Africa and equivalent institutions in the United Kingdom. The study was based on a review of existing literature and interviews and written responses with some of the members of the Joint Standing Committee on Intelligence, the former Minister for Intelligence Services, LN Sisulu, the head of the intelligence division of the South African National Defence Force, the former deputy Director-General of the South African Secret Service, judge Gordon who is responsible for interception of communications and the current Inspector-General of Intelligence, Mr ZT Ngcakani. The performance of the office of the Inspector General of Intelligence since 1995 indicates that: (a) there were ambiguities in the legal framework for the office of the Inspector-General which led to various interpretations by stakeholders on the functioning of the office; (b) there is still a need to test the impact of the office of the Inspector General on the Services and the public; and (c) the Inspector-General's office requires other oversight mechanisms to complement its functions. / Dissertation (MSS)--University of Pretoria, 2008. / Political Sciences / unrestricted

Le 23 juillet 2008, le Constituant français a créé la question prioritaire de constitutionnalité. Cette nouvelle procédure permet au Conseil constitutionnel d’être saisi, sur renvoi de la Cour de cassation ou du Conseil d’Etat, de la constitutionnalité d’une disposition législative. La création de cette nouvelle voie de droit est de nature à bouleverser les rapports qui se sont établis entre les ordres de juridiction constitutionnel,administratif et judiciaire. L’objet de la présente consiste en une analyse des relations qui existent entre ces trois ordres de juridiction dans le cadre de l’exercice de la fonction juridictionnelle et a pour objet de mesurer l’impact de la création de la question prioritaire de constitutionnalité sur les relations systémiques qui sont présentes entre ces trois juges. / On 2008, july 23 was created the “question prioritaire de constitutionnalité”.This new procedure allows the Constitutional Council to be seized, on remand from the administrative and judicial Supremes Courts, the constitutionality of a law. The creation of this new remedy is likely to upset the relationships that are established between levels of constitutional jurisdiction, administrative and judicial. This thesis is an analysis of the relationships between these three types of courts in the context of the exercise of the judicial function and measure the impact of the creation of the« question prioritaire de constitutionnalité » is to systemic relationships that are present between the three judges

Made available in DSpace on 2017-06-01T18:17:59Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 dissertacao_carlos_pessoa.pdf: 1069290 bytes, checksum: 45b9ece9ccba3a6acfdd7eacfd9bf391 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2009-08-27 / This study titled "Jurisdiction and the power of fact enunciation: normalization in the interstices of the court act" aims to get close to the performance of magistrates and courts of the judiciary power (the court action), specifically in its activities related to the creation of official versions of facts. From the assumption that such activity is based on a specific state power, called in this study the power of fact enunciation, we will show that the court actions are composed by other powers required for its performance. Given this diversity of powers, this study questions what kind of authorities and what kind of legitimization procedures the society is subjected to, specifically the citizens in courts. Based on a critical-dualistic methodology, which divides facts and decisions, balanced by the theory of speech acts, from Searle, this study will try to understand the various forms of ilocucionary strength, which affect the court actions. In this direction, after questioning the means of justification for the judicial activity and verification of its legitimacy, this study will seek to understand the idea of modalization explained by a linguistics enunciation, which will be used to explain how to carry out normalization, found inside the State, in its court action. However, it should be highlighted that this study, although closer to the theory of speech acts, believes that it is possible to match this ideas with the critical dualism and with the theory of truth as correspondence. Finally, this study results in a theoretical discourse related not only to the needs to legitimize the normative activity in a Republican state (in the way of Arendt), and democracy, but also to the activity related to the creation of official versions for past happenings, through the power of the fact enunciation / A presente dissertação, intitulada ¯Jurisdição e poder de enunciação fática: a normalização nos interstícios do agir jurisdicional. tem por objetivo aproximar-se da atuação dos magistrados e tribunais do Poder Judiciário (o agir jurisdicional), especificamente em sua atuação relacionada com o estabelecimento de versões oficiais sobre os fatos. A partir da consideração de tal atuação como oriunda de um poder estatal próprio, denominado por este estudo de poder de enunciação fática, explicitar-se-á que o agir jurisdicional é formado por outros poderes necessários à atuação estatal. Diante dessa diversidade de poderes, o presente estudo indaga a respeito do tipo de autoridade e do tipo de procedimento de legitimação a que os cidadãos estão sujeitos, especificamente os jurisdicionados. Utilizando a metodologia crítico-dualista, que defende a cisão entre fatos e decisões, redimensionada pela teoria dos atos de fala, especificamente de Searle, o presente estudo procurará compreender as diversas formas de força ilocucionária envolvidas no agir jurisdicional. Nessa direção, após questionar as formas de justificação da atividade jurisdicional e da verificação de sua legitimidade, buscar-se-á compreender a ideia de modalização explicitada por uma linguística da enunciação, que será utilizada para explicar como se procede à normalização, verificada no interior do Estado, em seu agir jurisdicional. É importante ressaltar, contudo, que este estudo, apesar de se aproximar da teoria dos atos de fala, acredita ser possível a compatibilização de suas ideias com o dualismo crítico e com a teoria da verdade como correspondência. Por fim, este estudo dissertativo resulta em um direcionamento teórico não vinculado, apenas, à necessidade de legitimação da atividade normativa em um Estado republicano (nos moldes de Arendt) e democrático, mas também, da atividade relacionada com o estabelecimento de versões oficiais sobre fatos pretéritos, através do poder de enunciação fática

Made available in DSpace on 2017-06-01T18:18:35Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 luis_carlos_morais.pdf: 816952 bytes, checksum: 03627d2ad124759a6abdd22b66771c48 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-05-24 / This research has the object of study the growing incorporation of methods that aim the achieving of solution of conflicts by consensus form into the justice system. In this direction, we can see a continuous doctrinal and normative effort directed to encourage the use of conciliation methods. Stands out, in normative terms, the issue of Resolution 125 of the National Council of Justice, that establishes the Judicial Policy of proper handling of conflicting of interests, and also the norms forecasted in the law 13,105 / 2015, which institutes the new Procedure Civil Code, among which the one that provides for a prior hearing dedicated exclusively to an attempt of conciliation. Given this framework, the aim of this research is, through bibliographic and empirical survey, to analyse the way it currently happen the attempts to establish a consensual solution to the conflict, specifically those in the midst of a judicial court through, using conciliation techniques and, by research, assure if the use of these means meets the main purpose of delivering a fair and appropriate legal result. The objective is to investigate factors that may compromise the use of the conciliation means as an alternative to a justcomposition of conflicts, preventing its work just to combine the interests of a judicial policy for outpouring of the system and its use as social accommodation tool. / A presente pesquisa tem por objeto de estudo a crescente incorporação ao sistema de justiça de métodos que visam a obtenção da solução dos conflitos de interesses de forma consensual. Nesta direção, percebe-se um contínuo esforço doutrinário e normativo direcionado para incentivar a utilização de métodos autocompositivos. Destaca-se, em termos normativos a edição da Resolução 125 do Conselho Nacional de Justiça, ao instituir a Política Judiciária de tratamento adequado dos conflitos de interesses, e também, as previsões normativas constante na lei 13.105/2015, que instituiu um novo Código de Processo Civil, entre as quais, a que prevê a realização de uma audiência prévia destinada exclusivamente para uma tentativa de conciliação. Diante deste quadro a proposta da pesquisa é por meio de levantamento bibliográfico e empírico realizado a partir de uma observação estruturada não participante de audiências designadas com o intuito de se obter uma conciliação, analisar a forma como se procede atualmente as tentativas de estabelecer uma solução consensual para o conflito, especificamente, as realizadas no bojo de um processo judicial por meio da técnica da conciliação, e verificar, se o seu uso, atende a finalidade precípua de entrega de uma prestação jurisdicional justa e adequada. O objetivo é investigar fatores que podem comprometer a utilização do referido instrumento como alternativa para uma justa-composição dos conflitos, evitando que se preste apenas para conjugar os interesses de politicas judiciárias para desafogo do sistema e sua utilização como instrumento de acomodação social.

Submitted by Nadir Basilio (nadirsb@uninove.br) on 2016-05-09T20:51:15Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Fernando Pereira Alqualo.pdf: 1298585 bytes, checksum: 214c2be0b180f2c4030f8a769707d76f (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-05-09T20:51:15Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Fernando Pereira Alqualo.pdf: 1298585 bytes, checksum: 214c2be0b180f2c4030f8a769707d76f (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-02-15 / The efficiency of the judiciary is not limited to the temporal aspect of length of proceedings, given that the concept of efficiency must be understood as beyond the speed of the procedural action. This is because, for an efficient judiciary necessarily judicial decisions shall be effective with respect to its own content, then, that the claimants have true access to justice, essential that the judiciary has provided you with a legal and appropriate response to you, regardless of the outcome. The decision ruled in Economic Analysis of Law does not convey the idea of effectiveness, since it is up to the magistrate first function as the link with the law and the commitment to intepretação. In interpreting the judge should be cautious when using the principles and indeterminate concepts to justify their decision and should make use of them only in character complementarity. The Justice Activism is most often characterized by the indiscriminate use of interpretative principles to overcome the limits and justify the decision according to personal conviction of the judge. Thus, the phenomenon of Justice Activism ends up interfering with other powers and face the democratic rule of law, to the extent that the judge's decision goes beyond standard and often distorts the legal text. Similarly, this disparity reflected in the jurisprudence and ultimately cause legal uncertainty on claimants who do not have the minimum of predictability decision by the current way of interpreting some judges, considered "activists". The New Code of Civil Procedure which will come into force next year was prepared with energetic devices in order to curb the features postures activism. The method chosen for this research was the hypothetical-deductive and dialectical, using specialized works and detailed study of all the case law, duly investigated according to the relevance of the work. / A eficiência do Poder Judiciário não se limita ao aspecto temporal de duração dos processos, sendo certo que o conceito de eficiência deve ser entendido como além da celeridade do trâmite processual. Isso porque, para um Poder Judiciário eficiente necessariamente as decisões judiciais deverão ser efetivas com relação ao seu próprio conteúdo, pois, para que o jurisdicionado tenha o verdadeiro acesso à justiça, imprescindível que o Judiciário lhe forneça uma resposta legal e adequada ao seu caso, independente do desfecho. A decisão pautada na Analise Econômica do Direito não traduz a ideia de efetividade, posto que cabe ao magistrado como função primeira o vínculo com a lei e o comprometimento com a intepretação. No interpretar, o juiz deve ser cauteloso quando da utilização dos princípios e conceitos indeterminados para fundamentar sua decisão, devendo se valer dos mesmos somente em caráter de complementariedade. O Ativismo Judicial tem na maioria das vezes como característica a utilização indiscriminada dos princípios para ultrapassar os limites interpretativos e justificar a decisão consoante a convicção pessoal do magistrado. Assim, o fenômeno do Ativismo Judicial acaba por interferir nos demais poderes e afrontar o regime democrático de direito, na medida em que o juiz vai além da norma de decisão e muitas vezes desvirtua o texto legal. De igual modo, isso reflete na disparidade jurisprudencial e acaba por causar insegurança jurídica no jurisdicionado que não tem o mínimo de previsibilidade de decisão pela atual maneira de interpretar de alguns magistrados, considerados “ativistas”. O Novo Código de Processo Civil que entrará em vigor no próximo ano foi elaborado com enérgicos dispositivos no sentido de coibir as posturas características do ativismo. O método escolhido para a presente pesquisa foi o hipotético-dedutivo e dialético, utilizando-se de obras especializadas, bem como estudo minucioso sobre toda a jurisprudência, devidamente pesquisada de acordo com a pertinência do trabalho.

Submitted by Nadir Basilio (nadirsb@uninove.br) on 2016-05-12T18:55:33Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Mauricio Gabriele.pdf: 1281603 bytes, checksum: 3c8170f77773637b426fe466cc74c7c7 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-05-12T18:55:33Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Mauricio Gabriele.pdf: 1281603 bytes, checksum: 3c8170f77773637b426fe466cc74c7c7 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2013-12-18 / The present study aims at analyzing the relation involving the judiciary crisis, the access to justice and the notarial protest, proposing a careful thought on each of these issues. At first, it analyses the judiciary crisis rationalizing the fact that this crisis is beyond the judiciary powers, and that it is already involving the State and the society as well, thus one may affirm that the judiciary on its own will not be able to find a solution. Hence, there is the need to search other means to do deal with this issue and especially alternative means for solving conflicts. Secondly, it analyses the crisis of reaching justice, originated by the judiciary crisis itself, it is proposed a re-interpretation of the institute aiming at clarifying the difference between access to justice and access to the judiciary system, taking into consideration the existing alternative means to solve conflicts. At last, it analyses the characteristics and the operation of notarial protest, in order to verify its capacity, as an alternative mean of solving conflicts, thus helping the judiciary system as well as easing the access to justice. In the very end, it presents statistics and data concerning notarial protest in Brazil. It confirms the first hypothesis of this work, which affirms that the protest itself is a great tool in solving conflicts, and one of the consequences of its daily use is the easing of a clogged judiciary system. Combining these thoughts, it is likely to conclude that notarial protest is an effective alternative and sui generis mean of conflict solving. The present study is based on qualitative and quantitative data as well as on previous studies over the subject matter, culminating at its conclusion by an inductive research approach. / O presente estudo tem por objetivo analisar a relação que pode ser legitimamente estabelecida entre a crise do Judiciário, o acesso à justiça e o protesto notarial, propondo uma reflexão sobre cada um desses três objetos. Primeiramente, analisa-se a crise do Judiciário ponderando que esta transcendeu os limites deste Poder, envolvendo todo o Estado e a Sociedade; assim, considera-se que o Judiciário, por si só, não poderá sanear sua crise devendo-se buscar subsídios em outros seguimentos, dos quais se destacam os meios alternativos para solução de conflitos. Em seguida, analisa-se a crise de acesso à justiça, motivada pela própria crise do Judiciário, e procura-se uma releitura deste instituto a fim de diferenciar o acesso à justiça do acesso ao Judiciário, que, muitas vezes, pode ser propiciado por meios alternativos de solução de conflito. Foram analisadas as características e operacionalidade do protesto notarial, com o propósito de verificar seu potencial enquanto meio alternativo de solução e pacificação de conflitos, socorrendo, assim o Judiciário e o acesso à justiça, e promovendo a desjudicialização de litígios. Por fim, apresenta estatísticas da experiência de protesto no Brasil, as quais confirmam a hipótese deste trabalho, em dizer, ao final que, constitui-se o protesto em importante ferramenta para a solução de conflitos e, por consequência, para desafogar (e agilizar) o Judiciário, perfazendo-se como um método alternativo sui generis de solução de conflitos. O presente trabalho serviu-se de pesquisa bibliográfica e empírica, com estatísticas, utilizando-se do método indutivo.

This dissertation is motivated by a straightforward question about a drastic change to American politics: why has the process of staffing the circuit courts of appeals, once so agreeable and bipartisan, seemed to have descended into almost complete partisan bitterness? Across the entire time series, these are, after all, the same courts endowed with the same power of judicial review. And when the process of staffing them was harmonious, the courts were nevertheless deciding the fate of major, controversial policies of national importance---such as the New Deal in the 1930s and civil rights in the 1950s---just as they do today. Yes, many other aspects of American politics have changed through the decades. But what could possibly explain such a complete reversal of course? I argue that this change, toward divisiveness and partisan warfare, is actually about the judiciary itself and the substantive manner by which the nominees are thought of---namely, the entry of judicial ideology into the debate through the innovation of circuit judges being evaluated on ideological terms. While taken for granted as central today, any ideological assessment of circuit court nominees, and in particular viewing them as having a comprehensive judicial philosophy as opposed to just a position on singular pressing issue of the day, was almost nonexistent for generations. Its entry into the process was piecemeal and somewhat complicated, but it eventually came to dominate and irrevocably polarize the business of staffing the courts. I argue that this was the key factor that leaves us where we are today. Broadly speaking, I consider the contributions and particular strengths of my dissertation, relative to previous scholarship, to be threefold. First is my argument and accompanying analyses which put the crucial (and severely understudied) role of judicial ideology front and center. Second, I analyze the entire lifespan of the circuit courts, whereas the previous scholarship looks only at (often relatively brief) subsets of their history. As far as I know, this is the first study to systematically look at all circuit court nominations from the establishment of these courts in 1891 through the modern era. Third, I collect and analyze a great deal of new data. In particular I focus on systematically utilizing extensive archival resources and build two original data sets related to the Senate's public and private evaluation of judicial nominees; and while there is certainly a qualitative aspect to much of this research, I also synthesize and make sense of it with quantitative analysis. In chapter 1, I explain the puzzle motivating this research, elaborate my argument, and lay out the theoretical, methodological, and data collection contributions of this dissertation. I also review the literature and describe the three existing schools of thought. In chapter 2, I give an overview of the history of the circuit courts from their founding to the present. In this data-heavy chapter, I examine multiple metrics individually, and using several of these I build a robust composite score of divisiveness for each nominee ever made to the circuit courts, from 1891 through 2020. As far as I know this has never been done before. I find overwhelming evidence that the process has fundamentally changed and become more divisive. In chapter 3, I dig more deeply into the timing of this change, and begin to explore how and why it happened---and begin my attempt at demonstrating how the evaluation of judicial ideology is central to this change. To do this I examine a massive data source that has never been utilized: the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings for all nominees. With both qualitative and quantitative analysis, I show that the evaluation of nominees has varied widely over time. Prior to 1979, nominees were evaluated almost exclusively based on their qualifications, with ideology examined only under special circumstances, which I explore in depth. In this time period, ideological scrutiny predicted a contentious confirmation process, providing evidence for my argument that ideological evaluation drove divisiveness. Also in this chapter, I analyze the post-1979 transition to the routine ideological evaluation that permanently altered the confirmation process. I find that Republicans and comprehensive judicial philosophies both played a key role. In chapter 4, I examine the senators' private evaluation of nominees, in part to serve as a check on the validity of my earlier data analysis and also to see if there is any difference between the senators' public and private goals in relation to the judiciary. To do this, I build an original data set of over 1000 internal letters and memoranda from senators, by searching the archival records of nearly every president since Benjamin Harrison as well as over 150 senators. Studying this material qualitatively and quantitatively, the findings here largely align with the analysis of the public committee hearings: for much of history senators were concerned mainly about qualifications, with ideological concern rare and under special circumstances, but eventually ideology came to be the predominant concern which ended the consensual and placid process. This immense historical record also brings to light additional senatorial goals, such as ensuring residents of their own state as well as personal friends obtain judicial appointments. In chapter 5, I focus in on the post-1979 era and I find that the more ideologically distant a nominee is from the Senate, the more divisive the confirmation process is. This provides evidence that the process is defined by ideology related to the nominees, not garden variety polarization of the system. In chapter 6, I conclude, trying to synthesize all of my findings as well as offer some thoughts on areas of future research.

[pt] O trabalho desenvolvido pretende compreender o controle concentrado de constitucionalidade de eventual norma instituidora de discriminação positiva, através do mecanismo de quotas raciais para ingresso no ensino superior público. Ficou demonstrada a necessidade de que tal controle seja realizado por meio do princípio da proporcionalidade. Isso porque, de um lado, a implementação de tais medidas acarreta restrição a um direito fundamental, qual seja, a igualdade em sentido formal. De outro, envolve a consideração de fatos e prognoses legislativos pelo Poder Judiciário. Assim, somente logra legitimidade se levada a efeito em consonância com os critérios de racionalização impostos pelo princípio em questão. É tarefa do legislador buscar meios para efetivar a isonomia substancial, como forma de concretizar os mandamentos constitucionais, os quais não podem significar um reles corpo programático de normas, e sim um instrumento para a realização do objetivo primordial do Constitucionalismo contemporâneo: a dignidade da pessoa humana. Portanto, restou clara a patente necessidade de racionalização do vínculo entre legislador e direitos fundamentais, precipuamente de modo a delimitar suas margens de ação. Para que a vinculação apontada seja realmente efetiva, torna-se indispensável a atuação da jurisdição constitucional, dentro dos limites traçados, de modo a obter legitimidade como importante instrumento de defesa do Estado Democrático de Direito. O controle realizado seguiu a máxima da proporcionalidade. Desse modo, a aferição dos fatos e prognoses legislativos ficou circunscrita aos subprincípios concretizadores da adequação aptidão dos meios empregados para a consecução dos fins e da necessidade inexistência de outro meio menos gravoso, em atenção à idéia de menor ingerência possível. Já a análise da tensão entre igualdade material e formal foi feita consoante o subprincípio da proporcionalidade em sentido estrito, pelo qual se opera um juízo de ponderação dos valores jurídicos em conflito. / [en] This work aims to understand the concentrated judicial control of constitutionality of any given positive discrimination law, based on the mechanism of preferred admissions for racial minorities in the public Universities. It`s been demonstrated that such control must follow the proportionality principle. That s because, on one side, the implementation of these measures involves a restriction on a fundamental right, that is, equality on its formal conception. Otherwise, it also involves the consideration of legislative facts and prognoses by the judiciary. Thus, this instance of control is only legitimate if carried out in line with the rules of rationalization imposed by the principle in question. It`s duty of the legislator to seek for the means capable of implementing the substantial conception of equality, as a way to put into practice the constitutional commandments, which may not be just ideological standards, but instruments for achieving the main objective of contemporary constitutionalism: the dignity of the human person. Therefore, it is necessary to rationalize the linkage between legislator and fundamental rights, especially in order to limit the margins of action. Indeed, the action of the judiciary branch is essential, restrained by the appointed limits, with the purpose of obtaining legitimacy as an important instrument of defense of a Democratic State. The suggested constitutionality control followed the principle of proportionality. Thus, legislative facts and prognoses were limited by the sub-principles of adequacy suitability of the employed means to achieve the aimed purposes and necessity inexistence of other harmlessly means, in attention to the idea of the smallest degree of intrusion as possible. In addition, the analysis of the stress between formal and material conceptions of equality was carried out considering the sub- principle ofproportionality in the strict sense, which operates a balancing of legal values in conflict.