1 |
A repercussão geral das questões constitucionais, no recurso extraordinário e a ampliação do acesso à justiça / The overall impact of constitutional issues in the appeal and the extraordinary expansion of access to JusticeGusmão, Ozana Baptista 14 October 2009 (has links)
Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:29:53Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
Ozana Baptista Gusmao.pdf: 371707 bytes, checksum: d5e17903de695177bc34491d1f808d43 (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2009-10-14 / The following study aims to analyse the impacts that the introduction of the subject of
general repercussion on the extraordinary appeal will bring to the Brazilian juridical
system, specially over the crisis that is inflicted on the Supreme Federal Court. It
looks as well to analyse the pertinence or not of adopting a filter to the ends it is
purposed to. The study is justified by the profound alterations that the subject
adoption will bring to all the system, even causing a paradigm shift on the
extraordinary appeal. For a better understanding of those alterations, it will first
examine the hystorical aspects, placing the creation of the extraordinary appeal and
the Supreme Federal Court on the Brazilian juridical system. Similar subjects,
adopted in other countries, will also be analyzed, as well as the courses of the
Brazilian appeal filter version. It will raise the cultural question, of operators and those
under jurisdiction, facing the juridical situations, on the Brazilian scenario. At last, it
will collate the subject creation and legitimity to the constitutional guarantee of
process reasonable length and access to Justice / O presente estudo tem por objetivo analisar os impactos que a introdução do
instituto da repercussão geral no recurso extraordinário trará ao sistema jurídico
brasileiro, especialmente sobre a crise que assola o Supremo Tribunal Federal, bem
como analisar a pertinência ou não da adoção do filtro para o fim que se propõe.
Justifica-se o estudo pela profunda alteração que a adoção do instituto trará sobre
todo o sistema, provocando inclusive mudança de paradigma do recurso
extraordinário. Para melhor compreensão dessas alterações, primeiramente
examinar-se-á os aspectos históricos, situando a criação do recurso extraordinário e
o Supremo Tribunal Federal, no sistema jurídico brasileiro. Serão também
analisados institutos similares, adotados em outros países, bem como os meandros
da versão brasileira do filtro recursal. Colocar-se-á a questão cultural dos operadores
e jurisdicionados frente às situações jurídicas na cena brasileira. Por fim, cotejar-seá
a criação e legitimidade do instituto frente à garantia constitucional da duração
razoável do processo e o acesso à Justiça
|
2 |
Die rol van diskresie by die toelaatbaarheid van getuienis wat in stryd met die grondwet verkry isNel, F. (Francisca) 11 1900 (has links)
Text in Afrikaans / Artikel 35(5) van die Grondwet 108 van 1996 handel oor die uitsluiting van
ongrondwetlike getuienis en bepaal dat sodanige getuienis uitgesluit moet word
indien toelating daarvan sal lei tot 'n onbillike verhoor of tot nadeel sal strek vir
die regspleging. Uit die bewoording van die artikel blyk dit dat die howe geen
diskresie het ten opsigte van die toelaatbaarheidsvraag nie en 'n streng
uitsluitingbenadering moet volg. Die doel van hierdie verha• ndeling is om
ondersoek in te stel na die mate van diskresie .en die wyse ·waarop diskresie
toepas word in hierdie besluitnemingsproses. Twee benaderings is deur die
howe gevolg, naamlik 'n benadering waar 'n wye diskresie uitgeoefen word en 'n
benadering waar 'n beperkte diskresie uitgeoefen word, dus 'n gekwalifiseerde uitsluitingsbenadering. Die skrywer doen aan die hand dat beide gronde vir
uitsluiting van belang is en dat die howe verkeie faktore moet oorweeg ten einde
'n beslissing te vel oor die insluiting of uitsluiting van ongrondwetlike getuienis. 'n
Balans moet dus gehandhaaf word tussen die belang van die beskuldigde op 'n
billike verhoor en die belang van die gemeenskap daarin dat regspleging nie
benadeel moet word nie en dat reg en geregtigheid moet geskied / Section 35(3) of the Constitution Act 108 of 1996 deals with the exclusion of
unconstitutionally obtained evidence and stipulates that such evidence must be
excluded if the admission would render the trial unfair or be detrimental to the
administration of justice. From the wording of the section it seems that the
courts have no jurisdiction in regard to the admissibility question and that a strict
exclusionary approach must be followed. The purpose of this dissertation is to
investigate the amount of discretion that the Courts have, and the manner in
which this discretion is applied in the process of decision making. Two
approaches were followed by the courts namely a wide discretionary approach
and an approach where a strict discretion was applied. It is submitted that botR
grounds for exclusion are of importance and that the courts must consider a
variety of factors in deciding the question on the inclusion or exclusion of
unconstitutionally obtained evidence. A balance must be struck between the
interest of the accused in a fair trial and the interest of the community that the
administration of justice must not be prejudiced and that justice must prevail. / Criminal & Procedural Law / LL.M. (Law)
|
3 |
Die rol van diskresie by die toelaatbaarheid van getuienis wat in stryd met die grondwet verkry isNel, F. (Francisca) 11 1900 (has links)
Text in Afrikaans / Artikel 35(5) van die Grondwet 108 van 1996 handel oor die uitsluiting van
ongrondwetlike getuienis en bepaal dat sodanige getuienis uitgesluit moet word
indien toelating daarvan sal lei tot 'n onbillike verhoor of tot nadeel sal strek vir
die regspleging. Uit die bewoording van die artikel blyk dit dat die howe geen
diskresie het ten opsigte van die toelaatbaarheidsvraag nie en 'n streng
uitsluitingbenadering moet volg. Die doel van hierdie verha• ndeling is om
ondersoek in te stel na die mate van diskresie .en die wyse ·waarop diskresie
toepas word in hierdie besluitnemingsproses. Twee benaderings is deur die
howe gevolg, naamlik 'n benadering waar 'n wye diskresie uitgeoefen word en 'n
benadering waar 'n beperkte diskresie uitgeoefen word, dus 'n gekwalifiseerde uitsluitingsbenadering. Die skrywer doen aan die hand dat beide gronde vir
uitsluiting van belang is en dat die howe verkeie faktore moet oorweeg ten einde
'n beslissing te vel oor die insluiting of uitsluiting van ongrondwetlike getuienis. 'n
Balans moet dus gehandhaaf word tussen die belang van die beskuldigde op 'n
billike verhoor en die belang van die gemeenskap daarin dat regspleging nie
benadeel moet word nie en dat reg en geregtigheid moet geskied / Section 35(3) of the Constitution Act 108 of 1996 deals with the exclusion of
unconstitutionally obtained evidence and stipulates that such evidence must be
excluded if the admission would render the trial unfair or be detrimental to the
administration of justice. From the wording of the section it seems that the
courts have no jurisdiction in regard to the admissibility question and that a strict
exclusionary approach must be followed. The purpose of this dissertation is to
investigate the amount of discretion that the Courts have, and the manner in
which this discretion is applied in the process of decision making. Two
approaches were followed by the courts namely a wide discretionary approach
and an approach where a strict discretion was applied. It is submitted that botR
grounds for exclusion are of importance and that the courts must consider a
variety of factors in deciding the question on the inclusion or exclusion of
unconstitutionally obtained evidence. A balance must be struck between the
interest of the accused in a fair trial and the interest of the community that the
administration of justice must not be prejudiced and that justice must prevail. / Criminal and Procedural Law / LL.M. (Law)
|
Page generated in 0.0965 seconds