La liberté d'expression intervient dans différents domaines, et bénéficie de la protection des constitutions nationales ainsi que des conventions internationales. Toutefois, la question se pose de cette protection s'agissant du domaine commercial. La reconnaissance d'un discours commercial constitutionnellement et conventionnellement protégé est le fruit de nombreux revirements de jurisprudence, mais demeure encore contestée par une partie de la doctrine. Consacrer la liberté d'expression commerciale en tant que droit fondamental ne permet dès lors pas uniquement de renforcer sa protection, mais aussi de créer un rapprochement entre les droits fondamentaux et le droit économique. En effet, la nature économique du discours commercial est au coeur des débats dont il est l'objet, et l'amène à être confronté, d'une part aux autres droits et libertés, d'autre part aux droits de la propriété intellectuelle et des nouvelles technologies. La présence de la liberté d'expression commerciale au sein de ces derniers témoigne de la diffusion des droits fondamentaux dans l'ensemble du droit. Enfin, la reconnaissance de cette nouvelle liberté fondamentale, relevant à la fois des droits civils et des droits économiques, met en lumière un renouvellement des typologies de classification des droits fondamentaux. / The freedom of speech takes place in differents domains, and receives protection from the national constitutions and international conventions. However, concerning the commercial domain, the question of its protection may be asked. The recognition of a constitutional and conventional protection of the commercial speech is the result of many turnovers Court, but still remains disputed by some doctrine. To devote the commercial speech as a constitutional right can not only strengthen its protection, but also to create a connection between economy and the consitutional rights. Indeed, the economic nature of the commercial speech is in the middle of the discussions which it is the object, and causes it to be confronted on the one hand with the other constitutional rights, and on the other hand with the right of intellectual property and of new technologies. The presence of the commercial speech in these reflects the spread of the constitutional rights in the whole law. Finally, the recognition of this new constitutional right, under both civil and economic rights, highlights a revitalisation of the classifications' typologies of the constitutional rights.

Le concept d'autonomie personnelle est apparu récemment dans l'ordre juridique européen, comme la faculté pour la personne humaine de mener sa vie comme elle l'entend. Ce concept trouve son ancrage dans un système juridique en pleine mutation, tiraillé entre deux traditions, l'une anglo-saxonne qui constitue un modèle autonomique de protection des droits de la personne, et l'autre continentale, plus paternaliste. Le rôle des juges constitutionnels européens et des organes de la Convention européenne des droits de l'homme s'est révélé décisif pour faire émerger la notion d'autonomie personnelle au sein de l'ordre juridique, et pour l'ériger progressivement en principe matriciel des droits fondamentaux. La prise en considération de l'autonomie personnelle vise, en effet, à modifier la protection juridique de la personne humaine, qui n'est plus générale et abstraite mais ajustée et concrète, répondant ainsi aux enjeux actuels de la protection des droits de l'homme et de la réalité sociale.Le but de cette étude est d'analyser la fonction de l'autonomie personnelle, vecteur d'intégration sociale de toute personne humaine, et élément participatif au pluralisme interne essentiel à une société démocratique. L'analyse porte sur les avancées permises par la reconnaissance de l'autonomie personnelle dans la protection des droits individuels et dans ceux des minorités. Malgré certaines réticences doctrinales, cette fonction se révèle limitée dans la remise en cause des valeurs sociales qu'elle pouvait induire, mais elle s'avère primordiale au développement de la protection des droits de la personne humaine. / The concept of personal autonomy recently appeared in the European justice system as a means by which people can lead their lives as they wish. This concept has its roots in an evolving justice system, torn between two traditions: the Anglo-Saxon model of individual rights; and the paternalist Continental approach. The role of constitutional European judges and the inner-workings of the European Convention on Human Rights has proved decisive for the development of the idea of personal autonomy which lies at the heart of the justice system, and its evaluation within the matrix of fundamental rights. Taking into account personal autonomy aims to effectively alter the judicial protection of the rights of the person which is no longer general and abstract but rather concrete and refined, and also addresses current issues of the protection of human rights and the reality of society.The aim of this study is to analyse the function of personal autonomy and the direction of human social interaction and the participative element of internal pluralism which is essential to a democratic society. The analysis focuses on advances permitted by the recognition of personal autonomy in the protection of individual rights and those of minorities. In spite of some doctrinal reluctance, this function proves limited in light of questions regarding social values which it might raise, but it proves essential to the development of the protection of the rights of the person.

[pt] O modelo de controle de constitucionalidade francês, devido à sua especificidade, serviu por anos como exemplo do único sistema no qual o exame de compatibilidade entre normas infraconstitucionais e o texto da Constituição era realizado pelo Conselho Constitucional - órgão político - e de maneira preventiva, ou seja, antes das disposições legislativas entrarem em vigor e produzirem efeitos. Com o passar do tempo verificou-se na prática, a perda da supremacia da Constituição da República Francesa de 1958, como resultado da ausência de proteção a direitos e liberdades constitucionais. Por este motivo, no final dos anos 80 operadores do direito começaram a se mobilizar e a vislumbrar uma proposta de mudança e reforma. Em 2008 foi aprovada uma Lei Constitucional, que tem status de Emenda Constitucional, com o intuito de modernizar as instituições políticas da França. Dentre as medidas modernizadoras estava incluída a criação da Questão Prioritária de Constitucionalidade, mecanismo que tem como principal objetivo conferir aos particulares a prerrogativa de contestarem a constitucionalidade de uma disposição legislativa que julguem atentar contra direitos e liberdades garantidos constitucionalmente. Esta pesquisa analisou os fatores que antecederam e influenciaram a reforma supracitada, além das consequências e dos efeitos gerados pela introdução da QPC no ordenamento jurídico francês. / [en] The French system of constitutional review is very specific and was used for years as an example of the only system in which the compatibility exam between laws and the Constitution was performed by the Constitutional Council - which is a politic institution - preventively. In other words, this exam happened before the legal provisions come into force and take effect. As a result of the lack of protection of the constitutional rights and freedoms, the French Constitution was gradually losing its supremacy. That is why jurists during the 80 s started to discuss a proposal of change and reform. When in 2008, a constitutional amendment was approved, creating a mechanism which gave individuals the right to contest the constitutionality of whichever legal provision they deemed to be violating their constitutional rights and freedoms. This research examined the factors that preceded and influenced the reform, and above all the effects and consequences generated by the Priority Question of Constitutionality in French Law.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:21:28Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Marcelo Buzaglo Dantas.pdf: 2709557 bytes, checksum: 4449f809147a13fced63f7b0416611f1 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012-12-10 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / Environmental law is a constitutional right and it frequently clashes with other protected rights. In these cases, differently from what happens to rule conflicts, in which, by the use of solution criterions, one of them is declared invalid, in competing principle cases, if harmonization is not possible, the solution is given by balancing, using the proportionality principle in its three dimensions (adequacy, necessity and strict proportionality), always through proper argumentation. There are some cases in which the proportionality test does not solve the conflict, and then judicial discretion appears. The object of this study is to analyze some situations where ecologically balanced environmental constitutional right clashes with others, such as cultural heritage, economic development, rule of law, res judicata, separation of powers, human dignity, living and traditional population rights in face of the creation of a protected area. The main target is to demonstrate that, since there are no absolute rights, in clash cases concerning ecologically balanced environmental right and other constitutional rights, if harmonization is not possible, any of them will prevail, according to the specificity of the case, as a result of balancing, using the proportionality principle and argumentation. The importance of this topic is immense because of its actuality and the fact that ecologically balanced environmental right is highly conflictive but, at the same time, very flexible, which stimulates practical agreement. The text was elaborated considering the most important issues that involve ecologically balanced environmental right, established by the Federal Constitution. It was searched, in specialized authors, the argumentation to demonstrate principles normative force and the technical solutions for hard cases, which, in a civil law tradition, means situations involving competing principles. In the end, specific situations in which environmental right clashes with other constitutional rights and the way Brazilian Courts have been solving these controversies were examined. The Supreme Court main decisions involving environmental issues were deeply analyzed. Polemic questions were brought to discussion, and different points of view about the controversy were shown. In order to clarify the analysis of some comparative law institutes, foreign references were brought, especially from the United States of America. The result was a systematization of a mostly complex and interesting topic, examined through actual doctrine and jurisprudence / O direito ao meio ambiente ecologicamente equilibrado é um direito fundamental de terceira geração e, como tal, colide com outros direitos fundamentais igualmente dignos de tutela. Em tais hipóteses, diferentemente do que se dá com os conflitos de regras, em que, ante a aplicação dos critérios de solução de antinomias, uma delas é declarada inválida, nos casos de colisão de princípios, caso impossível a harmonização, a solução é dada mediante ponderação, através do uso da máxima da proporcionalidade em suas três subdimensões (adequação, necessidade e proporcionalidade em sentido estrito), sempre mediante argumentação adequada. Há casos em que o teste da proporcionalidade não soluciona o conflito, dando margem ao recurso à discricionariedade judicial. O objeto do presente trabalho é analisar algumas hipóteses de colisão entre o direito fundamental ao meio ambiente ecologicamente equilibrado e outros direitos fundamentais, como o patrimônio cultural, o desenvolvimento econômico e a livre-iniciativa, a propriedade, o direito adquirido, o ato jurídico perfeito e a coisa julgada, a separação de poderes, a dignidade da pessoa humana e a moradia e os direitos das populações tradicionais diante da criação de unidades de conservação. O objetivo primacial é demonstrar que, como não há direito fundamental absoluto, nas hipóteses de colisão entre o meio ambiente ecologicamente equilibrado e outros direitos fundamentais, caso impossível a harmonização, tanto pode prevalecer um quanto o outro, dependendo das peculiaridades do caso concreto, o que é feito através do recurso à ponderação, com a aplicação da proporcionalidade e mediante argumentação. A importância do tema é imensa em virtude da sua atualidade e do fato de que o meio ambiente é um direito altamente conflituoso, mas, ao mesmo tempo, muitíssimo flexível, o que é um estímulo à concordância prática. O texto foi elaborado levando-se em conta as mais importantes questões que envolvem o direito ao meio ambiente ecologicamente equilibrado, previstas na Constituição da República.Buscaram-se, na doutrina especializada da Teoria Constitucional, as bases para se demonstrar a força normativa dos princípios e as técnicas de solução dos chamados casos difíceis (hard cases), que, para nós que seguimos a civil law, consistem nas situações que envolvem colisão de princípios. Ao final, examinaram-se hipóteses específicas em que o meio ambiente ecologicamente equilibrado colide com outros direitos fundamentais e a forma como os Tribunais brasileiros vêm solucionando tais controvérsias. As principais decisões do Supremo Tribunal envolvendo o tema meio ambiente foram objeto de detida análise. Questões altamente polêmicas foram trazidas à discussão, colacionando-se os diferentes entendimentos doutrinários acerca de cada controvérsia, buscando, sempre que possível, a tomada de posição. A fim de respaldar a análise de alguns institutos à luz do direito comparado, foram trazidas referências doutrinárias estrangeiras, principalmente dos Estados Unidos da América. O resultado que se pretendeu foi a sistematização de um tema dos mais complexos e instigantes, à luz da doutrina e da jurisprudência mais atuais

The environmental crisis threatens the fundamental values of the political liberal tradition. As the autonomy, the security and the prosperity of persons and peoples are jeopardized by political inaction, the legitimacy of the liberal constitutional order is compromised. Because of important collective action problems, the democratic processes are unfit to address the present crisis and protect adequately the natural environment. Two institutional solutions deemed capable of preserving the legitimacy of the functional domination at the heart of social order are analyzed. The first is the constitutionalization of a right to an adequate natural environment, which purports to circumvent the paralysis of legislative power. The second is the declaration of a limited state of emergency and the use of exceptional powers, which purports to circumvent the paralysis of both legislative and judiciary powers. Despite their legitimacy, the diligent application of these political solutions remains improbable. / La dégradation de l’environnement naturel menace les valeurs fondamentales de la tradition libérale que sont l’autonomie, la sécurité et la prospérité des personnes et des peuples. À ce titre, la légitimité morale de l’ordre constitutionnel libéral et la légitimité morale de l’autorité politique qui le représente sont toutes deux compromises. Or, les mécanismes démocratiques apparaissent pour de nombreuses raisons inaptes à assurer une protection suffisante de l’environnement naturel. Pour rétablir la légitimité des rapports de commandement et d’obéissance qui fondent l’ordre social, deux solutions institutionnelles sont analysées. La première consiste à constitutionnaliser un droit à un environnement naturel de qualité pour dépasser la paralysie du pouvoir législatif. La seconde consiste à déclarer un état d’urgence limité et à recourir aux pouvoirs d’exception, de manière à dépasser l’impotence législative et l’impotence judiciaire. En dépit de leur légitimité, la mise en œuvre de ces solutions politiques demeure improbable.

O objetivo central desta investigação é demonstrar que a ponderação é racional. A proposição normativa particular concreta resultante de um caso de colisão de direitos fundamentais resolvido pela ponderação pode ser justificada racionalmente. O que se pretende sustentar é que o problema não está na ponderação, mas como ela é realizada para solucionar os casos de colisão de direitos fundamentais. A ponderação somente pode pretender racionalidade quando sustentada por razões dadas conforme regras. A proposição decisiva desta investigação é a de que a ponderação, como atividade argumentativa, deve observar as regras da argumentação racional. Essas regras são as regras da argumentação prática geral e da argumentação jurídica, formuladas pela teoria do discurso prático geral e do discurso jurídico. Elas configuram a base das regras próprias da ponderação racional. / The goal of this research is to show that balancing is rational. The particular concrete normative statement resulting from a collision of constitutional rights resolved by balancing can be justified rationally. The aim is to sustain that the problem is not balancing itself, but how it is used to solve the cases of collision of constitutional rights.The balancing can be rational only if supported by reasons given under rules. A crucial proposition of this research is that the balancing, as argumentative activity, must observe the rules of rational legal reasoning. These rules are the rules of the general practice argumentation and the rules of the legal reasoning, raised by the theory of general practical discourse and legal discourse. They make the basis of its own rules of rational balancing.

O objetivo central desta investigação é demonstrar que a ponderação é racional. A proposição normativa particular concreta resultante de um caso de colisão de direitos fundamentais resolvido pela ponderação pode ser justificada racionalmente. O que se pretende sustentar é que o problema não está na ponderação, mas como ela é realizada para solucionar os casos de colisão de direitos fundamentais. A ponderação somente pode pretender racionalidade quando sustentada por razões dadas conforme regras. A proposição decisiva desta investigação é a de que a ponderação, como atividade argumentativa, deve observar as regras da argumentação racional. Essas regras são as regras da argumentação prática geral e da argumentação jurídica, formuladas pela teoria do discurso prático geral e do discurso jurídico. Elas configuram a base das regras próprias da ponderação racional. / The goal of this research is to show that balancing is rational. The particular concrete normative statement resulting from a collision of constitutional rights resolved by balancing can be justified rationally. The aim is to sustain that the problem is not balancing itself, but how it is used to solve the cases of collision of constitutional rights.The balancing can be rational only if supported by reasons given under rules. A crucial proposition of this research is that the balancing, as argumentative activity, must observe the rules of rational legal reasoning. These rules are the rules of the general practice argumentation and the rules of the legal reasoning, raised by the theory of general practical discourse and legal discourse. They make the basis of its own rules of rational balancing.

O objetivo central desta investigação é demonstrar que a ponderação é racional. A proposição normativa particular concreta resultante de um caso de colisão de direitos fundamentais resolvido pela ponderação pode ser justificada racionalmente. O que se pretende sustentar é que o problema não está na ponderação, mas como ela é realizada para solucionar os casos de colisão de direitos fundamentais. A ponderação somente pode pretender racionalidade quando sustentada por razões dadas conforme regras. A proposição decisiva desta investigação é a de que a ponderação, como atividade argumentativa, deve observar as regras da argumentação racional. Essas regras são as regras da argumentação prática geral e da argumentação jurídica, formuladas pela teoria do discurso prático geral e do discurso jurídico. Elas configuram a base das regras próprias da ponderação racional. / The goal of this research is to show that balancing is rational. The particular concrete normative statement resulting from a collision of constitutional rights resolved by balancing can be justified rationally. The aim is to sustain that the problem is not balancing itself, but how it is used to solve the cases of collision of constitutional rights.The balancing can be rational only if supported by reasons given under rules. A crucial proposition of this research is that the balancing, as argumentative activity, must observe the rules of rational legal reasoning. These rules are the rules of the general practice argumentation and the rules of the legal reasoning, raised by the theory of general practical discourse and legal discourse. They make the basis of its own rules of rational balancing.

The purpose of this study is to examine the actual political conditions that exist for the Iranian women. What is the political reality of the Iranian women and how can they exert political influence within the political system that exists in Iran today. This is done to see how the Iranian women's potential political influence affects Iran's democratic status. This will be answered through the overall research question: What opportunities do the Iranian women have to influence policy? This overall question is then split into three smaller research questions: 1) What formal possibilities to political influence do the Iranian women have? 2) What real possibilities to political influence do the Iranian women have? 3) How have women in Iran tried to exert political influence outside the institutional framework? This will be done through a qualitative text analysis where texts concerning the Iranian women’s political influence are examined. The theoretical basis for the study is Dahl's theories of an ideal democracy and polyarchy together with radical and liberal feminism. The Iranian women have many formal rights and opportunities for political influence given by the Constitution but these are not transferred to reality. The Iranian women have also been active in various political actions to influence their situations and the policies of the country. Because of the fact that women are underrepresented in political institutions, prevented from standing for all political offices and that the government exercises strong control over both women and society Iran cannot be considered to meet Dahl's five criteria for an ideal democracy or the seven institutions necessary for polyarchy. Therefore Iran cannot be regarded as an ideal democracy or as a polyarchy. According to radical and liberal feminism Iran also has a patriarchal political system with a society that supports the male dominance over its women.

Adding something new to the understanding of To Kill a Mockingbird (1960), which is considered a twentieth-century classic, would be nearly impossible if not for the outlook of new historicism. Through a new historicist analysis of Harper Lee’s literary text parallel to non-fictional texts relating to the American justice system and civil rights, this essay explores how race affects U.S. institutions and society. Lee’s novel is contextualized by delving into the American South of the 1930s, American society and politics in the1960s and the racial landscape in America today, connecting them through the experiences of racial bias within the justice system and the civil rights movement. The essay explores the racial and cultural norms that governed the American justice system at the set time of the story. It analyzes the time of publication and the American society in which the novel made such an impact on the racial debate. Finally, it looks at the impact of the novel and its connection to the civil rights movement of the 1960s, the Black Lives Matter movement and readers today. In the spirit of new historicism, the mechanisms of racism and how they affect the population, both the oppressors and the oppressed, is highlighted showing parallels between Lee’s fictional world and American society over time. Through the experiences of the characters, the structures of racism translate to a time and place where the Black Lives Matter movement has infused new life to the civil rights movement worldwide. Looking at retellings of the historical Scottsboro trials, which inspired the story unfolding in To Kill a Mockingbird in light of the justice system, Maycomb county and its inhabitants serves as guides into the racial norms that is ingrained in American society and politics. The results reveal a society where racial segregation is constantly reinforced by legal, economical, and social barriers, despite constitutional efforts to level the playing field for all American citizens.