Trata-se de estudo de Direito Constitucional acerca dos direitos fundamentais. Inicialmente estudam-se os conceitos de direito subjetivo e de direito fundamental, elencandose as suas assim chamadas “gerações”. Após, enfrenta-se a construção doutrinária dos “deveres de proteção” dos direitos fundamentais. De mão desses conhecimentos, volta-se o foco, na segunda parte, para a teoria da “eficácia contra particulares” dos direitos fundamentais. Inicialmente, ubica-se-a no fenômeno maior da “Constitucionalização do Direito Privado”. Após, enunciam-se as teorias contrapostas que se construíram para a explicação dessa “eficácia contra particulares”, apresentando-se solução de conciliação. Aborda-se também particularidade processual atinente à divisão de competências dos tribunais de Brasília (STF e STJ) para aplicação da “eficácia contra particulares”. Conclui-se, finalmente, sobre possibilidade de superação dos riscos que os detratores dessa teoria levantam, contanto que respeitados determinados marcos teóricos. / This is a study on Constitutional Law about fundamental rights. First are focused the concepts of subjectiv right, fundamental rights, and its “generations”. Afterwards the attention shifts to the “duty of protection” of the fundamental rights. In the second part, the doctrine of the “effect of fundamental rights against private individuals” and the opposing theories about it are researched, with the proposal of a conciliatory solution. Then, the particular division of judiciary competences in Brasilia (between STJ and STF) to enforce that doctrine is targeted. Finally, the study concludes in favour of the possibility of avoiding the risks presented by the enemmies of that doctrine, if some theoretical marks are respected.

Trata-se de estudo de Direito Constitucional acerca dos direitos fundamentais. Inicialmente estudam-se os conceitos de direito subjetivo e de direito fundamental, elencandose as suas assim chamadas “gerações”. Após, enfrenta-se a construção doutrinária dos “deveres de proteção” dos direitos fundamentais. De mão desses conhecimentos, volta-se o foco, na segunda parte, para a teoria da “eficácia contra particulares” dos direitos fundamentais. Inicialmente, ubica-se-a no fenômeno maior da “Constitucionalização do Direito Privado”. Após, enunciam-se as teorias contrapostas que se construíram para a explicação dessa “eficácia contra particulares”, apresentando-se solução de conciliação. Aborda-se também particularidade processual atinente à divisão de competências dos tribunais de Brasília (STF e STJ) para aplicação da “eficácia contra particulares”. Conclui-se, finalmente, sobre possibilidade de superação dos riscos que os detratores dessa teoria levantam, contanto que respeitados determinados marcos teóricos. / This is a study on Constitutional Law about fundamental rights. First are focused the concepts of subjectiv right, fundamental rights, and its “generations”. Afterwards the attention shifts to the “duty of protection” of the fundamental rights. In the second part, the doctrine of the “effect of fundamental rights against private individuals” and the opposing theories about it are researched, with the proposal of a conciliatory solution. Then, the particular division of judiciary competences in Brasilia (between STJ and STF) to enforce that doctrine is targeted. Finally, the study concludes in favour of the possibility of avoiding the risks presented by the enemmies of that doctrine, if some theoretical marks are respected.

Trata-se de estudo de Direito Constitucional acerca dos direitos fundamentais. Inicialmente estudam-se os conceitos de direito subjetivo e de direito fundamental, elencandose as suas assim chamadas “gerações”. Após, enfrenta-se a construção doutrinária dos “deveres de proteção” dos direitos fundamentais. De mão desses conhecimentos, volta-se o foco, na segunda parte, para a teoria da “eficácia contra particulares” dos direitos fundamentais. Inicialmente, ubica-se-a no fenômeno maior da “Constitucionalização do Direito Privado”. Após, enunciam-se as teorias contrapostas que se construíram para a explicação dessa “eficácia contra particulares”, apresentando-se solução de conciliação. Aborda-se também particularidade processual atinente à divisão de competências dos tribunais de Brasília (STF e STJ) para aplicação da “eficácia contra particulares”. Conclui-se, finalmente, sobre possibilidade de superação dos riscos que os detratores dessa teoria levantam, contanto que respeitados determinados marcos teóricos. / This is a study on Constitutional Law about fundamental rights. First are focused the concepts of subjectiv right, fundamental rights, and its “generations”. Afterwards the attention shifts to the “duty of protection” of the fundamental rights. In the second part, the doctrine of the “effect of fundamental rights against private individuals” and the opposing theories about it are researched, with the proposal of a conciliatory solution. Then, the particular division of judiciary competences in Brasilia (between STJ and STF) to enforce that doctrine is targeted. Finally, the study concludes in favour of the possibility of avoiding the risks presented by the enemmies of that doctrine, if some theoretical marks are respected.

Aux termes des traités, l'UE développe une politique commune en matière d'asile, d'immigration et de contrôle aux frontières, fondée sur la solidarité et sur le respect des droits fondamentaux. Objectif qu'elle poursuit, en amorçant des relations stratégiques avec les Pays tiers. Toutefois, l'action extérieure de l'UE dans ce domaine doit aborder des défis importants. En premier lieu, elle doit promouvoir la collaboration des Pays tiers d'origine et de transit, en renforçant sa crédibilitéinternationales et, donc, la diffusion d'un esprit de confiance mutuelle. En deuxième lieu, l'UE est appelée à rendre effective ladite collaboration, en assurant que la compétence externe soit exercée par le niveau politique apportant la valeur ajoutée et en utilisant tout instrument disponible, contraignant ou non. En somme, la dimension extérieure de la politique migratoire de l'UE doit s'appuyer sur une stratégie cohérente et souple, apte à garantir la gestion efficace des flux migratoires. / According to the Treaties, the EU shall frame a common policy on asylum, immigration and external border control, based on solidarity and on the respect for fundamental rights, whose achievement clearly relies on the establishment of strategic relations with Third Countries. However, the EU external action in this policy field faces various challenges. Primarily, the EUshall make any efforts to promote the collaboration of Third Countries of origin and transit, by strengthening its international reliability and, accordingly, the spread of a spirit of mutual trust. Secondarily, the EU shall strive to make effective such a collaboration, by ensuring that the external competence is exercised by the political level providing the added value and by making use of any available cooperation tool, binding or not. Conclusively, the external dimension of EU migration policy shall be backed by a coherent and flexible strategy, apt to guarantee the effective management of migration flows.

Submitted by Filipe dos Santos (fsantos@pucsp.br) on 2017-12-20T08:48:16Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Fábio Meneguelo Sakamoto.pdf: 1270213 bytes, checksum: cd50de1346cf85f25ee0ac36df9df979 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-12-20T08:48:16Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Fábio Meneguelo Sakamoto.pdf: 1270213 bytes, checksum: cd50de1346cf85f25ee0ac36df9df979 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-12-11 / Despite the vast amount of literature available on fundamental rights, both in the Brazilian Law, and in the Comparative Law, there is still a need for more studies as the society evolves and personal relationships become richer and more complex, demanding that the interpreter and judges play a role beyond the traditional logical-subsumptive method in applying the norm to a concrete case (major premise, minor premise and conclusion). Thus, it is possible that, at a certain point, there is a need to acknowledge a right that has not been pre-established as a norm, neither in the constitutional text, nor in any other normative document; we believe this has been the reason why contemporary constitutions have expressly predicted a clause of unenumerated rights, such as art. 5, §2nd, of the Brazilian Constitution, and art. 16th, n. 1, of the Portuguese Constitution, acknowledging that other fundamental rights are recognized by constituted powers, especially by the Judiciary in the exercise of their activity. Such possibility requires a definition of what can be considered fundamental from the point of view of its contents, i. e., from its essence; this is precisely the object of our study: to investigate the values which can effectively be a benchmark for the acknowledgment of rights as fundamental. We concluded that such values derive from the combination of the precepts established in art. 1st, caput, its clauses and single paragraph, in art. 2nd and in art. 60, §4th, I to IV, of the Federal Constitution; such values are mutually related and constitute a safe indication that they have been elected by the Constituent as the most legitimate ones to forge the special category of rights known as the fundamental rights. Based on this conclusion, we verified that not every mechanism contained in the Federal Constitution - including in the catalogue of art. 5th - has the necessary to be considered fundamental. On the other hand, others that do not even appear in the text are included in this special category of rights. Therefore, it is possible to mention the existence of rights which are merely constitutional and rights which are materially fundamental, or fundamental per se, which, for a didactic effect herein, we chose to call truly fundamental. The practical consequence of this differentiation is the fact that merely constitutional rights, though named fundamental, could be deleted or substantially modified through a constitutional amendment, without the problem predicted by the eternity clauses. The opposite is also true, i. e., a right outside the catalogue, but with a status of fundamental right, cannot be suppressed, nor modified in its essence. In this study, we analyzed a vast bibliography, both Brazilian and foreign; besides, we selected some paradigmatic practical cases judged by the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court and some judged by foreign courts, such as the German Federal Constitutional Court / O tema dos direitos fundamentais, apesar da vasta produção bibliográfica já existente a respeito, tanto no direito brasileiro quanto no direito comparado, continua sempre atual, na medida em que a evolução da sociedade faz com que as relações pessoais sejam cada vez mais ricas e complexas, exigindo, do intérprete e do aplicador do Direito, naturalmente, um papel que, muitas vezes, vai além do método tradicional lógico-subsuntivo de aplicação da norma ao caso concreto (premissa maior, premissa menor e conclusão). Dessa maneira, é possível que, em algum momento, surja a necessidade de reconhecimento de um direito que não esteja pré-estabelecido, como norma, no texto constitucional nem em qualquer outro documento normativo, e acreditamos tenha sido exatamente por essa razão que as constituições contemporâneas tenham previsto expressamente uma cláusula de abertura material, como é o caso do art. 5, §2º, da brasileira e do art. 16º, n. 1, da portuguesa, admitindo que outros direitos fundamentais sejam reconhecidos pelos poderes constituídos, sobretudo pelo Poder Judiciário no exercício da sua atividade-fim. Essa possibilidade impõe a necessidade de definição do que pode ser considerado fundamental do ponto de vista do seu conteúdo, isto é, da sua essência, e foi precisamente esse o objetivo desta dissertação: investigar quais são os valores que efetivamente servem de parâmetro para o reconhecimento de direitos como sendo fundamentais. Pôde-se chegar à conclusão de que tais valores decorrem da conjugação dos preceitos estatuídos no art. 1º, caput, seus incisos e seu parágrafo único, no art. 2º e no art. 60, §4º, I a IV, da Constituição Federal, cujos valores se relacionam mutuamente e constituem um indicativo seguro de que tenham sido eleitos pelo Constituinte como os mais idôneos a forjar essa especial categoria de direitos: os direitos fundamentais. A partir dessa conclusão, foi possível constatar que nem todos os dispositivos contidos na Constituição Federal, inclusive no catálogo do art. 5º, se revestem de conteúdo apto a dotá-los da rubrica semântica fundamental. Em contrapartida, outros que sequer estão escritos no texto fazem parte dessa especial categoria de direitos. Em vista disso, torna-se possível falar na existência de direitos que são meramente constitucionais e direitos que são materialmente fundamentais, ou fundamentais propriamente ditos, os quais, apenas para efeito didático, optamos por denominar de verdadeiramente fundamentais. A consequência prática que decorre dessa diferenciação reside no fato de que os direitos meramente constitucionais, a despeito do rótulo de fundamentais, podem ser eliminados ou substancialmente modificados por meio de emenda constitucional sem esbarrar no óbice previsto pelas regras de eternidade. E o contrário também é verdadeiro, ou seja, um direito fora do catálogo, mas que tenha dignidade de direito fundamental, não pode ser suprimido tampouco modificado em sua essência. Uma vasta bibliografia, nacional e estrangeria, foi objeto de análise e comparação para elaboração desta dissertação assim como foram pinçados alguns casos práticos paradigmáticos julgados pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal e também outros que foram julgados por Tribunais estrangeiros, como é o caso do Tribunal Constitucional Federal alemão

The purpose of this dissertation is to investigate the development of the notion of property concept since the promulgation of the Constitution of South Africa 108 of 1996 with special reference to the influence of statutory developments and especially the influence of Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 19 of 1998. In the preamble to the Constitution it is made very clear that the injustices of the past are recognised and that it is endeavoured to rectify the division of the past and that all efforts are to be made to build a future that is characterised for the acknowledgement of human rights, democracy, equality and peaceful co-existence. In the Bill of Rights the right to property is acknowledged as a fundamental right and is it also mentioned that the state must respect, protect, promote and fulfil the rights in the Bill of Rights. Before the Constitution common law protection for ownership was well established, but no statutory protection for ownership existed. The effect of the property clause (section 25) of the Constitution was that not only ownership, but also other rights to property protected. The property clause prescribes that no one may be deprived of his property, except in terms of law of general application, and no law may permit arbitrary deprivation of property. No fundamental right is absolute with the effect that conflict may arise between the different clauses of the Bill of Rights. A typical example may be where the rights of an owner of immovable come into conflict with another person's right to housing. It must, however, always be borne in mind that no fundamental right is absolute that it is possible, under certain circumstances, to limit a fundamental right. This limitation may also occur in the case of property rights. Certain statutory developments took place since the promulgation of the Constitution. The most important of these developments is of course the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 19 of 1998. In terms of this Act it is required that certain formalities are to be fulfilled before an unlawful occupier may be evicted from property. The relevant part of the Act is the definition of an illegal occupier. Despite the fact that it was decided in several court cases that an illegal occupier does not include a person who previously had permission to occupy the property, it was decided by the Supreme Court of Appeal in Ndlovu v Ngcobo : Bekker v Jika that the act is applicable to such occupiers and specifically to lessees who's lease agreements have expired or a mortgagor who's mortgage has been foreclosed and who now refuses to vacate the property in question. The key findings are that the property concept has developed drastically since the Constitution. In regard to statutory development the most important development was the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act which was found to be applicable to all unlawful occupiers of property, regardless of the fact that the occupiers may previously have occupied the property lawfully. The Legal Amendment Bill is to rectify this in order to ensure that the Prevention of lllegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act will no longer be applicable to such occupiers and specifically to lessees who's lease agreements have expired or mortgagors who's bond have been called up and who now refuse to vacate the property in question This amendment will bring the (often) conflicting fundamental rights to property and housing into a greater degree of harmony, even though it will not solve all problems. It is the duty of the State to address this and all other potential conflict between different fundamental rights. The method used in this dissertation was the analytical study of statutes, court cases and articles in legal magazines. / Thesis (LL.M. (Estate Law))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2004.

The purpose of this dissertation is to investigate the development of the notion of property concept since the promulgation of the Constitution of South Africa 108 of 1996 with special reference to the influence of statutory developments and especially the influence of Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 19 of 1998. In the preamble to the Constitution it is made very clear that the injustices of the past are recognised and that it is endeavoured to rectify the division of the past and that all efforts are to be made to build a future that is characterised for the acknowledgement of human rights, democracy, equality and peaceful co-existence. In the Bill of Rights the right to property is acknowledged as a fundamental right and is it also mentioned that the state must respect, protect, promote and fulfil the rights in the Bill of Rights. Before the Constitution common law protection for ownership was well established, but no statutory protection for ownership existed. The effect of the property clause (section 25) of the Constitution was that not only ownership, but also other rights to property protected. The property clause prescribes that no one may be deprived of his property, except in terms of law of general application, and no law may permit arbitrary deprivation of property. No fundamental right is absolute with the effect that conflict may arise between the different clauses of the Bill of Rights. A typical example may be where the rights of an owner of immovable come into conflict with another person's right to housing. It must, however, always be borne in mind that no fundamental right is absolute that it is possible, under certain circumstances, to limit a fundamental right. This limitation may also occur in the case of property rights. Certain statutory developments took place since the promulgation of the Constitution. The most important of these developments is of course the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act 19 of 1998. In terms of this Act it is required that certain formalities are to be fulfilled before an unlawful occupier may be evicted from property. The relevant part of the Act is the definition of an illegal occupier. Despite the fact that it was decided in several court cases that an illegal occupier does not include a person who previously had permission to occupy the property, it was decided by the Supreme Court of Appeal in Ndlovu v Ngcobo : Bekker v Jika that the act is applicable to such occupiers and specifically to lessees who's lease agreements have expired or a mortgagor who's mortgage has been foreclosed and who now refuses to vacate the property in question. The key findings are that the property concept has developed drastically since the Constitution. In regard to statutory development the most important development was the Prevention of Illegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act which was found to be applicable to all unlawful occupiers of property, regardless of the fact that the occupiers may previously have occupied the property lawfully. The Legal Amendment Bill is to rectify this in order to ensure that the Prevention of lllegal Eviction from and Unlawful Occupation of Land Act will no longer be applicable to such occupiers and specifically to lessees who's lease agreements have expired or mortgagors who's bond have been called up and who now refuse to vacate the property in question This amendment will bring the (often) conflicting fundamental rights to property and housing into a greater degree of harmony, even though it will not solve all problems. It is the duty of the State to address this and all other potential conflict between different fundamental rights. The method used in this dissertation was the analytical study of statutes, court cases and articles in legal magazines. / Thesis (LL.M. (Estate Law))--North-West University, Potchefstroom Campus, 2004.

Submitted by Jamile Barbosa da Cruz (jamile.cruz@ucsal.br) on 2017-05-12T19:22:47Z No. of bitstreams: 1 DISSERTACAOCATIAALVES.pdf: 1690549 bytes, checksum: 4468dbde2953e1621bd88a235af45015 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Rosemary Magalhães (rosemary.magalhaes@ucsal.br) on 2017-05-15T13:43:28Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 DISSERTAÇÃO CATIA WORD.pdf: 1690549 bytes, checksum: 4468dbde2953e1621bd88a235af45015 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-05-15T13:43:28Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 DISSERTACAOCATIAALVES.pdf: 1690549 bytes, checksum: 4468dbde2953e1621bd88a235af45015 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-03-28 / Esta pesquisa avalia como o Centro de Referência Especializado da Assistência Social – CREAS pode ser instrumento de garantia aos Direitos Fundamentais da mulher. Por um lado, toma como base conceitual a noção de vulnerabilidade e violações de direitos na forma descrita pela Lei Maria da Penha; e, de outro os dispositivos públicos na prestação de serviços na prevenção e garantia desses direitos. A pesquisa toma como base de referência o serviço ofertado a mulheres pelo CREAS - Centro de Referência Especializado da Assistência Social, ou seja, mulheres vítimas de ameaças ou que tiveram seus direitos violados. Dessa perspectiva, será analisada a articulação da Rede de Proteção Social Especial com os demais serviços de proteção social; e o acesso das Mulheres ao CREAS (Centro de Referência Especializado da Assistência Social) por encaminhamento de outras instâncias profissionais, das demais políticas públicas setoriais, dos demais órgãos do Sistema de Garantia de Direitos e do Sistema de Segurança Pública, além da demanda espontânea. / This research evaluates how the Specialized Reference Center for Social Assistance (CREAS) can be an instrument to guarantee the fundamental rights of women. On the one hand, it takes as conceptual basis the notion of vulnerability and violations of rights as described by the Maria da Penha Law; And, on the other, the public devices in the provision of services in the prevention and guarantee of these rights. The research is based on the service offered to women by CREAS - Specialized Reference Center for Social Assistance, that is, women victims of threats or who have had their rights violated. From this perspective, the articulation of the Special Social Protection Network with the other social protection services will be analyzed; And women's access to CREAS (Specialized Reference Center for Social Assistance) by referral from other professional bodies, other sectoral public policies, other bodies of the guarantee system and the public security system, as well as spontaneous demand.

La protection des droits fondamentaux par l’Union européenne et la problématique de la qualification juridique de l’Union ne sont pas isolées. Au contraire, elles sont profondément liées. Sous l’effet de la protection des droits fondamentaux, l’Union peut être classée dans la catégorie des fédéralismes. Cette nature fédérative exerce en retour une influence sur la protection des droits fondamentaux. La protection des droits fondamentaux et la nature de l’Union forment ensemble l’identité de l’Union. Cette identité pourrait-elle se concrétiser par une Fédération de droit ? Cette hypothèse de qualification, qui s’inspire du modèle de l’État de droit et repose sur les exigences du cosmopolitisme, vise une Fédération dont l’un des objectifs fondateurs est la protection des droits fondamentaux. Cette hypothèse offre certaines clés de compréhension sur l’articulation du processus de fédéralisation et de la protection des droits fondamentaux. Cependant, à bien des égards, l’articulation entre ce processus et cette protection est conflictuelle. Les obstacles à cette qualification sont nombreux. Les États membres souhaitent en effet préserver leur souveraineté. Les impératifs du fédéralisme économique ou les attentes d’une sécurité fédérative soulèvent également de multiples inquiétudes. Ces obstacles affectent tant le processus de fédéralisation que la protection des droits fondamentaux. En conclusion, ils empêchent de qualifier pleinement l’Union de Fédération de droit. / The protection of fundamental rights by the European Union and the issue of the Union's legal nature are not isolated. On the contrary, they are deeply linked. The Union can be classified in the category of federalism under the effect of the protection of fundamental rights. In return, this federative nature has an influence on the protection of fundamental rights. The protection of fundamental rights and the nature of the Union together form the identity of the Union. This identity could be a federal rule of law (Fédération de droit)? This hypothesis, which is based on the rule of law model and the requirements of cosmopolitanism, aims at a Federation whose founding objectives include the protection of fundamental rights. This hypothesis offers some keys to understanding how the federalization process and the protection of fundamental rights are articulated. However, the relationship between this process and the protection of fundamental rights is often conflictual. There are many obstacles to this qualification. Indeed, Member States wish to preserve their sovereignty. The imperatives of economic federalism or the expectations of federal security also raise multiple concerns. These obstacles impact both the federalization process and the protection of fundamental rights. In conclusion, they prevent this qualification of european federal rule of law.

The main purpose of this study was to establish how effectively mediation was applied to advance learners‟ fundamental rights in English First Additional Language classrooms. The researcher did a literature study in Chapter Two to do research on the concept mediation. The researcher briefly looked at a variety of approaches to mediation before deciding to base her study on the twelve mediation principles of Feuerstein. The advantages gained by following a mediational approach while teaching learners could not be disputed. In Chapter Three, the researcher investigated which fundamental rights learners have at South African schools. A variety of legislation was studied before determining those Acts and the legislation applicable to learners‟ fundamental rights. The researcher then proceeded with her empirical design in which she discussed the quantitative and qualitative methods of data collection which were triangulated in order to make findings. The researcher ensured that both mediation and fundamental rights were tested in the questionnaires which were answered by educators and learners. Thereafter, three focus group interviews were held with the educators who had completed the questionnaires. Lastly, the researcher conducted six observations during English First Additional Language literature periods. In order to advance learners‟ fundamental rights while applying mediation during literature periods, the researcher developed a teaching and learning programme for poetry in Grade 11 English First Additional Language educators. Through the research it was found that educators neglect the application of mediation. This, unfortunately, results in detrimental effects concerning the advancement of learners‟ fundamental rights. / Thesis (PhD (Education Law))--North-West University, Vaal Triangle Campus, 2013