Made available in DSpace on 2015-04-14T14:48:11Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
438479.pdf: 912601 bytes, checksum: ac4024464047b433d7d7a7e0dec65986 (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2012-03-29 / In Brazilian courts, the statement - explicit or implicit - of unconstitutionality of the law or normative act of the public authorities cannot be performed by their fractional composition (chambers). It is assumed, as a condition of validity of the decision, the installation of an incident of unconstitutionality and consequent submission of the constitutional matters to the plenary or the special bench - if any - to the respective court (article 97 of the Federal Constitution and the binding precedent n. 10 of the Supreme Federal Court). This limitation on the jurisdiction action - supervened from the constitutional rule called "full bench system" - leads to the question about its scope: in which cases can the Courts' fractional benches quit from applyng the law without, in order to, have to submit themselves to the full bench system rule? In the criminal ambit the theme gains a variant even more exciting. This is becauses there are several theories and techniques tendeing to the removal of incriminating criminal law. The proper normative structure formed by the Federal Constitution and by the fundamental rights raises to the constitutional justice many possibilities for conforntation the legislation product, especially in the criminal area. The study proposes, therefore, some paths and definitions which would be the that require submission to the full bench system, with the specific staining of criminal science. / No ?mbito dos Tribunais brasileiros, a declara??o expl?cita ou impl?cita de inconstitucionalidade de lei ou de ato normativo do poder p?blico n?o pode ser realizada por ?rg?os judiciais em sua composi??o fracion?ria (turmas ou c?maras). Pressup?e-se, como condi??o de validade da decis?o, a instala??o de incidente de inconstitucionalidade e a consequente submiss?o da mat?ria constitucional ao plen?rio ou ?rg?o especial se houver do respectivo Tribunal (artigo 97 da Constitui??o Federal e s?mula vinculante n. 10 do Supremo Tribunal Federal). Essa limita??o ? atua??o jurisdicional advinda da regra constitucional denominada reserva de plen?rio leva ? indaga??o acerca da sua abrang?ncia: em que casos os ?rg?os fracion?rios dos Tribunais podem deixar de aplicar a lei sem que, para tanto, devam se submeter ? regra da reserva de plen?rio? No ?mbito criminal a tem?tica ganha uma variante ainda mais instigante. Isso porque s?o v?rias as teorias e t?cnicas tendentes ao afastamento da lei penal incriminadora. A pr?pria estrutura normativa formada pela Constitui??o Federal e pelos direitos fundamentais al?am ? justi?a constitucional possibilidades m?ltiplas de enfrentamento do produto legislativo, sobretudo no ?mbito criminal. O estudo prop?e, com isso, alguns caminhos e defini??es de quais seriam os casos que exigem a submiss?o ? reserva de plen?rio, com a colora??o espec?fica das ci?ncias criminais.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:IBICT/oai:tede2.pucrs.br:tede/4889 |
| Date | 29 March 2012 |
| Creators | Azambuja Neto, Mario |
| Contributors | Feldens, Luciano |
| Publisher | Pontif?cia Universidade Cat?lica do Rio Grande do Sul, Programa de P?s-Gradua??o em Ci?ncias Criminais, PUCRS, BR, Faculdade de Direito |
| Source Sets | IBICT Brazilian ETDs |
| Language | Portuguese |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion, info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Source | reponame:Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertações da PUC_RS, instname:Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, instacron:PUC_RS |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
| Relation | 3263773896050529173, 500, 600, 2194221341323903125 |
Page generated in 0.0021 seconds