Banca de DEFESA: DIEGO FERREIRA PIMENTEL

Uma banca de DEFESA de MESTRADO foi cadastrada pelo programa.
STUDENT : DIEGO FERREIRA PIMENTEL
DATE: 25/10/2024
TIME: 15:00
LOCAL: SALA DE VIDEOCONFERÊNCIA - FACULDADE DE DIREITO - UnB
TITLE:

The Political Aspects of the Deliberative Capacity of the Supreme Federal Court: A Critique of Legal Theories on Judicial Review

KEY WORDS:

Federal Supreme Court; Judicial Review; Coalition presidentialism; Judicialization of politics; Judicial activism.

PAGES: 102
BIG AREA: Ciências Sociais Aplicadas
AREA: Direito
SUMMARY:

In recent decades, a series of research studies have been developed in law to explain the progressive rise in protagonism of the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court after the promulgation of the Federal Constitution of 1988. Guided by the concepts of the judicialization of politics and judicial activism, those papers were unable to present consistent explanations on this topic, restricting themselves to conceptual and normative discussions. Some empirical research, in parallel, carried out by political scientists were successful in demonstrating that, contrary to what is often defended by legal experts, there is a series of political factors that influence the way the Brazilian Supreme Federal Court operates, motivated mostly by what is frequently called in the Brazilian government structure informally as “coalition presidentialism”. As examples, we can note: the correlation between the fragmentation of the political system, the way the Brazilian Constitution prescribes appointing the Supreme Court justices, the cooptation of judicial reviewing for political aims, among other factors, as some explanation for the current overpresence of the Supreme Court in the political arena. Based on this scenario, this paper develops a critique of how law research has analyzed this problem, pointing out the need to bring political and empirical analysis together when researching the way those courts are currently working. However, political science argues that this joint method of observation should not result in the assessment that a high court is just a mundane political player but should guide future analysis as a way of reasoning about alternatives and ways to expand legislation as a regulatory source of the deliberative process of the Supreme Court.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS:
Externo à Instituição - GABRIEL DIAS MARQUES DA CRUZ - UFPR
Presidente - 2492387 - JULIANO ZAIDEN BENVINDO
Interno - 321346 - MENELICK DE CARVALHO NETTO
Externo à Instituição - MIGUEL GUALANO DE GODOY - UFPR