Matrix of analysis of court decisions: the speech of magistrates in Brazil and Germany
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2023 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Juris (Rio Grande. Online) |
Texto Completo: | https://periodicos.furg.br/juris/article/view/15416 |
Resumo: | This article aims to describe and analyze the contents of the legal discourses of magistrates in Brazil and Germany in the light of José Rodrigo Rodriguez's theory of hermeneutic subjectivism. It starts with a descriptive study of the constitutional provisions in force in Brazil and Germany, in order to explain the respective constitutional structures and their implications in the construction of the legal argumentation of the decision in order to debate the decision “Brazilian style” and “German style”. To this end, an exploratory methodology was applied and bibliographic and documentary research was chosen as an instrument for studying interdisciplinary scientific works, using especially the analysis of decisions rendered in Brazil and Germany, in addition to proposing a matrix for objective content analysis. The results obtained did not establish a value judgment on the Constitutional Courts of the two countries, on the contrary, they provided an expanded view of their practices, insofar as they pointed out distinctions in the way of exposing the content of the respective speeches, demonstrating that cultural differences demarcate the judges, from their training to their professional performance. |
id |
FURG-4_3a78cd1cd6fa0f2403f8abc28c847665 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.periodicos.furg.br:article/15416 |
network_acronym_str |
FURG-4 |
network_name_str |
Juris (Rio Grande. Online) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Matrix of analysis of court decisions: the speech of magistrates in Brazil and GermanyMatriz de análise das decisões judiciais: o discurso dos magistrados no Brasil e AlemanhaLegitimidade argumentativaDecisão judicialConstituiçãoDecisão judicial Argumentative legitimacy Judicial decision ConstitutionJudicial decision This article aims to describe and analyze the contents of the legal discourses of magistrates in Brazil and Germany in the light of José Rodrigo Rodriguez's theory of hermeneutic subjectivism. It starts with a descriptive study of the constitutional provisions in force in Brazil and Germany, in order to explain the respective constitutional structures and their implications in the construction of the legal argumentation of the decision in order to debate the decision “Brazilian style” and “German style”. To this end, an exploratory methodology was applied and bibliographic and documentary research was chosen as an instrument for studying interdisciplinary scientific works, using especially the analysis of decisions rendered in Brazil and Germany, in addition to proposing a matrix for objective content analysis. The results obtained did not establish a value judgment on the Constitutional Courts of the two countries, on the contrary, they provided an expanded view of their practices, insofar as they pointed out distinctions in the way of exposing the content of the respective speeches, demonstrating that cultural differences demarcate the judges, from their training to their professional performance.O presente artigo objetiva descrever e analisar os conteúdos dos discursos jurídicos dos magistrados no Brasil e na Alemanha à luz da teoria do subjetivismo hermenêutico de José Rodrigo Rodriguez. Partindo-se de um estudo descritivo dos dispositivos constitucionais vigentes no Brasil e na Alemanha, a fim de se explicitar as respectivas estruturas constitucionais e suas implicações na construção da argumentação jurídica da decisão de modo a debater a decisão “à moda brasileira” e “à moda germânica”. Para tanto, aplicou-se a metodologia do tipo exploratória e elegeu-se a pesquisa bibliográfica e documental como instrumento de estudos de trabalhos científicos interdisciplinares, valendo-se especialmente da análise das decisões proferidas no Brasil e na Alemanha, além de propor uma matriz para análise objetiva de conteúdo. Os resultados obtidos não estabeleceram juízo de valor sobre os Tribunais Constitucionais dos dois países, ao contrário, propiciaram uma visão ampliada sobre suas práticas, na medida em que apontaram distinções na maneira de expor o conteúdo dos respectivos discursos, demonstrando que as diferenças culturais demarcam os julgadores, desde a sua formação até a sua atuação profissional.Universidade Federal do Rio Grande2023-12-31info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionArtigos avaliados pelos paresapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.furg.br/juris/article/view/1541610.14295/juris.v32i1.15416JURIS - Faculty of Law Journal; Vol. 32 No. 1 (2022); 71 - 92JURIS - Revista de la Facultad de Derecho; Vol. 32 Núm. 1 (2022); 71 - 92JURIS - Revista da Faculdade de Direito; v. 32 n. 1 (2022); 71 - 922447-38551413-3571reponame:Juris (Rio Grande. Online)instname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande (FURG)instacron:FURGporhttps://periodicos.furg.br/juris/article/view/15416/10531https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/br/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessSouto Brandao Pereira, RebekaMartins, Leonardo2024-02-06T14:49:52Zoai:ojs.periodicos.furg.br:article/15416Revistahttp://www.seer.furg.br/juris/indexPUBhttps://seer.furg.br/juris/oaijrcc.pel@gmail.com||revistajuris.furg@gmail.com||juris@furg.br2447-38551413-3571opendoar:2024-02-06T14:49:52Juris (Rio Grande. Online) - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande (FURG)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Matrix of analysis of court decisions: the speech of magistrates in Brazil and Germany Matriz de análise das decisões judiciais: o discurso dos magistrados no Brasil e Alemanha |
title |
Matrix of analysis of court decisions: the speech of magistrates in Brazil and Germany |
spellingShingle |
Matrix of analysis of court decisions: the speech of magistrates in Brazil and Germany Souto Brandao Pereira, Rebeka Legitimidade argumentativa Decisão judicial Constituição Decisão judicial Argumentative legitimacy Judicial decision Constitution Judicial decision |
title_short |
Matrix of analysis of court decisions: the speech of magistrates in Brazil and Germany |
title_full |
Matrix of analysis of court decisions: the speech of magistrates in Brazil and Germany |
title_fullStr |
Matrix of analysis of court decisions: the speech of magistrates in Brazil and Germany |
title_full_unstemmed |
Matrix of analysis of court decisions: the speech of magistrates in Brazil and Germany |
title_sort |
Matrix of analysis of court decisions: the speech of magistrates in Brazil and Germany |
author |
Souto Brandao Pereira, Rebeka |
author_facet |
Souto Brandao Pereira, Rebeka Martins, Leonardo |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Martins, Leonardo |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Souto Brandao Pereira, Rebeka Martins, Leonardo |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Legitimidade argumentativa Decisão judicial Constituição Decisão judicial Argumentative legitimacy Judicial decision Constitution Judicial decision |
topic |
Legitimidade argumentativa Decisão judicial Constituição Decisão judicial Argumentative legitimacy Judicial decision Constitution Judicial decision |
description |
This article aims to describe and analyze the contents of the legal discourses of magistrates in Brazil and Germany in the light of José Rodrigo Rodriguez's theory of hermeneutic subjectivism. It starts with a descriptive study of the constitutional provisions in force in Brazil and Germany, in order to explain the respective constitutional structures and their implications in the construction of the legal argumentation of the decision in order to debate the decision “Brazilian style” and “German style”. To this end, an exploratory methodology was applied and bibliographic and documentary research was chosen as an instrument for studying interdisciplinary scientific works, using especially the analysis of decisions rendered in Brazil and Germany, in addition to proposing a matrix for objective content analysis. The results obtained did not establish a value judgment on the Constitutional Courts of the two countries, on the contrary, they provided an expanded view of their practices, insofar as they pointed out distinctions in the way of exposing the content of the respective speeches, demonstrating that cultural differences demarcate the judges, from their training to their professional performance. |
publishDate |
2023 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2023-12-31 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion Artigos avaliados pelos pares |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.furg.br/juris/article/view/15416 10.14295/juris.v32i1.15416 |
url |
https://periodicos.furg.br/juris/article/view/15416 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.14295/juris.v32i1.15416 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.furg.br/juris/article/view/15416/10531 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/br/ info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/br/ |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
JURIS - Faculty of Law Journal; Vol. 32 No. 1 (2022); 71 - 92 JURIS - Revista de la Facultad de Derecho; Vol. 32 Núm. 1 (2022); 71 - 92 JURIS - Revista da Faculdade de Direito; v. 32 n. 1 (2022); 71 - 92 2447-3855 1413-3571 reponame:Juris (Rio Grande. Online) instname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande (FURG) instacron:FURG |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande (FURG) |
instacron_str |
FURG |
institution |
FURG |
reponame_str |
Juris (Rio Grande. Online) |
collection |
Juris (Rio Grande. Online) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Juris (Rio Grande. Online) - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande (FURG) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
jrcc.pel@gmail.com||revistajuris.furg@gmail.com||juris@furg.br |
_version_ |
1808842656252428288 |