Openess and dialogue between constitutional courts: identifyng use patterns of the brazilian supreme court in relation the "comparative law argument"

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Bastos Junior, Luiz Magno Pinto
Data de Publicação: 2017
Outros Autores: Bunn, Alini
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Revista do Direito Público
Texto Completo: https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/direitopub/article/view/27637
Resumo: The use of foreign elements is a discursive strategy that has been largely utilized by constitutional judges, as if it were part of a global trend. However, this practice has several critiques related to its legitimacy (methodological difficulties and sovereignty objections). In light of this, this paper defines the discourse patterns of the STF (Brazilian Supreme Court –Supremo Tribunal Federal) in relation to the use of foreign precedents for its reasoning. Through the inductive method and quantitative and qualitative analyses, this study carefully selected and analyzed decisions of the STF, from the years 1998 to 2007, that specifically used this strategy. Moreover, in the first phase of this research, one can perceive that this argumentative strategy fulfills multiple purposes, playing a merely ancillary role in the hermeneutic work of the court.
id UEL-2_b01df9fd3d3fa37d5d533583eea1f584
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/27637
network_acronym_str UEL-2
network_name_str Revista do Direito Público
repository_id_str
spelling Openess and dialogue between constitutional courts: identifyng use patterns of the brazilian supreme court in relation the "comparative law argument"Abertura e diálogo entre as cortes constitucionais: identificação dos padrões de utilização pelo STF do argumento de direito comparadoComparative law argumentSupremo Tribunal FederalJudicial dialogueArgumentative strategy.Argumento de direito comparadoSupremo Tribunal FederalDiálogo entre cortesEstratégia argumentativa.The use of foreign elements is a discursive strategy that has been largely utilized by constitutional judges, as if it were part of a global trend. However, this practice has several critiques related to its legitimacy (methodological difficulties and sovereignty objections). In light of this, this paper defines the discourse patterns of the STF (Brazilian Supreme Court –Supremo Tribunal Federal) in relation to the use of foreign precedents for its reasoning. Through the inductive method and quantitative and qualitative analyses, this study carefully selected and analyzed decisions of the STF, from the years 1998 to 2007, that specifically used this strategy. Moreover, in the first phase of this research, one can perceive that this argumentative strategy fulfills multiple purposes, playing a merely ancillary role in the hermeneutic work of the court.O uso de elementos não-nacionais é um recurso que vem crescendo significativamente, sendo possível afirmar que o seu uso revela uma tendência global. No entanto, o seu emprego tem suscitado inúmeros questionamentos quanto à sua legitimidade (tanto em relação às dificuldades metodológicas, quanto em relação às objeções baseadas no exercício da soberania). A presente pesquisa buscou definir os padrões discursivos do STF quando do uso de precedentes estrangeiros no decorrer da argumentação judicial. Através do método indutivo e de análises qualitativa e quantitativa, foram selecionadas (e analisadas) as decisões colegiadas proferidas pelo STF (turmas e órgão pleno), no período de 1998 a 2008, que se valeram em alguma medida do recurso ao “argumento de direito comparado” como parte de sua estratégia discursiva. Nessa primeira fase da pesquisa, pode-se perceber que esta estratégia argumentativa cumpre múltiplas finalidades, desempenhando um papel meramente acessório no labor hermenêutico da corte.Universidade Estadual de Londrina2017-12-30info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionArtigo avaliado pelos Paresapplication/pdfhttps://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/direitopub/article/view/2763710.5433/1980-511X.2017v12n3p85Revista do Direito Público; v. 12 n. 3 (2017); 85-1141980-511Xreponame:Revista do Direito Públicoinstname:Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL)instacron:UELporhttps://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/direitopub/article/view/27637/22684Copyright (c) 2017 Revista do Direito Públicohttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessBastos Junior, Luiz Magno PintoBunn, Alini2022-09-26T12:10:50Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/27637Revistahttps://www.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/direitopubPUBhttps://www.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/direitopub/oai||rdpubuel@uel.br1980-511X1980-511Xopendoar:2022-09-26T12:10:50Revista do Direito Público - Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Openess and dialogue between constitutional courts: identifyng use patterns of the brazilian supreme court in relation the "comparative law argument"
Abertura e diálogo entre as cortes constitucionais: identificação dos padrões de utilização pelo STF do argumento de direito comparado
title Openess and dialogue between constitutional courts: identifyng use patterns of the brazilian supreme court in relation the "comparative law argument"
spellingShingle Openess and dialogue between constitutional courts: identifyng use patterns of the brazilian supreme court in relation the "comparative law argument"
Bastos Junior, Luiz Magno Pinto
Comparative law argument
Supremo Tribunal Federal
Judicial dialogue
Argumentative strategy.
Argumento de direito comparado
Supremo Tribunal Federal
Diálogo entre cortes
Estratégia argumentativa.
title_short Openess and dialogue between constitutional courts: identifyng use patterns of the brazilian supreme court in relation the "comparative law argument"
title_full Openess and dialogue between constitutional courts: identifyng use patterns of the brazilian supreme court in relation the "comparative law argument"
title_fullStr Openess and dialogue between constitutional courts: identifyng use patterns of the brazilian supreme court in relation the "comparative law argument"
title_full_unstemmed Openess and dialogue between constitutional courts: identifyng use patterns of the brazilian supreme court in relation the "comparative law argument"
title_sort Openess and dialogue between constitutional courts: identifyng use patterns of the brazilian supreme court in relation the "comparative law argument"
author Bastos Junior, Luiz Magno Pinto
author_facet Bastos Junior, Luiz Magno Pinto
Bunn, Alini
author_role author
author2 Bunn, Alini
author2_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Bastos Junior, Luiz Magno Pinto
Bunn, Alini
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Comparative law argument
Supremo Tribunal Federal
Judicial dialogue
Argumentative strategy.
Argumento de direito comparado
Supremo Tribunal Federal
Diálogo entre cortes
Estratégia argumentativa.
topic Comparative law argument
Supremo Tribunal Federal
Judicial dialogue
Argumentative strategy.
Argumento de direito comparado
Supremo Tribunal Federal
Diálogo entre cortes
Estratégia argumentativa.
description The use of foreign elements is a discursive strategy that has been largely utilized by constitutional judges, as if it were part of a global trend. However, this practice has several critiques related to its legitimacy (methodological difficulties and sovereignty objections). In light of this, this paper defines the discourse patterns of the STF (Brazilian Supreme Court –Supremo Tribunal Federal) in relation to the use of foreign precedents for its reasoning. Through the inductive method and quantitative and qualitative analyses, this study carefully selected and analyzed decisions of the STF, from the years 1998 to 2007, that specifically used this strategy. Moreover, in the first phase of this research, one can perceive that this argumentative strategy fulfills multiple purposes, playing a merely ancillary role in the hermeneutic work of the court.
publishDate 2017
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2017-12-30
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
Artigo avaliado pelos Pares
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/direitopub/article/view/27637
10.5433/1980-511X.2017v12n3p85
url https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/direitopub/article/view/27637
identifier_str_mv 10.5433/1980-511X.2017v12n3p85
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/direitopub/article/view/27637/22684
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2017 Revista do Direito Público
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2017 Revista do Direito Público
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual de Londrina
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Estadual de Londrina
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista do Direito Público; v. 12 n. 3 (2017); 85-114
1980-511X
reponame:Revista do Direito Público
instname:Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL)
instacron:UEL
instname_str Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL)
instacron_str UEL
institution UEL
reponame_str Revista do Direito Público
collection Revista do Direito Público
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista do Direito Público - Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||rdpubuel@uel.br
_version_ 1799305932028510208

Registros relacionados