The restriction of parliamentary immunity in the ADI 5526: a critique of judicial review from the analysis of Min. Luís Roberto Barroso vote

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Laurindo, Marja Mangili
Data de Publicação: 2019
Outros Autores: de Oliveira, Claudio Ladeira
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/35020
Resumo: This paper critically analyzes the vote of the Supreme Court Minister Luís Roberto Barroso in the ADI 5526, which prescribes different precautionary measures for the arrest for congressmen and congresswomen, which would be subject to the revision of the Legislative Power. Furthermore, the purpose of parliamentary immunity is to protect the democratic autonomy of the legislature in relation to the judiciary, diminishing its power of interference. This paper concludes that the expansion of article 319 of the CPP does not restrict the constitutionally established guarantee of parliamentary immunity. Henceforth, ADI 5526 proves a symptomatic case of how the Federal Supreme Court treats other branches of government, especially the legislative branch. In this sense, this paper utilizes the perspective of Dimoulis and Lunardi, as well as Waldron, in order to understand the limits of judicial control of constitutionality in order to point out the difference between the Barroso’s vote and the jurisdictional political legitimacy of its control of constitutionality.
id UEL-2_e156aa3782beeb010218e6fce458837a
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/35020
network_acronym_str UEL-2
network_name_str Revista do Direito Público
repository_id_str
spelling The restriction of parliamentary immunity in the ADI 5526: a critique of judicial review from the analysis of Min. Luís Roberto Barroso voteA restrição da imunidade parlamentar na ADI 5526: uma crítica ao controle judicial de constitucionalidade a partir da análise do voto do Min. Luís Roberto BarrosoADI 5526Judicial ReviewLuís Roberto BarrosoADI 5526Controle Judicial de ConstitucionalidadeLuís Roberto Barroso.This paper critically analyzes the vote of the Supreme Court Minister Luís Roberto Barroso in the ADI 5526, which prescribes different precautionary measures for the arrest for congressmen and congresswomen, which would be subject to the revision of the Legislative Power. Furthermore, the purpose of parliamentary immunity is to protect the democratic autonomy of the legislature in relation to the judiciary, diminishing its power of interference. This paper concludes that the expansion of article 319 of the CPP does not restrict the constitutionally established guarantee of parliamentary immunity. Henceforth, ADI 5526 proves a symptomatic case of how the Federal Supreme Court treats other branches of government, especially the legislative branch. In this sense, this paper utilizes the perspective of Dimoulis and Lunardi, as well as Waldron, in order to understand the limits of judicial control of constitutionality in order to point out the difference between the Barroso’s vote and the jurisdictional political legitimacy of its control of constitutionality.Este artigo tem como objetivo a análise crítica do voto do Ministro Luís Roberto Barroso na Ação Direta de Inconstitucionalidade 5526, que versou sobre se o alcance das medidas cautelares diferentes de prisão, quando aplicadas aos congressistas, seriam passíveis de revisão pelo Poder Legislativo - tal e qual ocorre com a prisão em flagrante. O instituto da imunidade parlamentar tem o propósito de proteger a autonomia democrática do Legislativo com relação ao Poder Judiciário, delimitando seu poder de interferência. Concluiu-se que não houve motivos razoáveis para se acreditar que a expansão das medidas do art. 319 do CPP restringiria tal garantia estabelecida constitucionalmente ao parlamento. A ADI 5526 se mostra como caso sintomático do modo de funcionamento do Supremo Tribunal Federal com relação ao seu modo de atuação em direção aos demais poderes, em especial o legislativo. Nesse sentido, este artigo apoia-se sobre a perspectiva de Dimoulis e Lunardi, bem como de Waldron, acerca dos limites do controle judicial de constitucionalidade para apontar a distância entre o discurso do voto do Min. Barroso e a legitimidade política jurisdicionaldo seu controle de constitucionalidade.Universidade Estadual de Londrina2019-12-31info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionArtigo avaliado pelos Paresapplication/pdfhttps://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/direitopub/article/view/3502010.5433/1980-511X.2019v14n3p110Revista do Direito Público; v. 14 n. 3 (2019); 110-1301980-511Xreponame:Revista do Direito Públicoinstname:Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL)instacron:UELporhttps://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/direitopub/article/view/35020/26690Copyright (c) 2019 Revista do Direito Públicoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessLaurindo, Marja Mangilide Oliveira, Claudio Ladeira2020-01-20T14:08:27Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/35020Revistahttps://www.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/direitopubPUBhttps://www.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/direitopub/oai||rdpubuel@uel.br1980-511X1980-511Xopendoar:2020-01-20T14:08:27Revista do Direito Público - Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv The restriction of parliamentary immunity in the ADI 5526: a critique of judicial review from the analysis of Min. Luís Roberto Barroso vote
A restrição da imunidade parlamentar na ADI 5526: uma crítica ao controle judicial de constitucionalidade a partir da análise do voto do Min. Luís Roberto Barroso
title The restriction of parliamentary immunity in the ADI 5526: a critique of judicial review from the analysis of Min. Luís Roberto Barroso vote
spellingShingle The restriction of parliamentary immunity in the ADI 5526: a critique of judicial review from the analysis of Min. Luís Roberto Barroso vote
Laurindo, Marja Mangili
ADI 5526
Judicial Review
Luís Roberto Barroso
ADI 5526
Controle Judicial de Constitucionalidade
Luís Roberto Barroso.
title_short The restriction of parliamentary immunity in the ADI 5526: a critique of judicial review from the analysis of Min. Luís Roberto Barroso vote
title_full The restriction of parliamentary immunity in the ADI 5526: a critique of judicial review from the analysis of Min. Luís Roberto Barroso vote
title_fullStr The restriction of parliamentary immunity in the ADI 5526: a critique of judicial review from the analysis of Min. Luís Roberto Barroso vote
title_full_unstemmed The restriction of parliamentary immunity in the ADI 5526: a critique of judicial review from the analysis of Min. Luís Roberto Barroso vote
title_sort The restriction of parliamentary immunity in the ADI 5526: a critique of judicial review from the analysis of Min. Luís Roberto Barroso vote
author Laurindo, Marja Mangili
author_facet Laurindo, Marja Mangili
de Oliveira, Claudio Ladeira
author_role author
author2 de Oliveira, Claudio Ladeira
author2_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Laurindo, Marja Mangili
de Oliveira, Claudio Ladeira
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv ADI 5526
Judicial Review
Luís Roberto Barroso
ADI 5526
Controle Judicial de Constitucionalidade
Luís Roberto Barroso.
topic ADI 5526
Judicial Review
Luís Roberto Barroso
ADI 5526
Controle Judicial de Constitucionalidade
Luís Roberto Barroso.
description This paper critically analyzes the vote of the Supreme Court Minister Luís Roberto Barroso in the ADI 5526, which prescribes different precautionary measures for the arrest for congressmen and congresswomen, which would be subject to the revision of the Legislative Power. Furthermore, the purpose of parliamentary immunity is to protect the democratic autonomy of the legislature in relation to the judiciary, diminishing its power of interference. This paper concludes that the expansion of article 319 of the CPP does not restrict the constitutionally established guarantee of parliamentary immunity. Henceforth, ADI 5526 proves a symptomatic case of how the Federal Supreme Court treats other branches of government, especially the legislative branch. In this sense, this paper utilizes the perspective of Dimoulis and Lunardi, as well as Waldron, in order to understand the limits of judicial control of constitutionality in order to point out the difference between the Barroso’s vote and the jurisdictional political legitimacy of its control of constitutionality.
publishDate 2019
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2019-12-31
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/35020
10.5433/1980-511X.2019v14n3p110
url https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/direitopub/article/view/35020
identifier_str_mv 10.5433/1980-511X.2019v14n3p110
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/35020/26690
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2019 Revista do Direito Público
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2019 Revista do Direito Público
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. 14 n. 3 (2019); 110-130
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_ 1799305932937625600