The restriction of parliamentary immunity in the ADI 5526: a critique of judicial review from the analysis of Min. Luís Roberto Barroso vote
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2019 |
Outros Autores: | |
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 |