Policy judicialization and democracy: the decriminalization of abortion until the third month of pregnancy

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Cunha, Jânio Pereira da
Data de Publicação: 2021
Outros Autores: Moreira, Roberta Pessoa
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Scientia Iuris (Online)
Texto Completo: https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/iuris/article/view/43011
Resumo: It investigates, in a descriptive and exploratory way, whether judicial decisions on sensitive and controversial issues compromise democracy and, if so, what are the reasons for democracy’s weakening condition. Bibliographic and documentary research on themes, such as abortion, judicialization of politics and its effects on democracy are examined. From an empirical standpoint, the object of study is Habeas Corpus nº 124.306/2016, specifically Minister Luís Roberto Barroso vote in the Brazilian Federal Court of Justice. This paper intends to obtain a pure and qualitative result on the theme, from the perspective that excessive judicialization of politics subverts the Constitution and disrespects popular sovereignty, since judges, not elected by the people, interpret, and rely on principles to make often discretionary and arbitrary decisions. This paper concludes that the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court, when granting the order in Habeas Corpus no. 124.306/2016, decriminalized a conduct objectively established by the Brazilian Criminal Code and disrespected a fundamental right, the right to life, protected by the Brazilian Federal Constitution. Such an act compromises the rules and legitimacy of democracy. Moreover, this study suggests that there needs to be greater dialogue between the three branches of government and more participation of the people to tackle complex questions, which depend on popular debate in order to be properly legitimized.
id UEL-6_4113b7f6166d1adb54d5cdb12de23907
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/43011
network_acronym_str UEL-6
network_name_str Scientia Iuris (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Policy judicialization and democracy: the decriminalization of abortion until the third month of pregnancyJudicialização da política e democracia: a descriminalização do aborto até o terceiro mês de gestaçãoJudicialization of politicsDemocracyHabeas Corpus nº 124.306/2016Federal Court of JusticeJudicialização da políticaDemocraciaHabeas Corpus nº 124.306/2016Supremo Tribunal FederalIt investigates, in a descriptive and exploratory way, whether judicial decisions on sensitive and controversial issues compromise democracy and, if so, what are the reasons for democracy’s weakening condition. Bibliographic and documentary research on themes, such as abortion, judicialization of politics and its effects on democracy are examined. From an empirical standpoint, the object of study is Habeas Corpus nº 124.306/2016, specifically Minister Luís Roberto Barroso vote in the Brazilian Federal Court of Justice. This paper intends to obtain a pure and qualitative result on the theme, from the perspective that excessive judicialization of politics subverts the Constitution and disrespects popular sovereignty, since judges, not elected by the people, interpret, and rely on principles to make often discretionary and arbitrary decisions. This paper concludes that the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court, when granting the order in Habeas Corpus no. 124.306/2016, decriminalized a conduct objectively established by the Brazilian Criminal Code and disrespected a fundamental right, the right to life, protected by the Brazilian Federal Constitution. Such an act compromises the rules and legitimacy of democracy. Moreover, this study suggests that there needs to be greater dialogue between the three branches of government and more participation of the people to tackle complex questions, which depend on popular debate in order to be properly legitimized.Investiga, de maneira descritiva e exploratória, se decisões judiciais acerca de temas sensíveis e polêmicos, no meio social, comprometem a democracia e, em caso positivo, quais as razões do enfraquecimento democrático. Recorre-se às pesquisas bibliográfica e documental sobre os temas aborto, judicialização da política e os reflexos desta na democracia. Mediante demanda empírica, o objeto de estudo é a ordem concedida no Habeas Corpus nº 124.306/2016, baseada no voto-vista do ministro Luís Roberto Barroso, do Supremo Tribunal Federal. Pretende-se obter resultado puro e qualitativo acerca da temática, sob a perspectiva de que o excesso de judicialização da política subverte a Constituição e desrespeita a soberania popular, já que juízes, não eleitos pelo voto, interpretam e se auxiliam de princípios para proferirem, muitas vezes, decisões discricionárias e arbitrárias. Conclui-se que o Supremo Tribunal Federal, ao conceder a ordem no Habeas Corpus nº 124.306/2016, descriminalizou conduta prevista, objetivamente, no Código Penal, como crime e desrespeitou direito individual fundamental, o direito à vida, contido na Constituição Federal, com um considerável comprometimento da democracia. Sugerem-se maior diálogo entre os poderes e mais participação do povo no enfrentamento de aspectos complexos, cujas decisões dependem do debate popular para que se legitimem.Universidade Estadual de Londrina2021-03-31info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionArtigo avaliado pelos Paresapplication/pdfhttps://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/iuris/article/view/4301110.5433/2178-8189.2021v25n1p178Scientia Iuris; v. 25 n. 1 (2021); 178-1992178-81891415-6490reponame:Scientia Iuris (Online)instname:Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL)instacron:UELporhttps://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/iuris/article/view/43011/29344Copyright (c) 2021 Scientia Iurisinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessCunha, Jânio Pereira daMoreira, Roberta Pessoa2021-04-09T12:51:39Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/43011Revistahttps://www.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/iurisPUBhttps://www.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/iuris/oairevistamdireito@uel.br2178-81891415-6490opendoar:2021-04-09T12:51:39Scientia Iuris (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Policy judicialization and democracy: the decriminalization of abortion until the third month of pregnancy
Judicialização da política e democracia: a descriminalização do aborto até o terceiro mês de gestação
title Policy judicialization and democracy: the decriminalization of abortion until the third month of pregnancy
spellingShingle Policy judicialization and democracy: the decriminalization of abortion until the third month of pregnancy
Cunha, Jânio Pereira da
Judicialization of politics
Democracy
Habeas Corpus nº 124.306/2016
Federal Court of Justice
Judicialização da política
Democracia
Habeas Corpus nº 124.306/2016
Supremo Tribunal Federal
title_short Policy judicialization and democracy: the decriminalization of abortion until the third month of pregnancy
title_full Policy judicialization and democracy: the decriminalization of abortion until the third month of pregnancy
title_fullStr Policy judicialization and democracy: the decriminalization of abortion until the third month of pregnancy
title_full_unstemmed Policy judicialization and democracy: the decriminalization of abortion until the third month of pregnancy
title_sort Policy judicialization and democracy: the decriminalization of abortion until the third month of pregnancy
author Cunha, Jânio Pereira da
author_facet Cunha, Jânio Pereira da
Moreira, Roberta Pessoa
author_role author
author2 Moreira, Roberta Pessoa
author2_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Cunha, Jânio Pereira da
Moreira, Roberta Pessoa
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Judicialization of politics
Democracy
Habeas Corpus nº 124.306/2016
Federal Court of Justice
Judicialização da política
Democracia
Habeas Corpus nº 124.306/2016
Supremo Tribunal Federal
topic Judicialization of politics
Democracy
Habeas Corpus nº 124.306/2016
Federal Court of Justice
Judicialização da política
Democracia
Habeas Corpus nº 124.306/2016
Supremo Tribunal Federal
description It investigates, in a descriptive and exploratory way, whether judicial decisions on sensitive and controversial issues compromise democracy and, if so, what are the reasons for democracy’s weakening condition. Bibliographic and documentary research on themes, such as abortion, judicialization of politics and its effects on democracy are examined. From an empirical standpoint, the object of study is Habeas Corpus nº 124.306/2016, specifically Minister Luís Roberto Barroso vote in the Brazilian Federal Court of Justice. This paper intends to obtain a pure and qualitative result on the theme, from the perspective that excessive judicialization of politics subverts the Constitution and disrespects popular sovereignty, since judges, not elected by the people, interpret, and rely on principles to make often discretionary and arbitrary decisions. This paper concludes that the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court, when granting the order in Habeas Corpus no. 124.306/2016, decriminalized a conduct objectively established by the Brazilian Criminal Code and disrespected a fundamental right, the right to life, protected by the Brazilian Federal Constitution. Such an act compromises the rules and legitimacy of democracy. Moreover, this study suggests that there needs to be greater dialogue between the three branches of government and more participation of the people to tackle complex questions, which depend on popular debate in order to be properly legitimized.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021-03-31
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/iuris/article/view/43011
10.5433/2178-8189.2021v25n1p178
url https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/iuris/article/view/43011
identifier_str_mv 10.5433/2178-8189.2021v25n1p178
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://ojs.uel.br/revistas/uel/index.php/iuris/article/view/43011/29344
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Scientia Iuris
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Scientia Iuris
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 Scientia Iuris; v. 25 n. 1 (2021); 178-199
2178-8189
1415-6490
reponame:Scientia Iuris (Online)
instname:Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL)
instacron:UEL
instname_str Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL)
instacron_str UEL
institution UEL
reponame_str Scientia Iuris (Online)
collection Scientia Iuris (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Scientia Iuris (Online) - Universidade Estadual de Londrina (UEL)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv revistamdireito@uel.br
_version_ 1799306016186171392

Registros relacionados