Repercussão geral e súmula vinculante: os efeitos no controle difuso

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Rocha, Valéria Maria Lacerda
Data de Publicação: 2011
Tipo de documento: Dissertação
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UFRN
Texto Completo: https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/13921
Resumo: Brazil since its first republican constitution has adopted systems of laws control. The review activity was given to three state powers or functions state, Executive, Legislative and Judiciary. However, it appears that in the country along the constitutional history, has stood considerably the jurisdictional control of the most important control. Initially, back in 1891, Brazil adopted the jurisdictional control of diffuse from U.S, whose role in monitoring of standards is delivered to all organs of the judiciary, which may face a case, put on trial, ascertain whether or not the possibility of applying a law, removing its impact in case of unconstitutionality. In 1969, entered in the second legal model of judicial review, the concentrated control of constitutionality, whose inspiration comes from the positivist theory of Hans Kelsen, and was adopted by the Austrian Constitution of 1920. According to the abstract control the supervision of law is given to a Court or Constitutional Court, responsible for the analysis of the legal constitutionality independent of its application to a specific case. In Brazil the role of concentrated control was handed over exclusively to the Supreme Court, which serves as the Constitutional Court, which accumulates that function with other constitutionally provided jurisdiction. Throughout this period, from 1891 until today, Brazil has maintained a dual system of judicial control of legal constitutionality, where they coexist and harmonize the diffuse control exercised by any organ of the Judiciary, and concentrated control of competence the Supreme Court. However, one must recognize that with the advent of the Federal Constitution of 1988, the concentrated control has emerged on the national stage due to two important factors: the expansion of the legal capacity to sue and the inclusion of other ways control, besides the already known Direct Claim of Unconstitutionality. This concentrated control and projection of the Supreme Court s attempt to become a true constitutional court, led to a relative weakening of diffuse control even when performed by the Brazilian Constitutional Court. In order to become a true constitutional court, all decisions handed down by the Supreme in the exercise of constitutional jurisdiction should have the same weight and the same measure, or at least bring improvement to similar effects, once is the responsible for the final word when it comes to constitutional interpretation. Thus, the writs of certiorari and stare decisis were responsible for profound changes in the diffuse control, allowing the Supreme Court can strengthen its decisions even in the diffuse control. These two institutions have substantially changed the legal status of diffuse control, allowing an extension of the effects of decisions handed down by the Supreme Court, so that you can no longer be said that the effects of this control to restrict the disputing parties in the process
id UFRN_0380f875977dcc9f4c838c7165ce37f6
oai_identifier_str oai:https://repositorio.ufrn.br:123456789/13921
network_acronym_str UFRN
network_name_str Repositório Institucional da UFRN
repository_id_str
spelling Rocha, Valéria Maria Lacerdahttp://lattes.cnpq.br/3688607792222684http://lattes.cnpq.br/6219856215182127Santos, Gustavo Ferreirahttp://lattes.cnpq.br/0225515825120934Pereira, érick Wilsonhttp://lattes.cnpq.br/08759212929811282014-12-17T14:27:16Z2012-05-042014-12-17T14:27:16Z2011-03-11ROCHA, Valéria Maria Lacerda. Repercussão geral e súmula vinculante: os efeitos no controle difuso. 2011. 149 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Constituição e Garantias de Direitos) - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, 2011.https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/13921Brazil since its first republican constitution has adopted systems of laws control. The review activity was given to three state powers or functions state, Executive, Legislative and Judiciary. However, it appears that in the country along the constitutional history, has stood considerably the jurisdictional control of the most important control. Initially, back in 1891, Brazil adopted the jurisdictional control of diffuse from U.S, whose role in monitoring of standards is delivered to all organs of the judiciary, which may face a case, put on trial, ascertain whether or not the possibility of applying a law, removing its impact in case of unconstitutionality. In 1969, entered in the second legal model of judicial review, the concentrated control of constitutionality, whose inspiration comes from the positivist theory of Hans Kelsen, and was adopted by the Austrian Constitution of 1920. According to the abstract control the supervision of law is given to a Court or Constitutional Court, responsible for the analysis of the legal constitutionality independent of its application to a specific case. In Brazil the role of concentrated control was handed over exclusively to the Supreme Court, which serves as the Constitutional Court, which accumulates that function with other constitutionally provided jurisdiction. Throughout this period, from 1891 until today, Brazil has maintained a dual system of judicial control of legal constitutionality, where they coexist and harmonize the diffuse control exercised by any organ of the Judiciary, and concentrated control of competence the Supreme Court. However, one must recognize that with the advent of the Federal Constitution of 1988, the concentrated control has emerged on the national stage due to two important factors: the expansion of the legal capacity to sue and the inclusion of other ways control, besides the already known Direct Claim of Unconstitutionality. This concentrated control and projection of the Supreme Court s attempt to become a true constitutional court, led to a relative weakening of diffuse control even when performed by the Brazilian Constitutional Court. In order to become a true constitutional court, all decisions handed down by the Supreme in the exercise of constitutional jurisdiction should have the same weight and the same measure, or at least bring improvement to similar effects, once is the responsible for the final word when it comes to constitutional interpretation. Thus, the writs of certiorari and stare decisis were responsible for profound changes in the diffuse control, allowing the Supreme Court can strengthen its decisions even in the diffuse control. These two institutions have substantially changed the legal status of diffuse control, allowing an extension of the effects of decisions handed down by the Supreme Court, so that you can no longer be said that the effects of this control to restrict the disputing parties in the processO Brasil desde a sua primeira constituição republicana tem adotado sistemas de controle de constitucionalidade das normas. Verifica-se que esta tarefa de fiscalização normativa foi entregue aos três poderes ou funções estatais, Executivo, Legislativo e Judiciário. Entretanto, verifica-se que no país, ao longo da história constitucional, tem se destacado consideravelmente o controle jurisdicional de constitucionalidade das leis. Inicialmente, já em 1891, foi adotado o controle jurisdicional difuso ou concreto, de origem norte-americana, cuja função de fiscalização das normas foi entregue a todos os órgãos do Poder Judiciário, os quais poderão diante de um caso concreto, posto a julgamento, verificarem ou não a possibilidade de aplicação de uma norma, afastando sua incidência em caso de inconstitucionalidade. Em 1969, entrou definitivamente no ordenamento jurídico o segundo modelo de fiscalização jurisdicional, o controle de constitucionalidade concentrado ou abstrato, cuja inspiração advém da teoria positivista de Hans Kelsen, e foi adotado pela Constituição Austríaca de 1920. Segundo o controle abstrato a fiscalização é entregue a um Tribunal ou Corte Constitucional responsável pela análise da norma em tese, independente de sua aplicação a um caso específico. No Brasil a função do controle concentrado foi entregue com exclusividade ao Supremo Tribunal Federal, que exerce a função de Tribunal Constitucional, que acumula referida função com outras competências jurisdicionais constitucionalmente previstas. Durante todo esse período, de 1891 até os dias atuais, o Brasil tem mantido um sistema misto de controle jurisdicional de constitucionalidade das normas, onde convivem e se harmonizam o controle difuso, exercido por qualquer órgão do Poder Judiciário, e o controle concentrado, de competência do Supremo Tribunal Federal. Porém, forçoso é reconhecer, que com o advento da carta de 1988, o controle concentrado ganhou projeção e destaque no cenário nacional, por dois importantes fatores: a ampliação do rol de legitimados ativos e a inclusão de outros mecanismos de controle, além da já conhecida Ação Direta de Inconstitucionalidade. Esta projeção do controle concentrado e a tentativa do Supremo Tribunal de se tornar uma verdadeira corte constitucional, levaram a um relativo enfraquecimento do controle difuso mesmo quando realizado pelo Tribunal Constitucional brasileiro. Ocorre que para se tornar uma verdadeira corte constitucional, todas as decisões prolatadas pelo Supremo no exercício da jurisdição constitucional devem ter o mesmo peso e a mesma medida, ou pelo menos surtirem efeitos análogos, haja vista ser o responsável pela última palavra em se tratando de interpretação constitucional. Desta forma, a repercussão geral e a súmula vinculante foram responsáveis por profundas transformações no controle difuso, permitindo que o Supremo Tribunal Federal possa fortalecer suas decisões mesmo em sede de controle concreto. Estes dois institutos modificaram substancialmente a natureza jurídica do controle difuso, permitindo um alargamento dos efeitos das decisões prolatadas pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal, de modo que já não se poderá mais afirmar que os efeitos deste controle se restrinjam as partes litigantes do processoapplication/pdfporUniversidade Federal do Rio Grande do NortePrograma de Pós-Graduação em DireitoUFRNBRConstituição e Garantias de DireitosControle de constitucionalidade difusoSúmula vinculanteRepercussão geralDiffuse controlStare decisisWrit of certiorariCNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITORepercussão geral e súmula vinculante: os efeitos no controle difusoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesisinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRNinstname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN)instacron:UFRNTEXTValeriaMLR_DISSERT.pdf.txtValeriaMLR_DISSERT.pdf.txtExtracted texttext/plain336020https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/13921/6/ValeriaMLR_DISSERT.pdf.txtaee8ea8e5ad28f6ac4db0cc9d24eb21aMD56RepercussãoGeralSúmula_Rocha_2011.pdf.txtRepercussãoGeralSúmula_Rocha_2011.pdf.txtExtracted texttext/plain335245https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/13921/8/Repercuss%c3%a3oGeralS%c3%bamula_Rocha_2011.pdf.txtf0fcce678e39d64397bf5b1d53730b87MD58THUMBNAILValeriaMLR_DISSERT.pdf.jpgValeriaMLR_DISSERT.pdf.jpgIM Thumbnailimage/jpeg1581https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/13921/7/ValeriaMLR_DISSERT.pdf.jpgd8aa3cc13ed18a15dab59f53518d9eb9MD57RepercussãoGeralSúmula_Rocha_2011.pdf.jpgRepercussãoGeralSúmula_Rocha_2011.pdf.jpgGenerated Thumbnailimage/jpeg1183https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/13921/9/Repercuss%c3%a3oGeralS%c3%bamula_Rocha_2011.pdf.jpgc802ef35c20f557946e8c15763fab2bcMD59ORIGINALRepercussãoGeralSúmula_Rocha_2011.pdfapplication/pdf729931https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/13921/1/Repercuss%c3%a3oGeralS%c3%bamula_Rocha_2011.pdf0e394caf067ef7b86575e19d833c0a17MD51123456789/139212019-05-26 02:12:20.582oai:https://repositorio.ufrn.br:123456789/13921Repositório de PublicaçõesPUBhttp://repositorio.ufrn.br/oai/opendoar:2019-05-26T05:12:20Repositório Institucional da UFRN - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN)false
dc.title.por.fl_str_mv Repercussão geral e súmula vinculante: os efeitos no controle difuso
title Repercussão geral e súmula vinculante: os efeitos no controle difuso
spellingShingle Repercussão geral e súmula vinculante: os efeitos no controle difuso
Rocha, Valéria Maria Lacerda
Controle de constitucionalidade difuso
Súmula vinculante
Repercussão geral
Diffuse control
Stare decisis
Writ of certiorari
CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO
title_short Repercussão geral e súmula vinculante: os efeitos no controle difuso
title_full Repercussão geral e súmula vinculante: os efeitos no controle difuso
title_fullStr Repercussão geral e súmula vinculante: os efeitos no controle difuso
title_full_unstemmed Repercussão geral e súmula vinculante: os efeitos no controle difuso
title_sort Repercussão geral e súmula vinculante: os efeitos no controle difuso
author Rocha, Valéria Maria Lacerda
author_facet Rocha, Valéria Maria Lacerda
author_role author
dc.contributor.authorID.por.fl_str_mv
dc.contributor.authorLattes.por.fl_str_mv http://lattes.cnpq.br/3688607792222684
dc.contributor.advisorID.por.fl_str_mv
dc.contributor.advisorLattes.por.fl_str_mv http://lattes.cnpq.br/6219856215182127
dc.contributor.referees1.pt_BR.fl_str_mv Santos, Gustavo Ferreira
dc.contributor.referees1ID.por.fl_str_mv
dc.contributor.referees1Lattes.por.fl_str_mv http://lattes.cnpq.br/0225515825120934
dc.contributor.referees2.pt_BR.fl_str_mv Pereira, érick Wilson
dc.contributor.referees2ID.por.fl_str_mv
dc.contributor.referees2Lattes.por.fl_str_mv http://lattes.cnpq.br/0875921292981128
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Rocha, Valéria Maria Lacerda
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Controle de constitucionalidade difuso
Súmula vinculante
Repercussão geral
topic Controle de constitucionalidade difuso
Súmula vinculante
Repercussão geral
Diffuse control
Stare decisis
Writ of certiorari
CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO
dc.subject.eng.fl_str_mv Diffuse control
Stare decisis
Writ of certiorari
dc.subject.cnpq.fl_str_mv CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO
description Brazil since its first republican constitution has adopted systems of laws control. The review activity was given to three state powers or functions state, Executive, Legislative and Judiciary. However, it appears that in the country along the constitutional history, has stood considerably the jurisdictional control of the most important control. Initially, back in 1891, Brazil adopted the jurisdictional control of diffuse from U.S, whose role in monitoring of standards is delivered to all organs of the judiciary, which may face a case, put on trial, ascertain whether or not the possibility of applying a law, removing its impact in case of unconstitutionality. In 1969, entered in the second legal model of judicial review, the concentrated control of constitutionality, whose inspiration comes from the positivist theory of Hans Kelsen, and was adopted by the Austrian Constitution of 1920. According to the abstract control the supervision of law is given to a Court or Constitutional Court, responsible for the analysis of the legal constitutionality independent of its application to a specific case. In Brazil the role of concentrated control was handed over exclusively to the Supreme Court, which serves as the Constitutional Court, which accumulates that function with other constitutionally provided jurisdiction. Throughout this period, from 1891 until today, Brazil has maintained a dual system of judicial control of legal constitutionality, where they coexist and harmonize the diffuse control exercised by any organ of the Judiciary, and concentrated control of competence the Supreme Court. However, one must recognize that with the advent of the Federal Constitution of 1988, the concentrated control has emerged on the national stage due to two important factors: the expansion of the legal capacity to sue and the inclusion of other ways control, besides the already known Direct Claim of Unconstitutionality. This concentrated control and projection of the Supreme Court s attempt to become a true constitutional court, led to a relative weakening of diffuse control even when performed by the Brazilian Constitutional Court. In order to become a true constitutional court, all decisions handed down by the Supreme in the exercise of constitutional jurisdiction should have the same weight and the same measure, or at least bring improvement to similar effects, once is the responsible for the final word when it comes to constitutional interpretation. Thus, the writs of certiorari and stare decisis were responsible for profound changes in the diffuse control, allowing the Supreme Court can strengthen its decisions even in the diffuse control. These two institutions have substantially changed the legal status of diffuse control, allowing an extension of the effects of decisions handed down by the Supreme Court, so that you can no longer be said that the effects of this control to restrict the disputing parties in the process
publishDate 2011
dc.date.issued.fl_str_mv 2011-03-11
dc.date.available.fl_str_mv 2012-05-04
2014-12-17T14:27:16Z
dc.date.accessioned.fl_str_mv 2014-12-17T14:27:16Z
dc.type.status.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis
format masterThesis
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.citation.fl_str_mv ROCHA, Valéria Maria Lacerda. Repercussão geral e súmula vinculante: os efeitos no controle difuso. 2011. 149 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Constituição e Garantias de Direitos) - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, 2011.
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/13921
identifier_str_mv ROCHA, Valéria Maria Lacerda. Repercussão geral e súmula vinculante: os efeitos no controle difuso. 2011. 149 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Constituição e Garantias de Direitos) - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte, Natal, 2011.
url https://repositorio.ufrn.br/jspui/handle/123456789/13921
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte
dc.publisher.program.fl_str_mv Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito
dc.publisher.initials.fl_str_mv UFRN
dc.publisher.country.fl_str_mv BR
dc.publisher.department.fl_str_mv Constituição e Garantias de Direitos
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv reponame:Repositório Institucional da UFRN
instname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN)
instacron:UFRN
instname_str Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN)
instacron_str UFRN
institution UFRN
reponame_str Repositório Institucional da UFRN
collection Repositório Institucional da UFRN
bitstream.url.fl_str_mv https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/13921/6/ValeriaMLR_DISSERT.pdf.txt
https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/13921/8/Repercuss%c3%a3oGeralS%c3%bamula_Rocha_2011.pdf.txt
https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/13921/7/ValeriaMLR_DISSERT.pdf.jpg
https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/13921/9/Repercuss%c3%a3oGeralS%c3%bamula_Rocha_2011.pdf.jpg
https://repositorio.ufrn.br/bitstream/123456789/13921/1/Repercuss%c3%a3oGeralS%c3%bamula_Rocha_2011.pdf
bitstream.checksum.fl_str_mv aee8ea8e5ad28f6ac4db0cc9d24eb21a
f0fcce678e39d64397bf5b1d53730b87
d8aa3cc13ed18a15dab59f53518d9eb9
c802ef35c20f557946e8c15763fab2bc
0e394caf067ef7b86575e19d833c0a17
bitstream.checksumAlgorithm.fl_str_mv MD5
MD5
MD5
MD5
MD5
repository.name.fl_str_mv Repositório Institucional da UFRN - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte (UFRN)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1802117848965840896