Ciência no tribunal: as expertises mobilizadas no caso Belo Monte
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2013 |
Tipo de documento: | Dissertação |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM |
Texto Completo: | http://repositorio.ufsm.br/handle/1/6238 |
Resumo: | My thesis treats about the scientific and technical knowledge used by the judge system and the federal public ministry in the Belo Monte case. It tries to explain how science proves are translated by the judge system and the federal public ministry, and also how they verify which are the principal experts mentioned. In this thesis I also define the arguments and actors that where legitimize in the Belo Monte case. It talks about how science merges with the judge system and how is treated and interpreted by people, that don t have the specific knowledge in science and technology in this field. It stars from this question: How judges discern from choosing between the technical documents produced by the people who claim, and the defendant documents, when this two are contradictory? Is there a way for this? After, all fifteen initial cases are specifically analyzed to verify which arguments and professionals are more relevant and repeated. Then, two sentences are analyzed to conclude which expertise did the judge system legitimated or not. This work is based on a ground study made by the author in Belem and Campinas, where I had access to some lawsuits of the case. I also interviewed key interlocutors that helped the federal public ministry with scientific studies. For making this,I Will use the Latour s concept of translation, the Harry Collins and Evans expertise concept, and also studies of Sheila Jasanoff about science in the United States courts. Speech analyze will also be addressed as a method of interview interpretation. |
id |
UFSM_4ddd86b87032f9d38f659fcc59d0ced1 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:repositorio.ufsm.br:1/6238 |
network_acronym_str |
UFSM |
network_name_str |
Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Ciência no tribunal: as expertises mobilizadas no caso Belo MonteBelo MonteCiênciaTraduçãoExpertiseAçõesScienceTranslationExpertiseLawsuitsCNPQ::CIENCIAS HUMANAS::SOCIOLOGIAMy thesis treats about the scientific and technical knowledge used by the judge system and the federal public ministry in the Belo Monte case. It tries to explain how science proves are translated by the judge system and the federal public ministry, and also how they verify which are the principal experts mentioned. In this thesis I also define the arguments and actors that where legitimize in the Belo Monte case. It talks about how science merges with the judge system and how is treated and interpreted by people, that don t have the specific knowledge in science and technology in this field. It stars from this question: How judges discern from choosing between the technical documents produced by the people who claim, and the defendant documents, when this two are contradictory? Is there a way for this? After, all fifteen initial cases are specifically analyzed to verify which arguments and professionals are more relevant and repeated. Then, two sentences are analyzed to conclude which expertise did the judge system legitimated or not. This work is based on a ground study made by the author in Belem and Campinas, where I had access to some lawsuits of the case. I also interviewed key interlocutors that helped the federal public ministry with scientific studies. For making this,I Will use the Latour s concept of translation, the Harry Collins and Evans expertise concept, and also studies of Sheila Jasanoff about science in the United States courts. Speech analyze will also be addressed as a method of interview interpretation.Esta dissertação trata da utilização dos conhecimentos técnico e científico pelo judiciário. Busca compreender como a ciência é traduzida nos processos jurídicos e verificar quais os principais experts mencionados, tanto pelo Ministério Público Federal do Pará, quanto pelo Judiciário, definindo, assim, quem são as pessoas e os argumentos que foram legitimados no caso judicial decorrente da construção da Usina Hidrelétrica de Belo Monte, no Estado do Pará, Brasil. Assim, cuida-se da questão de como a ciência adentra o meio jurídico, e de como é tratada e interpretada por pessoas que não têm conhecimento especializado em ciência e tecnologia. Parte-se das perguntas: como fazem os magistrados para eleger entre os documentos técnicos produzidos por autor e réu quando esses são contraditórios? Existem critérios para nortear tais casos? Posteriormente, analisam-se especificamente as iniciais dos quinze processos ajuizados, a fim de verificar quais os argumentos e profissionais são mais referidos e recorrentes. Depois, analisam-se duas sentenças já proferidas no caso, objetivando verificar quais expertises o Judiciário legitimou ou deslegitimou. O trabalho baseia-se em uma pesquisa de campo feita pela autora em Belém do Pará e Campinas, onde teve acesso aos autos de alguns processos do caso e entrevistou os interlocutores-chave, ou seja, as pessoas que com seus trabalhos científicos deram ferramentas ao Ministério Público Federal do Pará para o ajuizamento de quinze Ações Civis Públicas. Para isso, será utilizado o conceito de tradução de Latour, de expertise de Harry Collins e Evans, bem como os estudos de Sheila Jasanoff sobre a ciência nos tribunais norte-americanos. Será utilizada a análise de discurso como método de interpretação das entrevistas concedidas.Universidade Federal de Santa MariaBRSociologiaUFSMPrograma de Pós-Graduação em Ciências SociaisNeves, Fabrício Monteirohttp://lattes.cnpq.br/5812207127672055Sá, Guilherme José da Silva ehttp://lattes.cnpq.br/9806862393456180Tybusch, Jerônimo Siqueirahttp://lattes.cnpq.br/6477064173761427Rodrigues, Luciana Rosa2014-08-082014-08-082013-04-15info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersioninfo:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesisapplication/pdfapplication/pdfRODRIGUES, Luciana Rosa. CIÊNCIA NO TRIBUNAL: AS EXPERTISES MOBILIZADAS NO CASO BELO MONTE. 2013. 103 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Sociologia) - Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Santa Maria, 2013.http://repositorio.ufsm.br/handle/1/6238porinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessreponame:Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSMinstname:Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM)instacron:UFSM2022-01-20T13:36:17Zoai:repositorio.ufsm.br:1/6238Biblioteca Digital de Teses e Dissertaçõeshttps://repositorio.ufsm.br/ONGhttps://repositorio.ufsm.br/oai/requestatendimento.sib@ufsm.br||tedebc@gmail.comopendoar:2022-01-20T13:36:17Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM - Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Ciência no tribunal: as expertises mobilizadas no caso Belo Monte |
title |
Ciência no tribunal: as expertises mobilizadas no caso Belo Monte |
spellingShingle |
Ciência no tribunal: as expertises mobilizadas no caso Belo Monte Rodrigues, Luciana Rosa Belo Monte Ciência Tradução Expertise Ações Science Translation Expertise Lawsuits CNPQ::CIENCIAS HUMANAS::SOCIOLOGIA |
title_short |
Ciência no tribunal: as expertises mobilizadas no caso Belo Monte |
title_full |
Ciência no tribunal: as expertises mobilizadas no caso Belo Monte |
title_fullStr |
Ciência no tribunal: as expertises mobilizadas no caso Belo Monte |
title_full_unstemmed |
Ciência no tribunal: as expertises mobilizadas no caso Belo Monte |
title_sort |
Ciência no tribunal: as expertises mobilizadas no caso Belo Monte |
author |
Rodrigues, Luciana Rosa |
author_facet |
Rodrigues, Luciana Rosa |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
Neves, Fabrício Monteiro http://lattes.cnpq.br/5812207127672055 Sá, Guilherme José da Silva e http://lattes.cnpq.br/9806862393456180 Tybusch, Jerônimo Siqueira http://lattes.cnpq.br/6477064173761427 |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Rodrigues, Luciana Rosa |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Belo Monte Ciência Tradução Expertise Ações Science Translation Expertise Lawsuits CNPQ::CIENCIAS HUMANAS::SOCIOLOGIA |
topic |
Belo Monte Ciência Tradução Expertise Ações Science Translation Expertise Lawsuits CNPQ::CIENCIAS HUMANAS::SOCIOLOGIA |
description |
My thesis treats about the scientific and technical knowledge used by the judge system and the federal public ministry in the Belo Monte case. It tries to explain how science proves are translated by the judge system and the federal public ministry, and also how they verify which are the principal experts mentioned. In this thesis I also define the arguments and actors that where legitimize in the Belo Monte case. It talks about how science merges with the judge system and how is treated and interpreted by people, that don t have the specific knowledge in science and technology in this field. It stars from this question: How judges discern from choosing between the technical documents produced by the people who claim, and the defendant documents, when this two are contradictory? Is there a way for this? After, all fifteen initial cases are specifically analyzed to verify which arguments and professionals are more relevant and repeated. Then, two sentences are analyzed to conclude which expertise did the judge system legitimated or not. This work is based on a ground study made by the author in Belem and Campinas, where I had access to some lawsuits of the case. I also interviewed key interlocutors that helped the federal public ministry with scientific studies. For making this,I Will use the Latour s concept of translation, the Harry Collins and Evans expertise concept, and also studies of Sheila Jasanoff about science in the United States courts. Speech analyze will also be addressed as a method of interview interpretation. |
publishDate |
2013 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2013-04-15 2014-08-08 2014-08-08 |
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.uri.fl_str_mv |
RODRIGUES, Luciana Rosa. CIÊNCIA NO TRIBUNAL: AS EXPERTISES MOBILIZADAS NO CASO BELO MONTE. 2013. 103 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Sociologia) - Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Santa Maria, 2013. http://repositorio.ufsm.br/handle/1/6238 |
identifier_str_mv |
RODRIGUES, Luciana Rosa. CIÊNCIA NO TRIBUNAL: AS EXPERTISES MOBILIZADAS NO CASO BELO MONTE. 2013. 103 f. Dissertação (Mestrado em Sociologia) - Universidade Federal de Santa Maria, Santa Maria, 2013. |
url |
http://repositorio.ufsm.br/handle/1/6238 |
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 application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de Santa Maria BR Sociologia UFSM Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Sociais |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Universidade Federal de Santa Maria BR Sociologia UFSM Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciências Sociais |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
reponame:Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM instname:Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM) instacron:UFSM |
instname_str |
Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM) |
instacron_str |
UFSM |
institution |
UFSM |
reponame_str |
Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM |
collection |
Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM - Universidade Federal de Santa Maria (UFSM) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
atendimento.sib@ufsm.br||tedebc@gmail.com |
_version_ |
1805922104356372480 |