Critics to partial dictum of “necessity” from Robert Alexy with a basis on the idea of “politics” from Ronald Dworkin

• Autor(a) principal: Theodoro, Marcelo Antonio
• Data de Publicação: 2019
• Outros Autores: Possignolo, André Trapani Costa
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Revista Espaço Jurídico/Espaço Jurídico Journal of Law
• Texto Completo: https://periodicos.unoesc.edu.br/espacojuridico/article/view/17013
• topic: Legislative discretion; Judicial review; Reight formula; Arguments of politic; Legal principles.; Discricionariedade legislativa; Revisão judicial; Fórmula do peso; Argumentos de política; Princípios jurídicos

The paper propose critics to the partial dictum of “necessity” present in the second step of “proportionality rule” developed by Robert Alexy with a basis in the idea of “politics” from Ronald Dworkin and, additionally, in the “weight formula” from Robert Alexy himself. In this way, the work approaches the matter of legislative discretion and extent of judicial review of laws, which is relevant in times of highlight judicial activism. Besides, the contraposition allows an exposition and differentiation of the ideas from both authors. For that, the text, which follows a dialectical method, presents the “rule of proportionality” in its three steps of “suitability”, “necessity” and “proportionality in the narrower sense”, as well as the “weight formula” by which this last step is done. It also presents the concepts of “rules”, “principles” and “politics” from Ronald Dworkin and, from this, delineates the critics to the partial dictum of “necessity”. The main results found points that the step of “necessity” is not legally chargeable, but constitutes a “matter of politic”. This allows the conclusion that judicial review of law can be made by the “weight formula”, preventing disproportional laws in the narrower sense to be made, but that the election of the one that interfere less with other principles is a “matter of politic”.