Insuficiências e propostas teórico-práticas para a efetivação judicial de direitos humanos fundamentais

• Autor(a) principal: Barbosa, Vinícius Reis [UNESP]
• Data de Publicação: 2013
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Institucional da UNESP
• Texto Completo: http://hdl.handle.net/11449/110452
• topic: Direito - Filosofia; Argumentação jurídica; Direitos humanos; Teoria crítica; Direitos fundamentais; Law

This study aims to initially diagnose the failure of the realization of fundamental human rights in court. This research starts from the focus on the argumentative dimension of the phenomenon of judicial construction of the law; in sequence, seeks to outline proposals for effective legal strategies of these same fundamental human rights within a legal dogmatic criticism. The theoretical basis for this proposal is initially argumentation theory and neoconstitutionalism, moving then to the use of critical theory of human rights. Both frameworks are best suited to understanding and operationalization of the proposed objectives. It is also worth mentioning that the addition of critical theory of human rights is an epistemological necessity of argumentation theory, as it requires the same ideological considerations and moral support its use in legal practice. In turn, the realization of fundamental human rights in court is a practical urgency, since that, after the 1988 Constitution, the judiciary in general and the STF in particular have increasingly assuming the political agenda of society. In other words, the phenomenon of judicialization of politics and fundamental human rights as well as the politicization of the judiciary is a current pulsating reality, deserving therefore be properly investigated. Finally, the work also seeks to problematize the very theory of argumentation and neoconstitutionalism in the face of its limit, for example, the paradigmatic square developed by Machado and exposed in the body work