The principiological analysis of Law and its relationship to legal (in)certainty: an analysis of the jurisprudence os the STF in the constitutionality of the provisional prision after the decision in second instance
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.51359/2448-2307.2023.252639Keywords:
positivism, Neoconstitucionalism, legal rule, principles, legal certaintyAbstract
The principiological analysis of law has been gaining ground in the legal academy, mainly due to the performance of constitutional courts under the aegis of the theories of Dwokind and Alexy. In this perspective, analyzing the performance of the STF on the provisional execution of the sentence after the decision in the second instance becomes essential for understanding the risks to legal certainty when using the principiological analysis of law without the necessary guidelines. In this way, this article analyzes the jurisprudential evolution of this theme to evaluate the applicability of the theories of Dworkin and Alexy by the STF, being essential the prior presentation of the theoretical bases of legal positivism and its collision with the principiological analysis of law. For that, bibliographic research was used in order to explain these theories and correlate them with the decision of the Brazilian Constitutional Court. Thus, it was possible to observe that the STF, despite referring to the theories, does not use the guidelines imposed by them for the application of the principal in hard cases decisions, making its decisions about the provisional execution of the sentence volatile and a factor of legal uncertainty for the Brazilian legal system.
References
ALEXY, Robert. Teoria dos direitos fundamentais. Tradução: Virgílio Afonso da Silva. 2. ed. São Paulo: Malheiros, 2007.
BARROSO, Luís Roberto. Razão sem voto: O Supremo Tribunal Federal e o governo da maioria. In: NOVELINO, Marcelo; FELLET, André. Separação dos Poderes: aspectos contemporâneos entre Executivo, Legislativo e Judiciário. Salvador: Juspodivm, 2018.
BRASIL. Supremo Tribunal Federal. Ação Direta de Constitucionalidade nº 43. Rel. Min. Marco Aurélio. Tribunal Pleno, julgado em 07.11.2019, publicado em 11.11.2019.
BRASIL. Supremo Tribunal Federal. Habeas Corpus nº 126.292. Rel. Min. Teori Zavascki. Tribunal pleno, julgado em 17.02.2016, publicado em 17.06.2016.
CAPPELLETTI, Mauro. Juízes legisladores? Porto Alegre: Safe, 1993.
COELHO, Fábio Ulhoa. Para Entender Kelsen. 4. ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2001.
DWORKIN, Ronald. Uma questão de princípio. Tradução: Luíz Carlos Borges. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2000.
DWORKIN, Ronald. Levando os direitos a sério. Tradução: Nelson Boeira. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2002.
DWORKIN, Ronald. O império do direito. Tradução: Jefferson Luiz Camargo. 2. ed. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2007.
FONSECA, Ricardo Marcelo. Introdução Teórica à História do Direito. Curitiba: Juruá, 2012.
FONTENELES, Samuel Sales. Hermenêutica Constitucional. 2. ed. Salvador: Editora Juspodivm, 2019.
GRECO, Rogério. Curso de Direito Penal. 22. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Impetus, 2020.
HIRSCHL, Ran. Towards juristocracy: the origins and consequences of the Constitutionalism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2004.
KELSEN, Hans. Teoria Pura do Direito. Tradução: João Baptista Machado. 6. ed. São Paulo: Martins Fontes, 2003.
KOZICKI, Katya. Levando a Justiça a Sério: interpretação do direito e responsabilidade judicial. Belo Horizonte: Arraes Editores, 2012.
STRECK, Lênio. Lições de Crítica Hermenêutica do Direito. 2. ed. Porto Alegre: Livraria do Advogado, 2016.
TEIXEIRA, João Paulo Allain; SPAREMBERGER, Raquel Fabiana Lopes. Neoconstituciomalismo europeu e novo constitucionalismo latino-americano: um diálogo possível? Revista Brasileira de Sociologia do Direito, v. 3, n. 1, 2016, p. 52-70.
VIEIRA, Oscar Vilhena. Supremocracia. Revista Direito GV, v. 4, n. 2. São Paulo: Fundação Getúlio Vargas, 2008, p. 441-463.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with the Academic Journal of Recife Law School ("RAFDR") agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the RAFDR right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) after the publication of the article in the RAFDR, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Additional information:
Articles published by the Academic Journal of Recife Law School are licensed under CC-BY: