Título: | PARLIAMENTARY SOVEREIGNTY, JUDICIAL REVIEW AND INSTITUTIONAL DIALOGUES: FROM THE DECISIONIST ISOLATION TO THE COLLABORATIVE ACTIVITY BETWEEN THE POWERS IN CONSTITUTIONAL APPLICATION | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Autor: |
ETEOCLES BRITO MENDONCA DIAS JUNIOR |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Colaborador(es): |
JOSE RIBAS VIEIRA - Orientador MARCIA NINA BERNARDES - Coorientador |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Catalogação: | 08/JAN/2013 | Língua(s): | PORTUGUESE - BRAZIL |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tipo: | TEXT | Subtipo: | THESIS | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Notas: |
[pt] Todos os dados constantes dos documentos são de inteira responsabilidade de seus autores. Os dados utilizados nas descrições dos documentos estão em conformidade com os sistemas da administração da PUC-Rio. [en] All data contained in the documents are the sole responsibility of the authors. The data used in the descriptions of the documents are in conformity with the systems of the administration of PUC-Rio. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Referência(s): |
[pt] https://www.maxwell.vrac.puc-rio.br/projetosEspeciais/ETDs/consultas/conteudo.php?strSecao=resultado&nrSeq=20968&idi=1 [en] https://www.maxwell.vrac.puc-rio.br/projetosEspeciais/ETDs/consultas/conteudo.php?strSecao=resultado&nrSeq=20968&idi=2 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DOI: | https://doi.org/10.17771/PUCRio.acad.20968 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Resumo: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PARLIAMENTARY SOVEREIGNTY, JUDICIAL REVIEW AND
INSTITUTIONAL DIALOGUES: from the decisionist isolation to the
collaborative activity between the powers in constitutional application aims not
only to present the three best-known instruments for controversy’s solution
between the Constitution and Law indicated in the title, such as studying the
debate involving the legitimacy of judicial review of constitutionality up against
the democracy and point the main solution has already put into practice in other
jurisdictions: the institutional dialogues. Demonstrate by means of doctrinal
studies and foreign law analysis which they characterized as tools that better
reconcile democracy and protection of fundamental rights rather than an
decisionist isolationist by a single state power, which is characteristic of social
parliamentary sovereignty and judicial review. This work demonstrates that the
dialogical model emerged in contemporary constitutionalism, specifically within
the Commonwealth, it reveals as a kind of mechanism of controversy’s solution
supported by a weak judicial review. In it, there is no identification of a supreme
body of constitutional interpretation, but it seeks not to incur in the questions’
panorama of democratic legitimacy of currently experienced by the constitutional
court, especially in countries like Brazil and the United States, dominated, under
questioning, judicial activism. It is concluded that dialogic venture aims to
emphasize the strength of the rights themselves, not the jurisdiction’s exercise,
making it through the ombudsman for a collaborative activity between political
and judicial powers, posture that better aligns with a current view of democracy
that overcome the focus predominantly political.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|