...
  • 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Revista Brasileira de Politicas Publicas >A judicializa??o do processo político e a politiza??o do poder judiciário: uma análise da interven??o do Supremo Tribunal Federal no processo político partidário
【24h】

A judicializa??o do processo político e a politiza??o do poder judiciário: uma análise da interven??o do Supremo Tribunal Federal no processo político partidário

机译：政治进程的司法化和司法机构的政治化：最高联邦法院对政党进程的干预分析

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

The main focus of this study is to analyze the control of constitutionality of the Supremo Tribunal Federal in regard to the partisan political process, starting from the analysis of the ADIns (Direct Act of Unconstitutionality) n. 1.354, brought into court by the Partido Social Crist?o – PSC, and the main action, n 1.351, demanded by the Partido Democrático Trabalhista – PDT e pelo Partido Comunista do Brasil – PC do B, aiming to hinder the validity of the clause of barrier, foreseen in article 13 of the Federal Law n. 9.096/95 – Law of the Political Parties. Both judgments had unanimous votings, although divergent decisions. Thus, in the judgment of the ADIn no 1.354, judged in 1996, it was rejected the declaration of unconstitutionality of the barrier clause. However, in December of 2006, the judgment of the main action, ADIn no 1.351, its granting was judged. In such a way, in order to evaluate the legal and politics implications of these decisions for the Brazilian democracy, two effect are investigated: the judicialization of the political process and the politicization of justice. The first one, basically, is characterized by the intervention of Supreme the political dispute from the judgment of the ADIn no 1.351-3, and the second one by the political factors that influenced the way as the Supremo Tribunal Federal decided and, for evidence, the cause of its divergent judgments, in the ADIn no 1.354 and 1.351. Finally, through this panorama, it is inquired the political impact of the STF in the definition of the rules of the democratic system, not only as the “guard of the Federal Constitution”, which implies a certain neutrality in its decisions, but also by the influence of convenient political matters, decurrent of the composition of the federal government and the National Congress. At last, it is concluded that both decisions of the Supremo, on distinct periods, 1996 and 2006, were instrumental, which means that they were taken according to the government political necessities to maintain or/and increase its governmental basis in specific situations.
机译：本研究的主要重点是从对ADIns（《违宪直接法》）n的分析开始，分析Supremo联邦法庭对党派政治进程的合宪性控制。 1.354，由Partido SocialCristóo– PSC提起诉讼，主要行动n 1.351，由PartidoDemocráticoTrabalhista – PDT e pelo要求，Partido Comunista do Brasil – PC do B，目的在于阻止该条款的有效性《联邦法》第13条规定的障碍物。 9.096 / 95 –政党法。两种判决虽然有不同的决定，但票数一致。因此，在1996年的ADIn第1.354号判决中，它被拒绝宣布壁垒条款违宪。但是，在2006年12月，对主要诉讼ADIn No 1.351的判决被判决。通过这种方式，为了评估这些决定对巴西民主的法律和政治影响，研究了两种效果：政治进程的司法化和正义的政治化。基本上，第一个特征是最高法院根据ADIn No 1.351-3的判决对政治争端进行干预，第二个特征是政治因素影响了联邦最高法院（Supremo Tribunal）联邦决定的方式，并作为证据，在ADIn第1.354和1.351条中做出不同判断的原因。最后，通过这张全景图，我们询问了STF在定义民主制度规则方面的政治影响，不仅将其作为“联邦宪法的捍卫者”，这暗示着其决策的某些中立性，而且通过便利的政治事务的影响，以及联邦政府和国民议会组成的减少。最后，得出的结论是，最高法院在1996年和2006年不同时期的两项决定都是有帮助的，这意味着它们是根据政府的政治需要采取的，以在特定情况下维持或/和增加其政府基础。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号