Do controle de constitucionalidade dos atos jurisdicionais transitados em julgado

The following study aims to verify in which hypothesis res judicata, when it comes of an unconstitutional decision, shall not prevail over Constitution. It displayed the characteristics of formal and material constitutional systems. It debated the concepts of existence, validity and efficacy of juridical rules and acts. It dissertated about the idea of Constitution s superiority and about the birth of the judicial review of constitutionality. It focused some contemporary models of this judicial review and its historical evolution in Brazil, showing its effects towards the current Constitution. It sustained that the decision given by Supremo Tribunal Federal during abstract control of rules must bind even legislative bodies, preventing them to produce the same rules previously declared unconstitutional. It held up that all parts of the decision of Supremo Tribunal Federal oblige, even the juridical arguments employed, in both diffused and concentrated reviews. It showed that, despite these models of review live together in Brazil, our constitutional system preferred the concentrated one, considering one only court over the other constitutional organs. It discussed about res judicata with the purpose of clarifying its juridical nature, its objective and subjective limits and its regulation in collective demands. It explained that the material res judicata is an effect of a decision which cannot be reviewed, which makes the law s will free of discussion, binding the contendants and avoiding that other courts, judging future demands about the same object, may decide differently. It showed how the regulation of res judicata in collective demands, in respect oh their subjective limits, is useful to demonstrate that it is not the material law who must adapt itself to res judicata as traditionally thought, but res judicata, as a warranty of juridical certainty and security, who must be shaped from the debated rule. It presented to view the main doctrinal conceptions about res judicata s review in the hypothesis of unconstitutional judgement. It concluded that the decisions forged by unconstitutional rules or interpretations reputed not compatible to the Constitution by Supremo Tribunal Federal, in spite of it can make res judicata, may be reviewed beyond the term to file a recissory claim, since while the debated law is still valid, no matter if its decision was before or after the res judicata. At the end, it asserted that, when it is not legally authorized, the judicial review of res judicata is not admissible, after the term to file a recissory claim, under the argument that there was no direct violation to the constitutional principle or rule

A Constitucionalidade do decreto de licitações da Petrobrás à luz dos princípios da legalidade e da eficiência

PETROBRAS, a Brazilian oil company, follows principles of public administration and from the Constitutional Amendment 9/95 in Brazil began to compete with other companies with the flexibility of the oil monopoly. In this new model started to use the simplified procedure for bidding so that could compete on equal terms. The ordinance that adopted a simplified procedure for bidding has been the subject of some criticism and lawsuits especially under the Court of Audit and the Supreme Court in Brazil. The analysis of their constitutionality, and the possibility of their use by other group companies is the theme of this work, and for this purpose, permeates through the notions of judicial review in the Brazilian law on the stage of law and economics analysis of the norm, and the principles applicable to PETROBRAS and the devices most frequently asked about the implementation of 2745/98 Decree. For this, the basic issue that should be investigated further is the regulatory power of the Federal Executive and the delegation of powers within the legislature and its conformation to the constitutional regency

Limites formais e materiais ao controle de constitucionalidade pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal

This document approaches the formal and material limits of the constitucionalidade control for the Supreme Federal Court, iniating with the study of the Constitution, detaching its evolution, nature and meanings, passing for its historical evolution, offering still a unconstitutionality concept. Is work the principles as material Constitution, making the distinction entere principles and rules, detaching the characteristics of the principles constitutional, and the basic principle of the Constituition. It analyzes metodologics the historical parameters and of the brazilian system of constitutionality control and detaches the paper of the Supreme Federal Court as positive legislator. It observes the beddings of the constitutionality control and the legitimacy of the Supreme Federal Court. Is examines the performance of the Supreme Federal Court in face of the principle of the legal security. Is offers a vision on the experience of the control of constitutionality in other constries. It still approaches the control of constitutionality in Brazil, detaching the critical points of its formal and material limits. Is verifies the application of the principles constitutional for the Supreme Federal Court in the diffuse control and the intent control of constitutionality, as well as the performance of the Supreme Federal Court ahead of the unconstitutional omissions. It brings to the debate the new perspectives how much to the formal and material limits of the control of constitutionality for the Supreme Federal Court. Objective to elaborate considerations concerning the limits of the constitutional jurisdiction from the model of Constituition, the character politican of the difficulties with respect to the definition of its formal and material limits from the performance of the Supreme Federal Court

Fiscalização difusa da constitucionalidade e o incidente de argüição de inconstitucionalidade

The present work consists of studying to diffuse control of constitutionality in Brazil, with emphasis in a procedural alternative to the evolution of that model: the incident to challenge of unconstitutionality. Starting from the discussion about the new role of constitutional jurisdiction in peripheral countries and in the globalized society, without forgetting to face inevitable doubts about its legitimacy before other powers of the State, the Brazilian control of constitutionality is revealed, under a diffuse, non-dichotomical view, through a number of inconsistencies and misunderstandings, that compromise social peace, the credibility of democratic institutions and the supremacy of juridical security. In order to achieve the goal, the study in course discussed the main difficulties of the Brazilian mixed model of constitutionality control, as well as, directing its view to the incident of challenge of unconstitutionality, which the most adequate forms to assure its appropriateness, legitimacy, processing and decisory effects are. Is was essential, in this point of view, to establish the difference between the incident of challenge of unconstitutionality conceived in article of the Brazilian Federal Constitution and the incident of challenge of unconstitutionality such as it is known in the European models. The insertion of the incident of challenge of unconstitutionality based on European models in the Brazilian control system, without jeopardizing the North-American essence the Brazilian constitutional history presents since 1981, is the hypothesis that is presented as an improvement of constitutional protection

A objetivação do controle concreto de constitucionalidade nas decisões do Supremo Tribunal Federal

The independence of the United States and the revolutions that emerged in Europe in the eighteenth century led to the birth of the written constitution, with a mission to limit the power of the State and to ensure fundamental rights to citizens. Thus, the Constitution has become the norm and ultimate founding of the State. Because of this superiority felt the need to protect her, emerging from that constitutional jurisdiction, taking control of constitutionality of provisions his main instrument. In Brazil, the constitutionality control began with the Constitution of 1891, when "imported" the American model, which is named after incidental diffuse model of judicial review. Indeed, allowed that any judge or court could declare the unconstitutionality of the law or normative act in a concrete case. However, the Brazilian Constituent did not bring the U.S. Institute of stare decisis, by which the precedents of higher courts eventually link the below. Because of this lack, each tribunal Brazilian freely decide about the constitutionality of a rule, so that the decision took effect only between the parties to the dispute. This prompted the emergence of conflicting decisions between judicantes organs, which ultimately undermine legal certainty and the image of the judiciary. As a solution to the problem, was incorporated from the 1934 Constitution to rule that the Senate would suspend the law declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court. With the introduction of abstract control of constitutionality, since 1965, the Supreme Court went on to also have the power to declare the invalidity of the provision unconstitutional, effectively against all without the need for the participation of the Senate. However, it remained the view that in case the Supreme Court declared the unconstitutionality of the fuzzy control law by the Senate would continue with the competence to suspend the law unconstitutional, thus the decision of the Praetorium Exalted restricted parties. The 1988 Constitution strengthened the abstract control expanding legitimized the Declaratory Action of Unconstitutionality and creating new mechanisms of abstract control. Adding to this, the Constitutional Amendment. No. 45/2004 brought the requirement of general repercussion and created the Office of Binding Precedent, both to be applied by the Supreme Court judgments in individual cases, thus causing an approximation between the control abstract and concrete constitutional. Saw themselves so that the Supreme Court, to be the guardian of the Constitution, its action should be directed to the trial of issues of public interest. In this new reality, it becomes more necessary the participation of the Senate to the law declared unconstitutional in fuzzy control by the Supreme Court can reach everyone, because such an interpretation has become obsolete. So, to adapt it to this reality, such a rule must be read in the sense that the Senate give publicity to the law declared unconstitutional by the Supreme Court, since mutated constitutional

A democracia participativa na jurisdição constitucional brasileira: o amicus curiae enquanto mediador democrático no controle concentrado de constitucionalidade no Supremo Tribunal Federal

This master thesis aims to research the tension established between the judicial review and democratic theory which was always present in the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers. In this regard, the expansion of the Brazilian constitutional jurisdiction checked after the occurrence of the Federal Constitution of 1988 and the inertia of the Legislature in disciplinary relevant legal aspects of Brazilian society contributed to a hyperactivity of the Supreme Court. However, in a complex society of context, as is the Brazilian society, there are contained demands and political controversies that hardly would be well represented or resolved through the action of the Court of ministers at the expense of other government bodies. Among the supremacy of Parliament and the legitimacy deficit of these magistrates, is the constitutional text and the social fabric that makes this legal status of the political. Participatory democracy established by the guidelines of the Federal Constitution requires this perspective when the Supreme Court acting in place of concentrated constitutionality control. In a plural society, there is no reason to get rid of state decision moments popular participation. Lack the Supreme Court, this time, the democratizing perception that the institute brings to the interior of the Court, as state determination of space in which to come together and meet the aspirations of society and state claims. The dissertation investigates thus the possibility of amicus curiae Institute serve as a mediator of the democratic debate, to assist the Supreme Court in the preparation of the decision is, historically, that which is of greater legitimacy, from the perspective of a theory participatory democracy. Analyzes, likewise, the unfolding of abstract judicial review in the context of Brazilian law. Proposes, incidentally, a rereading of the separation of powers, with the call for the Judiciary be careful not to become the protagonist of national political decisions. It maintains, finally, that procedural opening the interpreters of the constitution, through the amicus curiae Institute, shows up as able to decrease the legitimacy deficit in the performance of the Brazilian Supreme Court.