Colonialidade do poder no direito e povos indígenas na América Latina: as faces da subordinação/dominação jurídica frente ao direito de retorno às terras ancestrais dos povos indígenas Kaiowá do Tekohá Laranjeira Ñande‘Rú no Brasil e Mapuche do Lof Temucuicui no Chile

Tese (doutorado)—Universidade de Brasília, Instituto de Ciências Sociais, Centro de Pesquisa e Pós-Graduação sobre as Américas, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Estudos Comparados sobre as Américas, 2016.

Ativismo judicial no Sistema Tributário Nacional: interpretação do aspecto material das regras de competência

O presente trabalho tem por objetivo analisar o controle judicial sobre as leis de incidência tributária, criticando a postura ativista e prestigiando a interpretação da Constituição pelo Legislativo. Ao longo da história da jurisdição constitucional brasileira, diversos fatores contribuíram para o fortalecimento do Judiciário em relação aos demais poderes: o constitucionalismo, com o reconhecimento da força normativa da Constituição, a doutrina da tipicidade fechada em Direito Tributário, a natureza de regra definitiva das normas de repartição de competência tributária, a vagueza da linguagem constitucional, entre outros. Como consequência, é comum que o Supremo Tribunal Federal declare a inconstitucionalidade de leis com base em concepções formadas jurisprudencialmente, como se o Sistema Tributário Nacional estivesse completamente encerrado na Constituição, e não fosse também construído pela lei. Serão apresentadas algumas alternativas para essa postura, tais como: a teoria dos diálogos constitucionais, a autocontenção judicial, a adoção de pluralidade metodológica no lugar de critérios apriorísticos de interpretação, a adoção de conceitos constitucionais dotados de núcleos semânticos rodeados de outros possíveis conteúdos marginais, e o reconhecimento do papel criativo e decisório da discricionariedade legislativa na interpretação das normas constitucionais de competência.

Motivação e discricionariedade: as razões de decidir e o contraditório como elementos legitimadores da atuação judicial

O objetivo do presente trabalho é demonstrar que uma releitura dos princípios do contraditório e do dever de motivar as decisões judiciais, sob a ótica da maior participação dos jurisdicionados, tem o condão de alcançar a esperada legitimidade democrática da atuação judicial. Para tanto, antes de adentrar ao cerne da questão, buscou-se analisar ordenamentos de tradições jurídicas distintas, civil law e common law, a fim de delinear as perspectivas que referidos sistemas enxergavam o dever de motivar a decisão judicial. O estudo convergiu para o momento atual do direito, iniciado na segunda metade do séc. XX com o movimento de constitucionalização e, consequentemente, judicialização dos direitos. Uma das maiores críticas ao momento vivido é o amplo espaço interpretativo do juiz, abrindo as portas para a discricionariedade, o que foi combatido e rechaçado tendo como parâmetro as origens do instituto. Passado referido ponto, discutiu-se sobre as evoluções e novas tendências que circundam os princípios do contraditório e do dever de motivar, cuja finalidade foi demonstrar a estreita conexão entre as normas. Conclusão inexorável foi que ambos compõem a base das garantias processuais que legitimam a atuação judicial democrática. Por fim, procurou-se tecer alguns comentários sobre os equívocos cometidos na interpretação do princípio do convencimento judicial, e como essa perspectiva pode ser alterada com as diretivas presentes no projeto do novo Código de Processo Civil, haja vista que suas previsões abraçam boa parte das ideias debatidas no presente trabalho.

EU membership of the WTO: international trade disputes and judicial protection of individuals by EU Courts

The European Union (EU) is embedded in a pluralistic legal context because of the EU and its Member States’ treaty memberships and domestic laws. Where EU conduct has implications for both the EU’s international trade relations and the legal position of individual traders, it possibly affects EU and its Member States’ obligations under the law of the World Trade Organization (WTO law) as well as the Union’s own multi-layered constitutional legal order. The present paper analyses the way in which the European Court of Justice (ECJ) accommodates WTO and EU law in the context of international trade disputes triggered by the EU. Given the ECJ’s denial of direct effect of WTO law in principle, the paper focuses on the protection of rights and remedies conferred by EU law. It assesses the implications of the WTO Dispute Settlement Understanding (DSU) – which tolerates the acceptance of retaliatory measures constraining traders’ activities in sectors different from those subject to the original trade dispute (Bananas and Hormones cases) – for the protection of ‘retaliation victims’. The paper concludes that governmental discretion conferred by WTO law has not affected the applicability of EU constitutional law but possibly shapes the actual scope of EU rights and remedies where such discretion is exercised in the EU’s general interest.

Disquieting Discretion: Race, Geography & the Colorado Death Penalty in the First Decade of the Twenty-First Century

This Article demonstrates through original statistical research that prosecutors in Colorado were more likely to seek the death penalty against minority defendants than against white defendants. Moreover, defendants in Colorado’s Eighteenth Judicial District were more likely to face a death prosecution than defendants elsewhere in the state. Our empirical analysis demonstrates that even when one controls for the differential rates at which different groups commit statutorily death-eligible murders, non-white defendants and defendants in the Eighteenth Judicial District were still more likely than others to face a death penalty prosecution. Even when the heinousness of the crime is accounted for, the race of the accused and the place of the crime are statistically significant predictors of whether prosecutors will seek the death penalty. We discuss the implications of this disparate impact on the constitutionality of Colorado’s death penalty regime, concluding that the Colorado statute does not meet the dictates of the Eighth Amendment to the Constitution.

Contemporary issues in Australian family law: Do we need a more unified and interventionist judicial model

Recent decisions of the Family Court of Australian reflect concerns over the adversarial nature of the legal process. The processes and procedures of the judicial system militate against a detailed examination of the issues and rights of the parties in dispute. The limitations of the family law framework are particularly demonstrated in disputes over the custody of children where the Court has tended to neglect the rights and interests of the primary carer. An alternative "unified family court" framework will be examined in which the Court pursues a more active and interventionist approach in the determination of family law disputes.

Are the financial services external complaints resolution schemes subject to judicial review?

In Australia seven schemes (apart from the Superannuation Complaints Tribunal) provide alternative dispute resolution services for complaints brought by consumers against financial services industry members. Recently the Supreme Court of New South Wales held that the decisions of one scheme were amenable to judicial review at the suit of a financial services provider member and the Supreme Court of Victoria has since taken a similar approach. This article examines the juristic basis for such a challenge and contends that judicial review is not available, either at common law or under statutory provisions. This is particularly the case since Financial Industry Complaints Service Ltd v Deakin Financial Services Pty Ltd (2006) 157 FCR 229; 60 ACSR 372 decided that the jurisdiction of a scheme is derived from a contract made with its members. The article goes on to contend that the schemes are required to give procedural fairness and that equitable remedies are available if that duty is breached.

Outrage management in cases of sexual harassment as revealed in judicial decisions

Sexual harassment can be conceptualized as a series of interactions between harassers and targets that either inhibit or increase outrage by third parties. The outrage management model predicts the kinds of actions likely to be used by perpetrators to minimize outrage, predicts the consequences of failing to use these tactics—namely backfire, and recommends countertactics to increase outrage. Using this framework, our archival study examined outrage-management tactics reported as evidence in 23 judicial decisions of sexual harassment cases in Australia. The decisions contained precise, detailed information about the circumstances leading to the claim; the events which transpired in the courtroom, including direct quotations; and the judges' interpretations and findings. We found evidence that harassers minimize outrage by covering up the actions, devaluing the target, reinterpreting the events, using official channels to give an appearance of justice, and intimidating or bribing people involved. Targets can respond using countertactics of exposure, validation, reframing, mobilization of support, and resistance. Although there are limitations to using judicial decisions as a source of information, our study points to the value of studying tactics and the importance to harassers of minimizing outrage from their actions. The findings also highlight that, given the limitations of statutory and organizational protections in reducing the incidence and severity of sexual harassment in the community, individual responses may be effective as part of a multilevel response in reducing the incidence and impact of workplace sexual harassment as a gendered harm.

Indigeneity and the judicial decision to imprison : a study of Western Australia’s higher courts

Internationally, sentencing research has largely neglected the impact of Indigeneity on sentencing outcomes. Using data from Western Australia’s higher courts for the years 2003–05, we investigate the direct and interactive effects of Indigenous status on the judicial decision to imprison. Unlike prior research on race/ethnicity in which minority offenders are often found to be more harshly treated by sentencing courts, we find that Indigenous status has no direct effect on the decision to imprison,after adjusting for other sentencing factors (especially past and current criminality).However, there are sub-group differences: Indigenous males are more likely to receive a prison sentence compared to non-Indigenous females. We draw on the focal concerns perspective of judicial decision making in interpreting our findings.

The role of legislative, executive and judicial mechanisms in ensuring a fair and effective asylum process

A good faith reading of core international protection obligations requires that states employ appropriate legislative, administrative and judicial mechanisms to ensure the enjoyment of a fair and effective asylum process. Restrictive asylum policies instead seek to ‘denationalize’ the asylum process by eroding access to national statutory, judicial and executive safeguards that ensure a full and fair hearing of an asylum claim. From a broader perspective, the argument in this thesis recognizes hat international human rights depend on domestic institutions for their effective implementation, and that a rights-based international legal order requires that power is limited, whether that power is expressed as an instance of the sovereign right of states in international law or as the authority of governments under domestic constitutions.

Estoppel in the face of consumer protection in land transactions- judicial reasoning or judicial intuition

Nationally, there is much legislation regulating land sale transactions, particularly in relation to seller disclosure of information. The statutes require strict compliance by a seller failing which, in general, a buyer can terminate the contract. In a number of instances, when buyers have sought to exercise these rights, sellers have alleged that buyers have either expressly or by conduct waived their rights to rely upon these statutes. This article examines the nature of these rights in this context, whether they are capable of waiver and, if so, what words or conduct might be sufficient to amount to waiver. The analysis finds that the law is in a very unsatisfactory state, that the operation of those rules that can be identified as having relevance are unevenly applied and concludes that sellers have, in the main, been unsuccessful in defeating buyers' statutory rights as a result of an alleged waiver by those buyers.