What kind of judiciary do we want?: the access to justice in Brazil

The goal of this paper is to discuss a key issue in the Democratic Rule of Law State: what are the role and main functions of the Judiciary in Brazil? Is the Judiciary mainly a public service provider, adjudicating disputes and guaranteeing individual rights? Or also as a state power, it should mainly control and guide the moral values of the society, changing the status quo and reducing social conflicts? In this sense, what are the conflicts that must be examined by the Judiciary? We will seek to answer these questions based on a discussion subsidized by courts official statistics and the results of surveys conducted with the Brazilian general population. The surveys measured how do citizens feel about their judicial system and what are the circumstances and the facts that determine the judicialization of conflicts. We work with the perceptions and attitudes of citizens relating to the Judiciary as it is today and discuss the Judiciary they want. Then, we compare how attitudes and perceptions relate to actual behavior and use of courts.

Judiciary as the last resort to protect children and adolescents: intersectoral actions, investment in human resources, and structuring of services

This study aimed to identify the work developed by the Judiciary to prevent sexual violence against children and adolescents within the family. The approach to social representations in a cultural perspective was used. The field study consisted in the 1st and 2nd Court of Crimes against Children and Adolescents, at the State Supreme Court of Pernambuco, Brazil. Participant observation, semi-structured interviews, and focus group with 17 subjects were the techniques for data collection, analyzed through the interpretation of meanings, allowing the identification of the category "The Judiciary as the ultimate level" and the following subcategories: "The public policies to prevent violence" and "The structure and dynamics of Courts". This study allows the visualization of the Judiciary's limitations with regard to the full protection and absolute priority, and that the work along with the victims demands investments in structure and human resources.

EU Law, International Law and Economic Sanctions against Terrorism: The Judiciary in Distress? Research Papers in Law, 3/2008

From the Introduction. This article seeks to examine the relationship between European Union law, international law, and the protection of fundamental rights in the light of recent case law of the European Court of Justice (ECJ) and the Court of First Instance (CFI) relating to economic sanctions against individuals. On 3 September 2008, the ECJ delivered its long-awaited judgment in Kadi and Al Barakaat on appeal from the CFI.3 In its judgment under appeal,4 the CFI had held that the European Community (EC) is competent to adopt regulations imposing economic sanctions against private organisations in pursuance of UN Security Council (UNSC) Resolutions seeking to combat terrorism; that although the EC is not bound directly by the UN Charter, it is bound pursuant to the EC Treaty to respect international law and give effect to UNSC; and that the CFI has jurisdiction to examine the compatibility of EC regulations implementing UNSC resolutions with fundamental rights not as protected by the EC but as protected by jus cogens. On appeal, following the Opinion of Maduro AG, the ECJ rejected the CFI’s approach. It held that UNSC resolutions are binding only in international law. It subjected the contested regulations to full review under EC human rights standards and found them in breach of the right to a hearing, the right to judicial protection and the right to property. Kadi and Al Barakaat is the most important judgment ever delivered by the ECJ on the relationship between EC and international law and one of its most important judgments on fundamental rights. It is imbued by constitutional confidence, commitment to the rule of law but also some scepticism towards international law. In the meantime, the CFI has delivered a number of other judgments on anti-terrorist sanctions assessing the limits of the “emergency constitution” at European level. The purpose of this paper is to examine the above case law and explore the dilemmas and tensions facing the EU judiciary in seeking to define and protect the EU’s distinct constitutional space. It is divided as follows. It first looks at the judgment in Kadi. After a short presentation of the factual and legal background, it explores the question whether the EU has competence to adopt smart sanctions. It then examines whether the EU is bound by resolutions of the Security Council, whether the ECJ has jurisdiction to review Community measures implementing such resolutions and the applicable standard of judicial scrutiny. It analyses the contrasting views of the CFI, the Advocate General, and the ECJ taking account also of the case law of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR). Further, it explores the consequences of annulling the contested regulation. It then turns to discussing CFI case law in relation to sanctions lists drawn up not by the UN Security Council but by the EC. The paper concludes by welcoming the judgment of the ECJ. Whilst its reasoning on the issue of Community competence is questionable, once such competence is established, it is difficult to support the abrogation of Community standards for the protection of fundamental rights. Such standards should ensure procedural due process whilst recognising the importance of public security.

Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1982 : Mr. Rodino, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the following report together with additional and dissenting views (to accompany H.R. 6514) (including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office).

"September 28, 1982."

Refugees and U.S. asylum seekers from Central America : statement of Nancy R. Kingsbury, Director, Foreign Economic Assistance Issues, National Security and International Affairs Division; before the Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees, and International Law, Committee on the Judiciary, House of Representatives.

"For release ... March 9, 1989."

Alcohol highway-traffic safety workshop for the judiciary.

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, D.C.

The Refugee act of 1979, S. 643 : hearing before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, Ninety-sixth Congress, first session, March 14, 1979.

"Serial no. 96-1."

Final report of the Select Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy : joint hearings before the Subcommittee on Immigration and Refugee Policy of the Senate Committee on the Judiciary and Subcommittee on Immigration, Refugees, and International Law of the House Committee on the Judiciary, Ninety-seventh Congress, first session, on the final report of the Select Commission on Immigration and Refugee Policy, May 5, 6, and 7, 1981.

Item 1042-A, 1041-B (microfiche)

The knowing employment of illegal immigrants : hearing before the Subcommittee on Immigration and Refugee Policy of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, Ninety-seventh Congress, first session, on employer sanctions, September 30, 1981.

Item 1042-A, 1042-B (microfiche)

Immigration reform and control : report of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, on S. 2222 with additional and minority views.

"June 30 ... 1982."

Juvenile delinquency (motion pictures) Hearings before the Subcommittee to Investigate Juvenile Delinquency of the Committee on the Judiciary.

Mode of access: Internet.

Juvenile delinquency, El Paso, Tex. Hearing before the Subcommittee to Investigate Juvenile Deliquency of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, Eighty-third Congress, second session, pursuant to S. Res. 89, investigation of juvenile delinquency in the United States. September 17, 1954.

Robert C. Hendrickson, chairman of subcommittee.

Government patent policy. : Hearings before the Subcommittee on Patents, Trademarks, and Copyrights of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, Eighty-seventh Congress, first session, pursuant to S. Res. 55 on S. 1084 and S. 1176.

Mode of access: Internet.

The insurance industry. Hearings before the Subcommittee on Antitrust and Monopoly of the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, Eighty-fifth Congress, second session, pursuant to S. Res. 231 ...

Continuous paging.