A medida cautelar na ação direta de inconstitucionalidade: uma abordagem pela perspectiva do princípio do acesso à justiça

The present study deals with the caution measure in the direct action of inconstitutionality. The treatment given to the approach is through the principle of access to justice. For this, a construction of the juridical content in the principle of access to justice is proposed, without losing the focus of its characteristic as a metajuridical principle, which is presented in the constitutional field as a fundamental right, generator of a new universality, destined to guarantee the prevalence of an adequate juridical tutelage. Some challenges of the concretizing hermeutics are still shown to give way to principle of access to justice, dealing with certain limitations and proposals. The direct action of inconstitutionality in face of the dissertation, begins to focus on the presentation of the tutelage of urgency, differentiating it from the other brief tutelage and elevating it to the condition of instrument which is indispensable to the principle of access to justice. In the most specific field of the abstract control of constitutionality, the characteristics of the objective process are defined, their sources, amongst which the regimental norms of the Federal Supreme Court and their role in the new constitutional reality. Finally, the caution measure in the direct action of inconstitutionality is presented by the perspective of principle of access to justice, identifying some points: the interpretations of the principle of the natural judge to adapt him to the aspect of continuous and temporarily adequate juridical account, especially when concerned to emergency; the analysis of facts in the direct action; the bonding objective effects and the erga omnes; the effect over the factual and normative plan; the effect of the caution measure over other processes and over the prescriptional course; the polemic of the possibility of caution measure in direct action of inconstitutionality through omission

A legitimidade da jurisdição de primeiro grau na concretização dos direitos fundamentais: proposta de um novo modelo jurídico-administrativo para o segundo grau de jurisdição

The current study is about the legitimacy of lower court jurisdiction as a way of exercising basic legal rights, proposing, therefore, a new legal-administrative model for appellate court. In order to achieve that, a demonstration of the importance of basic legal rights in the Brazilian legal system and an open interpretation in light of the Constitution, as a way to affirm said rights, among which are accessibility to the justice system and proper legal protection, is required. As a result, the legitimacy to access the legal system resides in the Constitution, where the interpreter should seek its basic principles to achieve basic legal rights. It is observed that the lack of credibility regarding lower court decisions comes from the dogmatic view of truth born from power, and therefore, that the truth resides in decisions from appellate court and not from lower court judges. A lower court judge holds a privileged position in providing basic legal rights for citizens, considering his close contact to the parties, the facts, and the evidences brought forth. Class action suit is presented as an important instrument able to lead the lower court judge to provide basic legal rights. Small Claims Courts may be used as paradigm to the creation of Appellate State Courts formed by lower court judges, reserving to higher jurisdiction courts and Federal Circuit Courts, the decisions of original competency and the management and institutional representation of the judiciary system. Instilling an internal democratization of the judiciary is also required, which means the participation of lower court judges in electing their peers to chief positions in the court system, as well as establishing a limited mandate to higher court judges.

A investigação criminal e a vedação ao anonimato no sistema jurídico brasileiro

The thesis, prepared with basis on deductive reasoning (through the utilization of general concepts of the fundamental rights theory) and on inductive logic (by means of the consideration of particular situations in which the theme has been approached) deals with the criminal investigation and the prohibition of anonymity in the Brazilian law system. The state criminal investigation activity presents not only a substantial constitutional basis, due to the objective dimension of fundamental rights (which imposes an obligation to protect these essential values), but also a formal constitutional basis, arising from the administrative principles of rule of law, morality and efficiency, referred to in article 37 of the Constitution. The criminal investigation, however, is not an unlimited pursuit, being restrained by the duty to consider fundamental rights that oppose to its realization. One of the limits of the state investigation activity, in the Brazilian law system, is the prohibition of anonymity, referred to in article 5°, IV, of the Constitution. This prohibition is a direct constitutional restriction to the freedom of expression that aims to ensure the credibility of the diffusion of ideas and prevent the abusive exercise of this fundamental right, which could harm both persons and the state, with no possibility of punishment to the offending party. Generally, based on this prohibition, it is affirmed that a criminal investigation cannot begin and progress founded on anonymous communication of crimes. Informations about crimes to the investigative authorities require the correct identification of the stakeholders. Therefore, it is sustained that the prohibition of anonymity also comprehends the prohibition of utilization of pseudonyms and heteronyms. The main purpose of this essay is to recognize the limits and possibilities in starting and conducting criminal investigations based on communication of crimes made by unidentified persons, behind the veil of anonymity or hidden by pseudonyms or heteronyms. Although the prohibition of article 5°, IV, of the Constitution is not submitted to direct or indirect constitutional restrictions, this impediment can be object of mitigation in certain cases, in attention to the constitutional values that support state investigation. The pertinence analysis of the restrictions to the constitutional anonymity prohibition must consider the proportionality, integrated by the partial elements of adequacy, necessity and strict sense proportionality. The criminal investigation is a means to achieve a purpose, the protection of fundamental rights, because the disclosure of facts, through the investigatory activity, gives rise to the accomplishment of measures in order to prevent or punish the violations eventually verified. So, the start and the development of the state criminal investigation activity, based on a crime communication carried out by an unidentified person, will depend on the demonstration that the setting up and continuity of an investigation procedure, in each case, are an adequate, necessary and (in a strict sense) proportional means to the protection of fundamental rights