Cooperação judicial internacional : a invalidade do art. 8º, parágrafo único, da resolução nº 09, do Superior Tribunal de Justiça, de 2005

• Ano de defesa: 2012
• Autor(a) principal: Peruchin, Marcelo Caetano Guazzelli
• Orientador(a): Ruaro, Regina Linden
• Tipo de documento: Tese
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul
• Programa de Pós-Graduação: Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito
• Departamento: Faculdade de Direito
• País: BR
• Palavras-chave em Português: DIREITO; COOPERAÇÃO INTERNACIONAL; DIREITOS FUNDAMENTAIS; LEGALIDADE (DIREITO); CONSTITUCIONALIDADE
• Área do conhecimento CNPq: CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO
• Link de acesso: http://tede2.pucrs.br/tede2/handle/tede/4199

This study assesses the international judicial cooperation as an indispensable instrument in the relations between States. Nevertheless, the States are not the only protagonists here, but also the individual (who comes to participate as the pleading issue) as a subject of rights in this ambit. Here the principle of adversary is proven to be of great importance as well as the way it should be observed, although it is often not obeyed in face of infra-constitutional laws, causing voidness. The principle of adversary is a corollary of human dignity and a fundamental right of the Constitutional Democratic Rule of Law. The control of rule validity, on its turn, depends on formal and material compatibility of infra-constitutional rules with the Constitution, as well as the international treaties of human rights in a broad sense ratified and internalized in Brazil. Once an integrating device of an administrative act of a respective Court (e.g., the Superior Court of Justice) offends the ordinary law, the Constitution, as well as international treaties of human rights in broad sense internalized in Brazil, should be considered void. The observation of the principle of adversary prior to granting a passive rogatory letter of request should be the ordinary, and its denial, the exception. This denial requires a supported request from the plaintiff State and a motivated decision from the President of the Superior Court of Justice in this sense. With that in mind, this study states the invalidity of the 8th article, paragraph, from the Superior Court of Justice Rule n. 09, from 2005, in these three aspects: legality, constitutionality and international treaties compatibility