As audiências públicas em sede de controle concentrado de constitucionalidade: um estudo comparado entre as realidades brasileira e francesa à luz da teoria da democracia deliberativa

• Ano de defesa: 2019
• Autor(a) principal: Thiago, Tainah Simões Sales
• Tipo de documento: Tese
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Palavras-chave em Português: Audiência pública; Jurisdição; Democracia - Brasil; Tribunais constitucionais; Democracia deliberativa; Democracia - França
• Link de acesso: http://www.repositorio.ufc.br/handle/riufc/45804

This research is about the analysis of the public hearings in concentrated control courts in Brazil, as well as the comparative study between the Brazilian and the French realities in relation to the popular participation in constitutional jurisdiction, based on the theory of deliberative democracy. In the Brazilian Judiciary an instrument was created to allow the participation of various sectors of society in the constitutional discussions of great relevance: the public hearings. However, the mere provision of the institute in the legislation or even the holding of the hearing in a session organized by the Supreme Court does not guarantee the effective democratization of judicial decisions. This will only be verified if the ministers in their votes take the debates raised by the groups that have spoken into account. That emphasizes the need to conduct research to assess the extent to which the arguments raised at the hearing influence the formation of the ministers’ understanding. So, research was conducted on public hearings held to date on concentrated control actions, in comparative, longitudinal and retrospective perspective, through the analysis of documents available on the website of the Federal Supreme Court, especially the convocation orders, the notices, the list of qualified exhibitors, the shorthand notes and the full judgments of the cases already judged. A comparison was made between what was exposed in the hearings and the votes of the ministers to verify if the content discussed in those hearings is relevant to the formation of the judges’ understanding. Although its legal foresight and its accomplishment can be celebrated, from the verification of the way the hearings are being developed in the reality of the Supreme Court, it is not possible to verify that they are elements effectively democratizing the process. However the negative points and limitations encountered can be overcome. Thus, in order to make suggestions and seek to improve the homeland constitutional jurisdiction to make it more deliberative, a qualitative and comparative research was carried in loco with a model that, in theory, proposes to be more democratic than the Brazilian one and adopts public hearings in all discussions in regard to a posteriori constitutionality control: the French system.