A vida armazenada em bancos de dados e sua influência na produção normativa

• Ano de defesa: 2022
• Autor(a) principal: Renê Morais da Costa Braga
• Tipo de documento: Tese
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais; Brasil; DIREITO - FACULDADE DE DIREITO; Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito; UFMG
• Palavras-chave em Português: Legisprudência; Legística; Inteligência artificial; Processamento de linguagem natural; Diálogo das fontes; Direito; Processamento de linguagem natural (Computação); Jurisprudência
• Link de acesso: http://hdl.handle.net/1843/43295

The work analyzes the impacts of communication and information technology on law-making. Using Legisprudence as a theoretical framework and considering mainly the duty of justification imposed on the legislator, the paper analyzes how information technology can impact normative production. With regard to communication and information technology, the potential for automating procedures and extracting information from lawsuits using artificial intelligence, specifically NLP (Natural Language Processing) are specifically analyzed. Characteristics of the PJe platform (electronic court proceedings) and its advantages and disadvantages for extracting information through the application of artificial intelligence techniques are analyzed. Establishing that the available technology allows access to such information, such as litigation rates, frequency of invocation of certain legislation in legal proceedings, allegations of legislative omission or requests for a declaration of unconstitutionality, it is discussed whether the search for such information would be a duty of the legislator. Furthermore, and paying attention to the theory of dialogue of the sources of law, it is analyzed what the impacts of the demonstration of information of this nature may be for the legitimacy of current norms, especially considering that, unlike the judiciary, the legislator's duty to justification encompasses not only the duty to justify the overturn of a precedent, but also the duty to justify the maintenance of the current law.