CARL SCHMITT X HANS KELSEN: DEFENSOR OU SENHOR DA CONSTITUIÇÃO?

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Pinto, Roberto Bueno
Publication Date: 2015
Format: Article
Language: por
Source: Revista da Faculdade de Direito UFPR (Online)
Download full: https://revistas.ufpr.br/direito/article/view/42346
Summary: The political crises of the contemporary democracies find their explanation in the past arguments composed by detractors of the parliamentarian democratic theory and practice. The debate between Schmitt and Kelsen on the protector of the Constitution and the (il)limitation, which must characterize the exercise of its power, contains one of the juridical and political reasons that exceeds its own time. We suggest that reason still beats and fulfills one of the many grooves of the contemporary democracy’s crisis, i.e., the unfinished debate on the supremacy of law over politics or politics over law, or still, the supremacy of the technique over the world of life (Lebenswelt) or, instead, the world of life over any type of regulation turned to assure the liberties. Starting from that premise this article looks to recognize – aside the self-perception of each author about his theories – who really support a theory composed by a defender, and who by a seignior of the Constitution.
id UFPR-3_fe6acac2c67f18ef274fe2d56f50a614
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/42346
network_acronym_str UFPR-3
network_name_str Revista da Faculdade de Direito UFPR (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling CARL SCHMITT X HANS KELSEN: DEFENSOR OU SENHOR DA CONSTITUIÇÃO?CARL SCHMITT X HANS KELSEN: DEFENDER OR SEIGNIOR OF THE CONSTITUTION?Carl Schmitt. Hans Kelsen. Judicial Review. Weimar Republic. Dictatorship.Carl Schmitt. Hans Kelsen. Controle de constitucionalidade. República de Weimar. Ditadura.The political crises of the contemporary democracies find their explanation in the past arguments composed by detractors of the parliamentarian democratic theory and practice. The debate between Schmitt and Kelsen on the protector of the Constitution and the (il)limitation, which must characterize the exercise of its power, contains one of the juridical and political reasons that exceeds its own time. We suggest that reason still beats and fulfills one of the many grooves of the contemporary democracy’s crisis, i.e., the unfinished debate on the supremacy of law over politics or politics over law, or still, the supremacy of the technique over the world of life (Lebenswelt) or, instead, the world of life over any type of regulation turned to assure the liberties. Starting from that premise this article looks to recognize – aside the self-perception of each author about his theories – who really support a theory composed by a defender, and who by a seignior of the Constitution.A crise política das democracias contemporâneas encontra suas razões em antigos argumentos elaborados pelos detratores da teoria e prática democrático-parlamentar. O debate entre Schmitt e Kelsen sobre o guardião da Constituição e a (i)limitação que deveria marcar o exercício de seu poder contém uma destas razões jurídico-políticas que transcende o seu tempo. Sugerimos que ela se encontra todavia pulsante e preenche uma das tantas ranhuras da crise das democracias contemporâneas; a saber, o inconcluso debate sobre a supremacia do direito sobre a política ou da política sobre o direito ou, ainda, sobre a preeminência da técnica sobre o mundo da vida (Lebenswelt) ou, ângulo inverso, do mundo da vida sobre qualquer tipo de regulamentação voltada ao asseguramento das liberdades. Partindo desta premissa, este texto procura reconhecer quem – à parte a autopercepção de ambos os autores sobre suas teorias – realmente sustenta teoria composta por um defensor e quem por um senhor da Constituição.Revista da Faculdade de Direito UFPR2015-10-21info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://revistas.ufpr.br/direito/article/view/4234610.5380/rfdufpr.v60i3.42346Revista da Faculdade de Direito UFPR; v. 60 n. 3 (2015); 103-1362236-72840104-331510.5380/rfdufpr.v60i3reponame:Revista da Faculdade de Direito UFPR (Online)instname:Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR)instacron:UFPRporhttps://revistas.ufpr.br/direito/article/view/42346/26942Pinto, Roberto Buenoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2015-12-18T20:59:56Zoai:ojs.pkp.sfu.ca:article/42346Revistahttp://ojs.c3sl.ufpr.br/ojs2/index.php/direitoPUBhttp://ojs.c3sl.ufpr.br/ojs/index.php/direito/oai||revistadireito@ufpr.br2236-72840104-3315opendoar:2015-12-18T20:59:56Revista da Faculdade de Direito UFPR (Online) - Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv CARL SCHMITT X HANS KELSEN: DEFENSOR OU SENHOR DA CONSTITUIÇÃO?
CARL SCHMITT X HANS KELSEN: DEFENDER OR SEIGNIOR OF THE CONSTITUTION?
title CARL SCHMITT X HANS KELSEN: DEFENSOR OU SENHOR DA CONSTITUIÇÃO?
spellingShingle CARL SCHMITT X HANS KELSEN: DEFENSOR OU SENHOR DA CONSTITUIÇÃO?
Pinto, Roberto Bueno
Carl Schmitt. Hans Kelsen. Judicial Review. Weimar Republic. Dictatorship.
Carl Schmitt. Hans Kelsen. Controle de constitucionalidade. República de Weimar. Ditadura.
title_short CARL SCHMITT X HANS KELSEN: DEFENSOR OU SENHOR DA CONSTITUIÇÃO?
title_full CARL SCHMITT X HANS KELSEN: DEFENSOR OU SENHOR DA CONSTITUIÇÃO?
title_fullStr CARL SCHMITT X HANS KELSEN: DEFENSOR OU SENHOR DA CONSTITUIÇÃO?
title_full_unstemmed CARL SCHMITT X HANS KELSEN: DEFENSOR OU SENHOR DA CONSTITUIÇÃO?
title_sort CARL SCHMITT X HANS KELSEN: DEFENSOR OU SENHOR DA CONSTITUIÇÃO?
author Pinto, Roberto Bueno
author_facet Pinto, Roberto Bueno
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Pinto, Roberto Bueno
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Carl Schmitt. Hans Kelsen. Judicial Review. Weimar Republic. Dictatorship.
Carl Schmitt. Hans Kelsen. Controle de constitucionalidade. República de Weimar. Ditadura.
topic Carl Schmitt. Hans Kelsen. Judicial Review. Weimar Republic. Dictatorship.
Carl Schmitt. Hans Kelsen. Controle de constitucionalidade. República de Weimar. Ditadura.
description The political crises of the contemporary democracies find their explanation in the past arguments composed by detractors of the parliamentarian democratic theory and practice. The debate between Schmitt and Kelsen on the protector of the Constitution and the (il)limitation, which must characterize the exercise of its power, contains one of the juridical and political reasons that exceeds its own time. We suggest that reason still beats and fulfills one of the many grooves of the contemporary democracy’s crisis, i.e., the unfinished debate on the supremacy of law over politics or politics over law, or still, the supremacy of the technique over the world of life (Lebenswelt) or, instead, the world of life over any type of regulation turned to assure the liberties. Starting from that premise this article looks to recognize – aside the self-perception of each author about his theories – who really support a theory composed by a defender, and who by a seignior of the Constitution.
publishDate 2015
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2015-10-21
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://revistas.ufpr.br/direito/article/view/42346
10.5380/rfdufpr.v60i3.42346
url https://revistas.ufpr.br/direito/article/view/42346
identifier_str_mv 10.5380/rfdufpr.v60i3.42346
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://revistas.ufpr.br/direito/article/view/42346/26942
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Revista da Faculdade de Direito UFPR
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Revista da Faculdade de Direito UFPR
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista da Faculdade de Direito UFPR; v. 60 n. 3 (2015); 103-136
2236-7284
0104-3315
10.5380/rfdufpr.v60i3
reponame:Revista da Faculdade de Direito UFPR (Online)
instname:Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR)
instacron:UFPR
instname_str Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR)
instacron_str UFPR
institution UFPR
reponame_str Revista da Faculdade de Direito UFPR (Online)
collection Revista da Faculdade de Direito UFPR (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista da Faculdade de Direito UFPR (Online) - Universidade Federal do Paraná (UFPR)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv ||revistadireito@ufpr.br
_version_ 1825134094917304320