司法能动主义及其在民主法治下的有效性

E. Messias, André Luís Cateli Rosa
{"title":"司法能动主义及其在民主法治下的有效性","authors":"E. Messias, André Luís Cateli Rosa","doi":"10.5752/P.2318-7999.2021V24N47P359-379","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The actual article aims to analyze the validity of judicial activism within the scope of the Democratic State of Law under the bias of the Systems Theory. For that purpose, the following aspects will be investigated: the distinction between society, system, communication, programming and coding; the luhmannian theory and its systems; the evolution of systems and the and the communicative forms of propagation; the time according to Luhmann, the conception of a systemic unity and the existence of autonomous branches of the law, and the distinction between judicial activism, motivated free conviction of the judge and judicial pro-activity and the risk to the Democratic State of Law in the face of an eventual dictatorship of the judiciary. In order to obtain the results intended by this research, the method of approach to be followed will be the empirico-dialectic, making use of a bibliographic and legislative research, having as a background a reference system based on the linguistic turnaround, represented by the Logical Semantic Constructivism taken from Paulo de Barros Carvalho. In conclusion, it is demonstrated that judicial activism does not have validity within the Democratic State of Law, if it is based on the theoretical framework adopted here.","PeriodicalId":148867,"journal":{"name":"Revista da Faculdade Mineira de Direito","volume":"65 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"O ATIVISMO JUDICIAL E SUA VALIDADE NO ÂMBITO DO ESTADO DEMOCRÁTICO DE DIREITO\",\"authors\":\"E. Messias, André Luís Cateli Rosa\",\"doi\":\"10.5752/P.2318-7999.2021V24N47P359-379\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The actual article aims to analyze the validity of judicial activism within the scope of the Democratic State of Law under the bias of the Systems Theory. For that purpose, the following aspects will be investigated: the distinction between society, system, communication, programming and coding; the luhmannian theory and its systems; the evolution of systems and the and the communicative forms of propagation; the time according to Luhmann, the conception of a systemic unity and the existence of autonomous branches of the law, and the distinction between judicial activism, motivated free conviction of the judge and judicial pro-activity and the risk to the Democratic State of Law in the face of an eventual dictatorship of the judiciary. In order to obtain the results intended by this research, the method of approach to be followed will be the empirico-dialectic, making use of a bibliographic and legislative research, having as a background a reference system based on the linguistic turnaround, represented by the Logical Semantic Constructivism taken from Paulo de Barros Carvalho. In conclusion, it is demonstrated that judicial activism does not have validity within the Democratic State of Law, if it is based on the theoretical framework adopted here.\",\"PeriodicalId\":148867,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista da Faculdade Mineira de Direito\",\"volume\":\"65 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-06-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista da Faculdade Mineira de Direito\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5752/P.2318-7999.2021V24N47P359-379\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista da Faculdade Mineira de Direito","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5752/P.2318-7999.2021V24N47P359-379","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文的实际目的是在系统论的偏见下,分析民主法制国家范围内司法能动主义的有效性。为此目的,将调查以下方面:社会、系统、通信、编程和编码之间的区别;卢曼理论及其体系;系统的演化与传播的传播形式;根据Luhmann的说法,当时,系统统一的概念和法律自治分支的存在,以及司法能动主义之间的区别,激发了法官的自由定罪和司法能动主义以及民主法治国家面临最终司法独裁的风险。为了获得本研究的预期结果,将采用经验辩证法的研究方法,利用书目和立法研究,并以以保罗·德·巴罗斯·卡瓦略的逻辑语义建构主义为代表的基于语言学转向的参考系统为背景。综上所述,如果司法能动主义是基于本文所采用的理论框架,那么它在民主法治国家内是不具有有效性的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
O ATIVISMO JUDICIAL E SUA VALIDADE NO ÂMBITO DO ESTADO DEMOCRÁTICO DE DIREITO
The actual article aims to analyze the validity of judicial activism within the scope of the Democratic State of Law under the bias of the Systems Theory. For that purpose, the following aspects will be investigated: the distinction between society, system, communication, programming and coding; the luhmannian theory and its systems; the evolution of systems and the and the communicative forms of propagation; the time according to Luhmann, the conception of a systemic unity and the existence of autonomous branches of the law, and the distinction between judicial activism, motivated free conviction of the judge and judicial pro-activity and the risk to the Democratic State of Law in the face of an eventual dictatorship of the judiciary. In order to obtain the results intended by this research, the method of approach to be followed will be the empirico-dialectic, making use of a bibliographic and legislative research, having as a background a reference system based on the linguistic turnaround, represented by the Logical Semantic Constructivism taken from Paulo de Barros Carvalho. In conclusion, it is demonstrated that judicial activism does not have validity within the Democratic State of Law, if it is based on the theoretical framework adopted here.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信