| Summary: | Submitted by Automa??o e Estat?stica (sst@bczm.ufrn.br) on 2016-04-25T23:18:51Z
No. of bitstreams: 1
DeborahLeiteDaSilva_DISSERT.pdf: 1206544 bytes, checksum: 5b171284ad399f08abe340d4439b26f0 (MD5) === Approved for entry into archive by Arlan Eloi Leite Silva (eloihistoriador@yahoo.com.br) on 2016-04-28T00:19:44Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1
DeborahLeiteDaSilva_DISSERT.pdf: 1206544 bytes, checksum: 5b171284ad399f08abe340d4439b26f0 (MD5) === Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-28T00:19:44Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1
DeborahLeiteDaSilva_DISSERT.pdf: 1206544 bytes, checksum: 5b171284ad399f08abe340d4439b26f0 (MD5)
Previous issue date: 2014-12-19 === A cria??o do Conselho Nacional de Justi?a (CNJ) atrav?s da Emenda Constitucional n?
45/2004, decorreu da constata??o de uma s?rie de lacunas do Poder Judici?rio brasileiro,
relacionadas, sobretudo, ? morosidade processual, ? inefetividade das decis?es judiciais,
assim como ? falta de mecanismos aptos a viabilizar, de maneira eficaz, a
responsabiliza??o disciplinar dos magistrados. O ?rg?o foi concebido
constitucionalmente como integrante do Poder Judici?rio, dotado de natureza
administrativa e com atribui??es estatu?das no art. 103-B, ? 4? da Constitui??o vigente,
dentre as quais se destaca a de editar regulamentos que instrumentalizem a sua atua??o.
No entanto, desde que entrou em vigor, a Emenda suscitou amplas discuss?es, atreladas,
em especial, ? constitucionalidade do CNJ, o que se deu atrav?s da A??o Direta de
Inconstitucionalidade n? 3367, ante a suposta viola??o aos princ?pios da separa??o de
poderes e da forma federativa, bem como aos limites do seu poder regulamentar, a
exemplo do que fora ventilado na ADI n? 3823/DF, esta versando sobre a Resolu??o n?
07, que disciplinou a veda??o da pr?tica do nepotismo no Poder Judici?rio. Contudo,
n?o obstante o Supremo Tribunal Federal j? ter se pronunciado acerca da mat?ria,
reconhecendo a constitucionalidade do ?rg?o, assim como da resolu??o suso referida, o
debate encontra-se em estado de lat?ncia, podendo novamente eclodir a cada nova
manifesta??o regulamentar do CNJ, dada a aus?ncia de conson?ncia entre doutrina e
jurisprud?ncia em torno do tratamento constitucional do seu poder regulamentar. Nesse
contexto, inegavelmente, a reflex?o acerca da delimita??o do poder regulamentar do
CNJ, apresenta-se como extremamente relevante, al?m de atual, em particular, na
ambi?ncia do Estado Constitucional de Direito, onde se prima pela seguran?a jur?dica e
consolida??o dos institutos normativos. Para que se pudesse chegar a um resultado
satisfat?rio, h?bil a solucionar a problem?tica suscitada, o presente estudo analisou as
raz?es que ensejaram a cria??o do CNJ, demonstrando a sua imprescindibilidade, como
tamb?m buscou caracterizar o seus status de ?rg?o administrativo-constitucional,
constatando, enfim, a compatibilidade da sua atua??o regulamentar aos ditames
constitucionais. Sob esta perspectiva, foi adotado o m?todo dedutivo e realizada
pesquisa de cunho bibliogr?fico e documental. === The creation of the National Council of Justice (CNJ) through the Constitutional
Amendment n? 45/2004, derived from countless gaps in Brazilian law, mainly relating
to procedural delays, ineffectiveness of judicial decisions, and the lack of mechanisms
that enable, effectively, disciplinary accountability of judges. The council is
constitutionally designed as a member of the Judiciary, which has administrative nature
and laid assignments in art. 103-B, ? 4 of the current Constitution, among which is to
edit regulations to instrument its performance. However, since it came into force, the
amendment raised extensive discussions, linked in particular to the constitutionality of
the CNJ, which was made through the direct action of unconstitutionality n? 3367,
against the alleged violation of the principles of separation of powers and federative
form, as well as the limits of its regulatory powers, as has fanned out in ADI n? 3823/
DF, this one dealing on Resolution n? 07, which regulates the seal of nepotism practice
in the judiciary. However, despite the Supreme Court has already pronounced on the
matter, recognizing the constitutionality of the council, as well as the resolution already
said, the debate is in a state of latency, and may erupt again with each new
manifestation of regulatory CNJ, given the lack of agreement between doctrine and
jurisprudence around the constitutional treatment of its regulatory powers. In this
context undeniably reflection on the definition of the regulatory power of the CNJ,
presents itself as extremely relevant, and current, in particular in the ambience of the
Constitutional Rule of Law, where he strives for legal certainty and consolidation of
regulatory institutions. So that it could reach a satisfactory result, skilled at resolving the
problems raised, the present study analyzed the reasons that gave rise to the creation of
the CNJ, demonstrating their indispensability, but also sought to characterize the status
of their administrative and constitutional body, noting finally, the compatibility of its
regulatory activities to constitutional principles. From this perspective, we adopted the
deductive method and carried out research and bibliographic nature documentary.
|
|---|
