Análise de argumentos em decisões penais do STF: objetivos e metodologia
This article presents normative and methodological foundations for empirical research around the criminal decisions of the Federal Supreme Court (STF), notably based on the idea of argumentative representation, in order not only to highlight constitutional argumentation as a tool for legitimizing th...
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Formato: | Online |
| Lenguaje: | Português |
| Publicado: |
TJDFT
2023
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | https://revistajuridica.tjdft.jus.br/rdj/article/view/878 |
| Sumario: | This article presents normative and methodological foundations for empirical research around the criminal decisions of the Federal Supreme Court (STF), notably based on the idea of argumentative representation, in order not only to highlight constitutional argumentation as a tool for legitimizing the court's decision, but mainly with methodological ways for its analysis and evaluation, aiming at the search for a rational standard of decision in the criminal field, without disregarding the deliberation model traditionally developed in the Brazilian Supreme Court. Thus, the work starts from the thesis that the only way to confer democratic legitimacy to the decisions of the STF is to associate the exercise of the authority of the court to a notion of representation, so that, based on the in order deliberative practice of the Court, invest in methodological proposals to achieve an ideal way of arguing, especially in criminal cases, considering that the deliberation in this field becomes more transparent and fulfills its social function in a democratic context. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2675-9640 |
| DOI: | 10.22477/rdj.v113i00.878 |