Constituição federal de 1988, dispositivos não-regulamentados e atuação judicial
This paper approaches the problem of non-regulated devices in 1988 Constitution. Over past three decades, several provisions still wait for regulation. It is important to acknowledge which and how many constitutional devices are under this context. The main objective is to identify the non-regulated...
Na minha lista:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Outros Autores: | |
| Formato: | bachelorThesis |
| Idioma: | pt_BR |
| Publicado em: |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte
|
| Assuntos: | |
| Endereço do item: | https://repositorio.ufrn.br/handle/123456789/46987 |
| Tags: |
Adicionar Tag
Sem tags, seja o primeiro a adicionar uma tag!
|
| Resumo: | This paper approaches the problem of non-regulated devices in 1988 Constitution. Over past three decades, several provisions still wait for regulation. It is important to acknowledge which and how many constitutional devices are under this context. The main objective is to identify the non-regulated provisions in 1988 Constitution. Specifically, the research intended to: 1) demonstrate the texts of non-regulated 1988 constitutional provisions, with and without legislative proposals in the scope of Chamber of Deputies; 2) analyze some of Supreme Court decisions in order to understand how judicial activity has been working in cases which involve non-regulated constitutional provisions, mainly when regarding to fundamental rights principles. Methodology is based on hypothetical-deductive method, whereby primary hypothesis accounts that the lack of regulation of constitutional provisions has been contributing to judicial protagonism. Besides granting a qualitative and descriptive approach of the theme, we also consulted Supreme Court jurisprudence and case studies. In conclusion, the research recognized that, in the period from 1988 to 2021, 152 non-regulated provisions were found, from which 95 had presented proposals; and 57 provisions had no formal proposals. Finally, it was possible to state that the lack of regulation of constitutional devices has been allowing the judicial protagonism. |
|---|