Democracia Deliberativa: as audiências públicas judiciais enquanto expressão da jurisdição procedimental
Since that contemporary society has been marked by the plurality of ways of life and the dense complexity of social relations, democratic theory was faced with the pressing need to design a model of democracy capable of encompassing this entire framework of worldviews. Therefore, this dissertatio...
Na minha lista:
| Autor principal: | |
|---|---|
| Outros Autores: | |
| Formato: | Dissertação |
| Idioma: | pt_BR |
| Publicado em: |
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Norte
|
| Assuntos: | |
| Endereço do item: | https://repositorio.ufrn.br/handle/123456789/53067 |
| Tags: |
Adicionar Tag
Sem tags, seja o primeiro a adicionar uma tag!
|
| Resumo: | Since that contemporary society has been marked by the plurality of ways of life and the dense
complexity of social relations, democratic theory was faced with the pressing need to design a
model of democracy capable of encompassing this entire framework of worldviews. Therefore,
this dissertation has aimed to examine whether the deliberative and procedural democracy
idealized by Jürgen Habermas can provide a seat for all this plurality of forms of life, as well
as whether the proposal by Ricardo Tinoco de Góes can enable the application by Habermas'
theory to the Brazilian jurisdiction. Thus, the analysis is carried out using the deductive method
through qualitative research with a normative focus and bibliographical support in the works
by Jürgen Habermas and Ricardo Tinoco de Góes. During the study, they have treated themes
related to the importance of language and the public sphere for the circulation of arguments
capable of guaranteeing procedures for public opinion formation and, thus, guaranteeing
political pluralism, the foundation of the Constitution of the Republic, as provided for in art.
1st, V, of the Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil (CRFB). Furthermore, the
investigation has focused, with vigor, on public judicial hearings, so as to verify if they have
lent themselves to express the necessary space for the performance of the communicative
action. In view of this, it has been concluded that despite the serious problems encountered in
holding public court hearings in Brazil in cases of great complexity, they are configured as
deliberative spaces capable of enabling the protagonism of communicative action, and, thus,
guaranteeing the political pluralism propagated by the Federal Constitution. |
|---|