AUDIÊNCIAS PÚBLICAS COM ESPECIALISTAS NO ÂMBITO DO CONTROLE ABSTRATO DE CONSTITUCIONALIDADE: LIMITES E POSSIBILIDADES

Abstract

It is intended to develop in this dissertation research on the limits and possibilities of public hearings with experts in the abstract control of constitutionality. Public hearings may be defined as a participatory mechanism provided for in the process of abstract judicial review, in an advisory and non-binding, which create opportunities to direct contact between judge and expert, are intended to hear the varied opinions on certain submission to trial, supporting thus the performance of judicial functions. This dissertation intends to specifically investigate whether the opinions and knowledge exhibited at such events has, in fact, interfered in any way in the activity of constitutional interpretation and judgments of the Supreme Court. A question that should properly be made on the effectiveness of such hearings refers to the fact whether they really have contributed to a pluralistic and democratic opening in brazilian process of constitutional interpretation, or whether, conversely, has been used only to meet a mere ritualism or formalism, without any influence on the process of constitutional interpretation and decisions of the Supreme Court. This study acquires significant importance today when the Supreme Court has been constantly driven to solve extremely difficult and multidisciplinary causes, which has attracted the attention of public opinion and the community, noted that in some of these moments, the Supreme Court triggered the mechanism the public hearing and promoted the hearing of experts as well as other segments of society are directly interested in the affairs ended in actions such as associations and other representative groups. The brazilian legal literature is still lacking specific scientific papers on this subject, although I count on a big production about the institution of amicus curiae. The relevance of the subject of public hearings with experts in the abstract control of constitutionality can not be overlooked, since it interacts primarily with the issue pertaining to the active participation of citizens, groups, community, the public powers and public opinion in the process of constitutional interpretation. A set of ideas with this meaning has a central place in the work of the german jurist Peter Häberle, which advocates the adoption of constitutional hermeneutics criteria for an open society that is increasingly pluralistic. This research focuses on investigating also the public hearings with experts can really contribute to that court decisions are more fair and legitimate. Held, in addition to literature review, a case study of public hearing in the Supreme Court in 2007, ADI 3510 which discussed the issue pertaining to permission to use embryonic stem cells for research and therapy, specifically for check whether the opinion and knowledge of experts affect the positioning of the ministers of the Supreme Court in the trial of this action. One hopes, to investigate the dynamic that has been given to such public hearings, build a study of its limits and its possibilities.