English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Resumo: Talvez nao haja tribunal constitucional ou suprema corte com tantos votos divergentes e concorrentes quanto o Supremo Tribunal Federal. De forma geral, contudo, pouco se questiona esse fato. Ele costuma ser simplesmente encarado como um produto natural da tradicao e da forma de decisao adotada no STF. Este artigo nao tem como objetivo fazer uma analise critica dessa pratica. Este texto e parte dos resultados de uma pesquisa que pretende compreender o que os proprios ministros do STF pensam da pratica deliberativa e decisoria desse tribunal. No âmbito especifico da divergencia nas votacoes, procurou-se analisar como os ministros explicam a quantidade de votos divergentes; como eles avaliam essa grande quantidade de votos divergentes e concorrentes; se eles veem alguma diferenca entre voto divergente e voto vencido; se existe alguma regra geral sobre quando vale a pena divergir de forma explicita; e como eles relacionam a publicacao de tantas divergencias e o grande volume de trabalho no tribunal. Palavras-chave: Votos divergentes; Deliberacao; Supremo Tribunal Federal. Abstract : There may be possibly no constitutional or supreme court with as many dissenting and concurrent opinions as the Brazilian Supreme Court. In general, however, this fact is barely discussed. Usually it is taken for granted as a natural outcome of tradition as well as of the decision-making process adopted by the Brazilian Supreme Court. This article does not aim at arguing against this practice. Here, I present parts of the results of a broader research aiming at grasping what the Justices of the Brazilian Supreme Court themselves think of the deliberation and decision-making process within this court. Concerning the publication of individual opinions, it aims at analyzing how the Justices themselves explain the amount of individual opinions; how they assess the amount of dissenting and concurring opinions; if they see any difference between a dissenting and a defeated opinion; if there is any general rule on when is it worth to dissent or to concur; and, finally, how they assess the publication of various dissenting opinions vis-a-vis the workload of the court. Keywords : Dissenting opinions; Deliberation; Brazilian Supreme Court.

direito, estado e sociedade

De Quem Divergem os Divergentes: os Votos Vencidos no Supremo Tribunal Federal / Whom the Dissenters Dissent From: Defeated Opinions in the Brazilian Supreme Court