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 Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

 This research’s question is “is it possible to explore the constitutional and internal norms that regulate the actions of STF’s President in order to identify: decision-making process in the court and/or accountability according to the principles of the rule of law?” Primarily, it is necessary to acknowledge STF structure. There were 57,056 actions – up until August 24, 2015 – awaiting appreciation at Brazilian Supreme Court, according to data provided by the institution itself. Later, one needs to comprehend how the internal procedure to organize its schedule works. Internal rules grant the President of the Supreme Court the power to decide about what will be heard by the ministers, although normative responses about criteria taken into account are obscure or, at least, insufficient, for their lack of objectivity. This paper posits that, if “first come, first heard” is not the most important criteria in scheduling, the course of the cases in the court are subjected to the President's whim, and hence there are no legal limits for his or her decisions. Furthermore, the President is not selected for this specific task by any authorities, but elected by his or her peers – according to a tradition that dictates that the oldest in court should be president. The social accountability of a court renowned for the wide publicity – live broadcast on TV and radio, Twitter e Youtube, and others – contrasts with the comparative lack of control over its trial schedule. This research describes the consequences of these factors over the court’s schedule and reflects upon its democratic accountability. Keywords: Brazil’s Chief Justice; Brazilian Supreme Court; Scheduling. RESUMO Esta pesquisa propoe a seguinte pergunta: "e possivel explorar as normas constitucionais e internas que regulam as acoes do Presidente do STF a fim de identificar: o processo de tomada de decisao no tribunal e / ou prestacao de contas de acordo com os principios do Estado de Direito?. Inicialmente, e necessario reconhecer a estrutura STF. Houve 57.056 acoes - ate 24 de agosto de 2015 - aguardando apreciacao no Supremo Tribunal Federal, de acordo com dados fornecidos pela propria instituicao. Depois, e preciso compreender como funciona o procedimento interno para organizar seu cronograma. As regras internas conferem ao Presidente da Suprema Corte o poder de decidir sobre o que sera ouvido pelos ministros, embora as respostas normativas sobre os criterios tomados em consideracao sejam obscuras ou, pelo menos, insuficientes, por sua falta de objetividade. Este artigo postula que, se "primeiro a chegar, primeiro ouvido" nao e o criterio mais importante na programacao, o curso dos casos no tribunal estao sujeitos ao capricho do presidente e, portanto, nao ha limites legais para suas decisoes. Alem disso, o presidente nao e selecionado para esta tarefa especifica por quaisquer autoridades, mas eleito por seus pares - de acordo com uma tradicao que determina que o mais antigo no tribunal deve ser presidente. A responsabilidade social de um tribunal reconhecido pela ampla publicidade - transmissao ao vivo na TV e radio, Twitter e Youtube e outros - contrasta com a falta comparativa de controle sobre o cronograma do julgamento. Esta pesquisa descreve as consequencias desses fatores sobre o cronograma do tribunal e reflete sobre sua responsabilidade democratica. Palavras-chave: Presidente do STFl; Supremo Tribunal Federal; Agendamento.

revista brasileira de direito

Emperor or President? Understanding the (almost) unlimited power of the Brazilian Supreme Court’s President / Imperador ou presidente? Compreendendo o (quase) ilimitado poder do Presidente do Supremo Tribunal Federal.