Loading...
Publication
Duas decisões, dois tempos, um tribunal: ethos e o discurso de persuasão na decisão judicial
| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.04 MB | Adobe PDF |
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
O presente trabalho visa a proceder a uma análise comparativa da retórica do
discurso jurídico de caráter decisório nos votos proferidos pelos ministros do Supremo
Tribunal Federal brasileiro em dois processos judiciais históricos e distanciados no
tempo, o HC nº 26.155/DF e a ADPF nº 54/DF. O primeiro foi julgado em 1936 e o
segundo, em 2012. No HC nº 26.155/DF, pretendeu-se evitar a expulsão do Brasil de
uma mulher grávida, judia e comunista, enquanto na ADPF nº 54/DF, o pedido era de
reconhecimento da ausência de crime na interrupção da gravidez de fetos
anencéfalos. O embasamento teórico inclui a Análise do Discurso (Amossy,
Charaudeau, Maingueneau) e a Nova Retórica (Perelman e Olbrechts-Tyteca).
Evidencia-se o ethos de cada um dos julgadores e apontam-se as influências do
contexto histórico, político e social sobre o discurso jurídico decisório da mais alta
Corte do Poder Judiciário brasileiro. Destacam-se estratégias discursivas que
subjazem à construção de determinados tipos de ethé pelos magistrados em
colegiado, com vistas a sua relação com o auditório, bem como os mecanismos de
persuasão e/ou convencimento por eles utilizados na argumentação que fundamenta
as decisões nos processos indicados. No HC nº 26.155/DF, prevalece o ethos do
julgador formalista, machista, conservador, que não perquire a respeito dos efeitos da
decisão na sociedade, enquanto na ADPF nº 54/DF prevalece o ethos do julgador
culto, sério, preocupado em fazer justiça e que considera as consequências da decisão
para além da decisão do processo. Tais julgados testemunham a transição do
positivismo para o pós-positivismo, ou seja, do império da lei para o dos princípios.
The presente work aims to undertake a comparative analysis of the rhetoric of the legal discourse of decision-making character that was carried out in the votes delivered by the ministers of the Brazilian Supreme Court in two historical and distant in time judicial proceedings, HC No. 26,155/DF and ADPF No. 54/DF. The first was tried in 1936 and the second in 2012. In HC no. 26.155/DF it was intended to avoid the expulsion from Brazil of a pregnant, Jewish and communist woman, while in ADPF no. 54/DF, the request was to recognize the absence of crime in the interruption of pregnancy of anencephalic fetuses. The theoretical basis includes Discourse Analysis (Amossy, Charaudeau, Maingueneau) and New Rhetoric (Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca). The ethos of each of the judges are evidenced and the influences of the historical, political and social context on the decision-making legal discourse of the highest Brazilian Judicial Court are pointed out. Discursive strategies that underlie the construction of certain types of ethé by the collegiate magistrates stand out, with a view to their relationship with the auditorium, as well as the mechanisms of persuasion and/or convincement by them used in the argumentation that underlies the decisions in the processes indicated. In HC no. 26.155/DF, prevails the ethos of the formalist, sexist, conservative judge, who does not inquire about the effects of the decision on society, while in ADPF no. 54/DF prevails the ethos of the educated, serious judge, concerned with doing justice and considering the consequences of the decision beyond the decision of the process. These judgments testify to the transition from positivism to post-positivism, that is, from the empire of the law to that of the principles.
The presente work aims to undertake a comparative analysis of the rhetoric of the legal discourse of decision-making character that was carried out in the votes delivered by the ministers of the Brazilian Supreme Court in two historical and distant in time judicial proceedings, HC No. 26,155/DF and ADPF No. 54/DF. The first was tried in 1936 and the second in 2012. In HC no. 26.155/DF it was intended to avoid the expulsion from Brazil of a pregnant, Jewish and communist woman, while in ADPF no. 54/DF, the request was to recognize the absence of crime in the interruption of pregnancy of anencephalic fetuses. The theoretical basis includes Discourse Analysis (Amossy, Charaudeau, Maingueneau) and New Rhetoric (Perelman and Olbrechts-Tyteca). The ethos of each of the judges are evidenced and the influences of the historical, political and social context on the decision-making legal discourse of the highest Brazilian Judicial Court are pointed out. Discursive strategies that underlie the construction of certain types of ethé by the collegiate magistrates stand out, with a view to their relationship with the auditorium, as well as the mechanisms of persuasion and/or convincement by them used in the argumentation that underlies the decisions in the processes indicated. In HC no. 26.155/DF, prevails the ethos of the formalist, sexist, conservative judge, who does not inquire about the effects of the decision on society, while in ADPF no. 54/DF prevails the ethos of the educated, serious judge, concerned with doing justice and considering the consequences of the decision beyond the decision of the process. These judgments testify to the transition from positivism to post-positivism, that is, from the empire of the law to that of the principles.
Description
Keywords
Retórica Ethos Persuasão Discurso judicial Brasil Rhetoric Persuasion Judicial discourse
Citation
Mondini, Maria da Conceição Serafim - Duas decisões, dois tempos, um tribunal [Em linha]: ethos e o discurso de persuasão na decisão judicial. [S.l.]: [s.n.], 2022. 176 p.