Critics to partial dictum of “necessity” from Robert Alexy with a basis on the idea of “politics” from Ronald Dworkin
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18593/ejjl.17013Keywords:
Legislative discretion, Judicial review, Reight formula, Arguments of politic, Legal principles.Abstract
The paper propose critics to the partial dictum of “necessity” present in the second step of “proportionality rule” developed by Robert Alexy with a basis in the idea of “politics” from Ronald Dworkin and, additionally, in the “weight formula” from Robert Alexy himself. In this way, the work approaches the matter of legislative discretion and extent of judicial review of laws, which is relevant in times of highlight judicial activism. Besides, the contraposition allows an exposition and differentiation of the ideas from both authors. For that, the text, which follows a dialectical method, presents the “rule of proportionality” in its three steps of “suitability”, “necessity” and “proportionality in the narrower sense”, as well as the “weight formula” by which this last step is done. It also presents the concepts of “rules”, “principles” and “politics” from Ronald Dworkin and, from this, delineates the critics to the partial dictum of “necessity”. The main results found points that the step of “necessity” is not legally chargeable, but constitutes a “matter of politic”. This allows the conclusion that judicial review of law can be made by the “weight formula”, preventing disproportional laws in the narrower sense to be made, but that the election of the one that interfere less with other principles is a “matter of politic”.
Downloads
References
ALEXY, Robert. Princípios formais. In: TRIVISONNO, Alexandre Travessoni Gomes; SALIBA, Aziz Tuffi; LOPES, Mônica Sette (org.). Princípios formais e outros aspectos da teoria discursiva do direito. 1. ed. Rio de Janeiro: Forense Universitária, 2014.
ALEXY, Robert. Teoria dos direitos fundamentais. Tradução: Virgílio Afonso da Silva. 2. ed. São Paulo: Malheiros, 2011.
ÁVILA, Humberto Bergmann. A distinção entre princípios e regras e a redefinição do dever de proporcionalidade. Revista de Direito Administrativo, Rio de Janeiro, v. 215, p. 151-179, jan./mar. 1999
BARROSO, Luís Roberto. Judicialização, ativismo judicial e legitimidade democrática. [Syn]Thesis, Rio de Janeiro, v. 5, n. 1, p. 23-32, 2012.
DWORKIN, Ronald. Levando os direitos a sério. Tradução: Nelson Boeira. 3. ed. São Paulo: WMF Martins Fontes, 2010.
HABERMAS, Jürgen. Direito e democracia: entre facticidade e validade. Tradução: Flávio Beno Siebeneichler. Rio de Janeiro: Tempo Brasileiro, 1997. v. 1.
POPPER, Karl Raimund. A lógica da pesquisa científica. Tradução: Leonidas Hegenberg e Octanny Silveira da Mota. 16. ed. São Paulo: Cultrix, 2008.
SARLET, Ingo Wolfgang; MARINONI, Luiz Guilherme; MITIDIERO, Daniel. Curso de direito constitucional. 6. ed. São Paulo: Saraiva, 2017.
SILVA, Virgílio Afonso da. O proporcional e o razoável. Revista dos Tribunais, a. 91, v. 798, p. 23-50, abr. 2002.
VIEIRA, Oscar Vilhena. Supremocracia. Revista Direito GV, São Paulo, v. 2, n. 4, p. 441-464, jul./dez. 2008.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright: All manuscripts submitted become the property of the Unoesc and will not be returned to the author. It is a condition of publication that authors vest copyright in their paper, including abstracts, in the Universidade do Oeste de Santa Catarina - Unoesc. This enables us to ensure full copyright protection and to disseminate the paper to the widest possible readership in print and electronic formats as appropriate. Authors may, of course, use the article elsewhere after publication without prior permission from the Publishers, subject to the terms outlined on the Copyright transfer form.