A judicialização das relações internacionais no Brasil em face do princípio constitucional da prevalência dos direitos humanos / The judicialization of international relations in Brazil in light of the constitutional principle of primacy of human rights

AUTOR(ES)

Eduardo Pannunzio

FONTE

IBICT - Instituto Brasileiro de Informação em Ciência e Tecnologia

DATA DE PUBLICAÇÃO

10/05/2012

RESUMO

The 1988 Federal Constitution broke new ground by establishing in a specific provision (Article 4) the directive principles for Brazils international relations. The present thesis firts considers this provision in light of the Brazilian constitutional history, it further questions whether acts from the Executive branch in exercise of its constitutional mandate to conduct foreign policy are subject to judicial review and, finally, it discusses how a specific principle established by Article 4 the one determining primacy of human rights in international relations operates as a constitutional standard, seeking to clarify what are the obligations that this provision imposes on the Brazilian State while conducting its foreign policy. Based on an analysis of case law from Brazil and other jurisdictions, this thesis argues that the judicialization of international relations is already underway, although the Judiciary has not been able to develop assertive and consistent judicial standards to resolve cases dealing with issues of foreign policy, considering the lack of a clear definition of the role to be played by the Judiciary in this realm. In this sense, the thesis takes into account the main legal barriers generally faced in cases of judicial review of foreign policy issues in Brazil, revealing some of its shortcomings, and argues in favor of such judicial scrutiny. In cases where the principle of primacy of human rights applies, the act of the Executive branch should protect the human rights of all individuals involved by this act, regardless their nationality (Brazilian or not) or location (national territory or abroad). Restrictive measures (actions or omissions) that limit human rights, without a constitutional basis, can amount to a violation of the abovementioned principle, and, therefore, might be struck down by the Judiciary. This thesis concludes with a case study, where those ideas are applied to two particular situations.

ASSUNTO(S)

constituição de 1824 constituição de 1891 constituição de 1946 constituição de 1967 constituição de 1988 constitution direitos humanos foreign policy human rights international relations judicial review principles relações internacionais separação de poderes separation of powers

Documentos Relacionados

• Nepotismo e estado patrimonial no Brasil em face do princípio constitucional da moralidade
• Direito internacional dos direitos humanos: uma discussão sobre a relativização da soberania face à efetivação da proteção internacional dos direitos humanos
• O princípio de proteção em face da flexibilização dos direitos trabalhistas
• Princípio constitucional da celeridade processual
• INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHTS TREATIES AND THE 1988 CONSTITUTION