Confiança pública e legitimidade do Poder Judiciário: literatura internacional e a agenda de pesquisa pendente no Brasil

Paulo Alexandre Batista de Castro

Resumo


Resumo: a emergência do Poder Judiciário no cenário político nacional tem levantado questões importantes sobre a capacidade das instituições representativas, sobretudo o parlamento, de lidar com problemas de representação. Embora haja uma diversa literatura interessada em investigar as nuances da relação entre o Judiciário e os demais Poderes, inclusive no Brasil, observa-se uma predominância nos esforços recentes de pesquisa em explicar como os tribunais funcionam internamente. Este trabalho distancia-se desta discussão para inserir no campo de estudos judiciais brasileiro uma nova perspectiva analítica: a construção da legitimidade do Poder Judiciário. Partindo da premissa de que os tribunais não são universalmente dotados de legitimidade, o artigo resume quatro das principais hipóteses presentes na literatura internacional para as seguintes perguntas:  como a legitimidade do Judiciário é construída? quais fatores colocam em risco essa legitimidade? O objetivo desta discussão é oferecer alguns insights sobre o campo de estudos relacionados a legitimidade e estimular o desenvolvimento de estudos que considerem estas questões no Brasil.


Texto completo:

PDF

Referências


BAIRD, Vanessa A.; GANGL, Amy. Shattering the myth of legality: The impact of the media's framing of Supreme Court procedures on perceptions of fairness. Political Psychology, v. 27, n. 4, p. 597-614, 2006.

Baker Thomas E. 2004. “Constitutional Theory in a Nutshell.” William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal 13:57-172.

BERGGREN, Niclas. Peter Moser (2000) The Political Economy of Democratic Institutions. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 193 pp., $85. Constitutional Political Economy, v. 12, n. 3, p. 273-275, 2001.

Bobbitt Philip. 1982. Constitutional Fate: Theory of the Constitution. New York: Oxford University Press.

BONNEAU, Chris W. et al. Evaluating the effects of multiple opinion rationales on Supreme Court legitimacy. American Politics Research, v. 45, n. 3, p. 335-365, 2017.

BRASIL. Código de Ética da Magistratura. Conselho Nacional de Justiça. Brasília, 2008.

BÜHLMANN, Marc; KUNZ, Ruth. Confidence in the judiciary: Comparing the independence and legitimacy of judicial systems. West European Politics, v. 34, n. 2, p. 317-345, 2011.

CARLSMITH, Kevin M.; DARLEY, John M. Psychological aspects of retributive justice. Advances in experimental social psychology, v. 40, p. 193-236, 2008.

Casey Gregory. 1974. “The Supreme Court and Myth: An Empirical Investigation.” Law and Society Review 8:385-419.

Chemerinsky Erwin. 2002. “The Rhetoric of Constitutional Law.” Michigan Law Review 100:2008-35.

CLAWSON, Rosalee A.; KEGLER, Elizabeth R.; WALTENBURG, Eric N. The legitimacy-conferring authority of the US Supreme Court: An experimental design. American Politics Research, v. 29, n. 6, p. 566-591, 2001.

COOK, Karen S.; HARDIN, Russell; LEVI, Margaret. Cooperation without trust?. Russell Sage Foundation, 2005.

DURR, Robert H. Ideological divergence and public support for the Supreme Court. American Journal of Political Science, vol. 44, no. 4, 2000, pp. 768–776. JSTOR.

FARNSWORTH, Stephen J. Congress and citizen discontent: Public evaluations of the membership and one’s own representative. American Politics Research, v. 31, n. 1, p. 66-80, 2003.

FEREJOHN, John A.; WEINGAST, Barry R. A positive theory of statutory interpretation. International Review of Law and Economics, v. 12, n. 2, p. 263-279, 1992.

GANGL, Amy. Procedural justice theory and evaluations of the lawmaking process. Political Behavior, v. 25, n. 2, p. 119-149, 2003.

GELY, Rafael; SPILLER, Pablo T. A rational choice theory of Supreme Court statutory decisions with applications to the State Farm and Grove City cases. JL Econ & Org., v. 6, p. 263, 1990.

GIBSON, James L., Gregory A. CALDEIRA, and Lester Kenyatta Spence. 2003a. “MeasuringAttitudes toward the United States Supreme Court.” American Journal o f Political Science 47 (Apr.): 354-367.

GIBSON, James L., Gregory A. CALDEIRA, and Lester Kenyatta Spence. 2003b. “TheSupreme Court and the U.S. Presidential Election of 2000.” British Journal o f Political Science 33: 535-556.

GROSSKOPF, Anke; MONDAK, Jeffery J. Do attitudes toward specific Supreme Court decisions matter? The impact of Webster and Texas v. Johnson on public confidence in the Supreme Court. Political Research Quarterly, v. 51, n. 3, p. 633-654, 1998.

HIBBING, John R.; THEISS-MORSE, Elizabeth. Stealth democracy: Americans' beliefs about how government should work. Cambridge University Press, 2002.

HIRSCHL, Ran. The judicialization of mega-politics and the rise of political courts. Annu. Rev. Polit. Sci., v. 11, p. 93-118, 2008.

HIRSCHL, Ran. Towards juristocracy: the origins and consequences of the new constitutionalism. Harvard University Press, 2004.

HULST, Liesbeth et al. On Why Procedural Justice Matters in Court Hearings. Utrecht L. Rev., v. 13, p. 114, 2017.

LEVI, Margaret. Consent, dissent, and patriotism. Cambridge University Press, 1997.

LEVI, Margaret. Of rule and revenue. Univ of California Press, 1988.

LEVI, Margaret; SACKS, Audrey; TYLER, Tom. Conceptualizing legitimacy, measuring legitimating beliefs. American Behavioral Scientist, v. 53, n. 3, p. 354-375, 2009.

MONDAK, Jeffery J. Institutional legitimacy, policy legitimacy, and the Supreme Court. American Politics Quarterly, v. 20, n. 4, p. 457-477, 1992.

MURPHY, Kristina. The role of trust in nurturing compliance: A study of accused tax avoiders. Law and human behavior, v. 28, n. 2, p. 187-209, 2004.

NERY JUNIOR, Nelson. Princípios do processo na Constituição Federal: processo civil, penal e administrativo. 2009.

PATERNOSTER, Raymond et al. Do Fair Procedures Matter-The Effect of Procedural Justice on Spouse Assault. Law & Soc'y Rev., v. 31, p. 163, 1997.

ROSANVALLON, Pierre. Democratic legitimacy: Impartiality, reflexivity, proximity. Princeton University Press, 2011.

ROTHSTEIN, Bo. Social traps and the problem of trust. Cambridge University Press, 2005.

SCHEB, John M.; LYONS, William. Judicial behavior and public opinion: Popular expectations regarding the factors that influence Supreme Court decisions. Political Behavior, v. 23, n. 2, p. 181-194, 2001.

SELIGSON, Mitchell A. The impact of corruption on regime legitimacy: A comparative study of four Latin American countries. The journal of Politics, v. 64, n. 2, p. 408-433, 2002.

SUNSHINE, Jason; TYLER, Tom R. The role of procedural justice and legitimacy in shaping public support for policing. Law & society review, v. 37, n. 3, p. 513-548, 2003.

TATE, C. Neal et al. (Ed.). The global expansion of judicial power. NYU Press, 1995.

Toobin, Jeffrey. 2005. “Breyer’s Big Idea: The Justice's Vision for a Progressive Revival on the Supreme Court.” New Yorker Oct 31: 36.

TYLER, Tom R. Court Review: Volume 44, Issue 1/2-Procedural Justice and the Courts. Court Review: The Journal of the American Judges Association, p. 217, 2007.

TYLER, Tom R.; HUO, Yuen. Trust in the law: Encouraging public cooperation with the police and courts. Russell Sage Foundation, 2002.

TYLER, Tom R.; SEVIER, Justin. How do the Courts Create Popular Legitimacy-The Role of Establishing the Truth, Punishing Justly, and/Or Acting through Just Procedures. Alb. L. Rev., v. 77, p. 1095, 2014.

TYLER, Tom R.; WAKSLAK, Cheryl J. Profiling and police legitimacy: Procedural justice, attributions of motive, and acceptance of police authority. Criminology, v. 42, n. 2, p. 253-282, 2004.

VAN LENT, Leonie. Procedural Justice Seen to Be Done: The Judiciary's Press Guidelines in the Light of Publicity and Procedural Justice. 2014.


Apontamentos

  • Não há apontamentos.


Clique aqui para pesquisar os artigos por título.