Os princípios jurídicos e a efetividade das sentenças da Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos no Brasil.
Lately, principles have received attention in the legal system. However, both the formalization of legal practices and procedures and their theorization have been delayed and incomplete. Recent legal debates have attributed to the norms the division in principles and rules by arguing that the princi...
Saved in:
| Main Authors: | , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | Portuguese |
| Published: |
Universidade FUMEC, Faculdade de Ciências Humanas, Sociais e da Saúde
2009
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=4049036 |
| Source: | Meritum, ISSN 2238-6939, Vol. 4, Nº. 2, 2009, pags. 209-236 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags: Be the first to tag this record
|
| Summary: |
Lately, principles have received attention in the legal
system. However, both the formalization of legal practices and
procedures and their theorization have been delayed and
incomplete. Recent legal debates have attributed to the norms
the division in principles and rules by arguing that the principles
guide the legal system, defending in many cases that specific
legislation to protect such rights is unnecessary. In this line of
thought, what is not taken into consideration is that, despite
the fact that they are used to inform the legal system as a
whole, the principles, without appropriate regulation, could
grant full freedom to specific sectors of decision-makers to
take the measures that should be within the reach of all of
those to which they apply to. That is what occurs with the
judgments of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights �
(IACRH). The competence of the IACHR gave to that court
the opportunity to judge the country for actions it had committed
and that may involve disrespect for human rights, but it is up
to the country itself to determine how to implement the
sentences. However, the absence of national legislation
accordingly leaves broad discretionary power to the state, which,
on behalf of principles that consider priorities, may not apply
the sentence in its entirety or excuse such application by the
absence of appropriate domestic legislation. |
|---|