Juízes ou experts? Uma comparação acerca das construções jurídicas de verdades em casos difíceis
The paper discusses the argument that experts are better decision-makers in cases that involve scientific knowledge in relation to judges. This is a debate about the allocation of decision in complex society. The study underscores the examination of administrative courts in Brazil, as well as a comp...
Saved in:
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | Portuguese |
| Published: |
2017
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=6182134 |
| Source: | Revista Electrónica Direito e Sociedade - REDES, ISSN 2318-8081, Vol. 5, Nº. 2, 2017, pags. 157-174 |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags: Be the first to tag this record
|
| id |
dialnet-ar-18-ART0001231636
|
|---|---|
| record_format |
dialnet
|
| institution |
Dialnet
|
| collection |
Dialnet AR
|
| source |
Revista Electrónica Direito e Sociedade - REDES, ISSN 2318-8081, Vol. 5, Nº. 2, 2017, pags. 157-174
|
| language |
Portuguese
|
| topic |
Experts
Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica Processo Decisório Experts Administrative Council for Economic Defense Decision-making |
| spellingShingle |
Experts
Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica Processo Decisório Experts Administrative Council for Economic Defense Decision-making de Barros, Marco Antonio Loschiavo Leme Juízes ou experts? Uma comparação acerca das construções jurídicas de verdades em casos difíceis |
| description |
The paper discusses the argument that experts are better decision-makers in cases that involve scientific knowledge in relation to judges. This is a debate about the allocation of decision in complex society. The study underscores the examination of administrative courts in Brazil, as well as a comparison with the Judiciary. The main examination is the Court of the Administrative Council of Economic Defense. After describing the decision-making practice of this court, the study reveals the tensions concealed by the counselors’ actions from the perspective of the relation between law and science. The question is how the law operates with scientific knowledge for decision making. The paper argues that both experts and judges share problems related to the construction of legal truths in hard cases, either because administrative courts mimic the structures of the Judiciary or to reveal the fragility of the operation of scientific knowledge by law. Rather than believing that neutrality and security prevail in the performance of experts within the legal system, it is preferable to denounce the ambiguities that are reproduced in decision-making practices in order to effectively produce adequate structures for the future.
|
| format |
Article
|
| author |
de Barros, Marco Antonio Loschiavo Leme
|
| author_facet |
de Barros, Marco Antonio Loschiavo Leme
|
| author_sort |
de Barros, Marco Antonio Loschiavo Leme
|
| title |
Juízes ou experts? Uma comparação acerca das construções jurídicas de verdades em casos difíceis
|
| title_short |
Juízes ou experts? Uma comparação acerca das construções jurídicas de verdades em casos difíceis
|
| title_full |
Juízes ou experts? Uma comparação acerca das construções jurídicas de verdades em casos difíceis
|
| title_fullStr |
Juízes ou experts? Uma comparação acerca das construções jurídicas de verdades em casos difíceis
|
| title_full_unstemmed |
Juízes ou experts? Uma comparação acerca das construções jurídicas de verdades em casos difíceis
|
| title_sort |
juízes ou experts? uma comparação acerca das construções jurídicas de verdades em casos difíceis
|
| publishDate |
2017
|
| url |
https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=6182134
|
| _version_ |
1709746407977517056
|
| spelling |
dialnet-ar-18-ART00012316362017-11-22Juízes ou experts? Uma comparação acerca das construções jurídicas de verdades em casos difíceisde Barros, Marco Antonio Loschiavo LemeExpertsConselho Administrativo de Defesa EconômicaProcesso DecisórioExpertsAdministrative Council for Economic DefenseDecision-makingThe paper discusses the argument that experts are better decision-makers in cases that involve scientific knowledge in relation to judges. This is a debate about the allocation of decision in complex society. The study underscores the examination of administrative courts in Brazil, as well as a comparison with the Judiciary. The main examination is the Court of the Administrative Council of Economic Defense. After describing the decision-making practice of this court, the study reveals the tensions concealed by the counselors’ actions from the perspective of the relation between law and science. The question is how the law operates with scientific knowledge for decision making. The paper argues that both experts and judges share problems related to the construction of legal truths in hard cases, either because administrative courts mimic the structures of the Judiciary or to reveal the fragility of the operation of scientific knowledge by law. Rather than believing that neutrality and security prevail in the performance of experts within the legal system, it is preferable to denounce the ambiguities that are reproduced in decision-making practices in order to effectively produce adequate structures for the future.O texto discute o argumento que experts conseguem decidir da melhor maneira casos que envolvam conhecimento científico em relação aos juízes. Trata-se de um debate sobre a alocação da decisão na sociedade complexa. Para tanto o estudo adota como recorte o exame dos tribunais administrativos no Brasil, bem como é feita uma comparação com o Judiciário. O principal exame é o Tribunal do Conselho Administrativo de Defesa Econômica. Após a descrição da prática decisória desse tribunal, o estudo revela as tensões ocultadas pela atuação dos conselheiros a partir da relação entre direito e ciência. A questão é saber como o direito opera com o conhecimento científico para a tomada de decisão. O texto constata que tanto experts quanto juízes compartilham problemas relacionados com a construção de verdades jurídicas em casos difíceis, seja pelo fato de tribunais administrativos mimetizarem as estruturas do Judiciário, ou por revelar a fragilidade da operação dos conhecimentos científicos pelo direito. Ao invés de acreditar que prevalece uma neutralidade e segurança na atuação dos experts no interior do sistema jurídico, é preferível denunciar as ambiguidades que se autorreproduzem nas práticas decisórias para efetivamente produzir estruturas adequadas para o futuro.2017text (article)application/pdfhttps://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/oaiart?codigo=6182134(Revista) ISSN 2318-8081Revista Electrónica Direito e Sociedade - REDES, ISSN 2318-8081, Vol. 5, Nº. 2, 2017, pags. 157-174porLICENCIA DE USO: Los documentos a texto completo incluidos en Dialnet son de acceso libre y propiedad de sus autores y/o editores. Por tanto, cualquier acto de reproducción, distribución, comunicación pública y/o transformación total o parcial requiere el consentimiento expreso y escrito de aquéllos. Cualquier enlace al texto completo de estos documentos deberá hacerse a través de la URL oficial de éstos en Dialnet. Más información: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/info/derechosOAI | INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS STATEMENT: Full text documents hosted by Dialnet are protected by copyright and/or related rights. This digital object is accessible without charge, but its use is subject to the licensing conditions set by its authors or editors. Unless expressly stated otherwise in the licensing conditions, you are free to linking, browsing, printing and making a copy for your own personal purposes. All other acts of reproduction and communication to the public are subject to the licensing conditions expressed by editors and authors and require consent from them. Any link to this document should be made using its official URL in Dialnet. More info: https://dialnet.unirioja.es/info/derechosOAI
|