A necessidade de resolução do Senado Federal no controle de constitucionalidade incidental: a aderência do poder legislativo como condição de efetividade “erga omnes”.
Carregando...
Data
2023-05-04
Autores
Parra, Marcos Vinícius Canhedo
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
Resumo
O controle de constitucionalidade é essencial a um Estado Democrático de Direito, para que a atuação do legislador infraconstitucional se mantenha dentro dos limites traçados pelo legislador constituinte, de modo a manter o desenho constitucional originário, embora seja certo que o passar do tempo demande alterações pontuais, que podem ser feitas pelo procedimento apropriado, que é, no Brasil, o das emendas constitucionais. Uma lei que afronte a Constituição Federal deve ser imediatamente combatida, e isso pode se dar por dois caminhos, que são o controle de constitucionalidade concentrado, perante o Supremo Tribunal Federal, utilizando-se de ação declaratória de inconstitucionalidade, e o controle de constitucionalidade difuso, de modo incidental, perante qualquer magistrado brasileiro. As duas vias se diferenciam em razão de, na primeira, a lei ser imediatamente declarada inconstitucional e expurgada do ordenamento jurídico, enquanto, na segunda, o juiz afasta sua aplicação no caso concreto, apenas. Nessa via, a análise de constitucionalidade pode chegar ao Supremo Tribunal Federal, quando poderá reconhecer e declarar a inconstitucionalidade. Este trabalho discute se é necessário que o Senado Federal elabore resolução para que esse reconhecimento e declaração se tornem definitivos, com a retirada da lei do ordenamento jurídico. Faz-se uso da pesquisa bibliográfica, com a revisão de literatura, e de uma abordagem dogmática, compatível com a análise de institutos jurídicos.
The constitutional review is essential to a Democratic State of Law, so that the action of the infra-constitutional legislator remains within the limits set by the constituent legislator, in order to maintain the original constitutional design, although it is certain that the passage of time requires occasional changes, which can be done through the appropriate procedure, which is, in Brazil, that of constitutional amendments. A law that violates the Federal Constitution must be immediately opposed, and this can be done in two ways, which are concentrated control of constitutionality, before the Federal Supreme Court, using a declaratory action of unconstitutionality, and diffuse control of constitutionality, incidentally, before any Brazilian magistrate. The two ways differ because, in the first, the law is immediately declared unconstitutional and expunged from the legal system, while, in the second, the judge rejects its application in the specific case, only. In this way, the analysis of constitutionality can reach the Federal Supreme Court, when it can recognize and declare the unconstitutionality. This work discusses whether it is necessary for the Federal Senate to elaborate a resolution so that this recognition and declaration become definitive, with the withdrawal of the law from the legal system. It makes use of the bibliographic research, with the literature review, and of a dogmatic approach, compatible with the analysis of legal institutes.
The constitutional review is essential to a Democratic State of Law, so that the action of the infra-constitutional legislator remains within the limits set by the constituent legislator, in order to maintain the original constitutional design, although it is certain that the passage of time requires occasional changes, which can be done through the appropriate procedure, which is, in Brazil, that of constitutional amendments. A law that violates the Federal Constitution must be immediately opposed, and this can be done in two ways, which are concentrated control of constitutionality, before the Federal Supreme Court, using a declaratory action of unconstitutionality, and diffuse control of constitutionality, incidentally, before any Brazilian magistrate. The two ways differ because, in the first, the law is immediately declared unconstitutional and expunged from the legal system, while, in the second, the judge rejects its application in the specific case, only. In this way, the analysis of constitutionality can reach the Federal Supreme Court, when it can recognize and declare the unconstitutionality. This work discusses whether it is necessary for the Federal Senate to elaborate a resolution so that this recognition and declaration become definitive, with the withdrawal of the law from the legal system. It makes use of the bibliographic research, with the literature review, and of a dogmatic approach, compatible with the analysis of legal institutes.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Controle de constitucionalidade, Controle difuso, Controle incidental, Resolução, Senado Federal, Supremo Tribunal Federal, Constitutional review, Diffuse control, Incidental control, Resolution, Federal Senate, Federal Supreme Court