Colegialidade e unanimidade nos Tribunais Regionais Eleitorais

Abstract

From a quantitative survey that found that 93% were unanimous for appeal judgments in contesting the application registration feature in elective office appeal of action and appeal against the degree of expedition five Regional Electoral Courts (TRE) from different regions of Brazil, is sought in this dissertation identify the reason so many trials unanimously. Drawing on primary sources (constitutions, laws, decrees and resolutions - notably the internal regulations of various courts) and secondary (theses, books and articles), the answer is searching the history and organization of the Electoral Court and the composition of the TRE; the institutional role of the courts; the collegiality effectively applied and the specific characteristics of the electoral courts of second instance. The theoretical framework chosen was the Communicative Action Theory of Habermas. It discusses the advantages of collegial judgment and whether collegiality is a rule or a constitutional principle. The paradigm of collegiate judgment of the Federal Supreme Court and the doctrine of unanimity are studied. In the end, it is concluded that the causes are: a) the result conditioning the institutional role of the courts - to ensure the law - which takes the judges naturally differ little; b) the absence of a specific moment of the debate collegial, apart from the time of harvest of the votes; c) the short tenure of judges and the little time devoted to electoral judiciary in the face of the accumulation of another jurisdiction or law and, finally, d) the fact that the judges vote on the confidence of the Rapporteur, pressed by the conditions indicated in items "b" and "c", characterizing progress in the implementation of communicative action in the weak sense theorized by Habermas.