Processo civil brasileiro e precedentes da corte interamericana de direitos humanos: análise das garantias da oralidade, imparcialidade e duração razoável do processo

Abstract

The study of the precedents of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and their applicability to Brazilian Law has acquired great relevance in recent times, especially in view of the issue of Resolution 123/22 by the National Council of Justice. The present work aims to develop the analysis of the incompatibilities of the Brazilian Civil Procedure - including not only the legislation, but also the jurisprudential and doctrinal understanding - in relation to the precedents of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights on the procedural guarantees provided for in the American Convention on Human Rights. It seeks to identify the points of misalignment between what the Court has been deciding and what Brazil has been deciding and applying, also addressing the possible legal consequences at an international level. The research analyzes, for example, the controversy about the Brazilian jurisprudential position in relation to the restriction of personal testimony at a hearing required by the deponent himself, to the detriment of what the Inter-American Court decides in relation to the right to be heard and the unfolding of orality. The deductive method is used, proceeding with a bibliographic review on the subject, with the scope of assessing the validity of the hypothesis about the need for a re-reading of the Brazilian Civil Procedure in the light of the precedents of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights.