A adoção do modelo de julgamento Per Curiam no Supremo Tribunal Federal

Abstract

The present study consists of an analysis of the adoption of the per curiam opinion model by the Supreme Federal Court of Brazil, especially regarding the compatibility of the application method when confronted with the transparency standards and the republican and democratic principles established in the Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil of 1988. For this purpose, the work will examine the origins of this practice in comparative law, especially in European and Inter-American settings, in order to outline a broad overview of its interaction with different constitutional standards of the Democratic Rule of Law. Aiming to understand what motivated the adoption of a different deliberation method, an investigation will be conducted on the criticisms made against the deliberation model currently in force in the Brazilian judicial system (seriatim). Subsequently, new concrete cases in which the supreme court published this type of decision will be researched in order to identify application patterns and deduce the implicit reasons for its use, as well as to deepen knowledge of national practice. Finally, a diagnostic effort will be produced regarding the results of the sociopolitical tensions resulting from the eventual transformation of this decision-making model into standard practice and its compatibility with the effectiveness of the republican and democratic principles of accountability of state agents and the promotion of democratic debate.