The Judicial Power as an Institutional Tool for Citizen Participation within the Framework of the Theory of Deliberative Democracy (original) (raw)
Related papers
Modest Praise for Political Deliberation Elogio modesto a la deliberación política
2010
This text analyzes the relationship between politic al deliberation and democracy. Its content differs both from a scarcely normative idea of competitive politics, predominant in contemporary Political Science, and from a philo sophical defense of the deliberation, founded on an idea of common reasonability or on an ideal of communicative speech. The central argument of the author is that delibera tion constitutes a good instrument of improvement of competitive democracy. The reasons h e gives are not those held by some contemporary political philosophers, inspired by problematic generalizations about the basic structures of the rationality and r easonability of citizens and their agents. The author stresses instead the capacity of deliber at on to strengthen the epistemic and normative basis of the political decisions of the m ajority. The text discusses different visions of the benefits of political deliberation, some of then centered on their procedural conditions, others on the ...
2021
The actual article aims to analyze the validity of judicial activism within the scope of the Democratic State of Law under the bias of the Systems Theory. For that purpose, the following aspects will be investigated: the distinction between society, system, communication, programming and coding; the luhmannian theory and its systems; the evolution of systems and the and the communicative forms of propagation; the time according to Luhmann, the conception of a systemic unity and the existence of autonomous branches of the law, and the distinction between judicial activism, motivated free conviction of the judge and judicial pro-activity and the risk to the Democratic State of Law in the face of an eventual dictatorship of the judiciary. In order to obtain the results intended by this research, the method of approach to be followed will be the empirico-dialectic, making use of a bibliographic and legislative research, having as a background a reference system based on the linguistic t...
This article has as its main purpose to reflect on the possibility of integration between public deliberation and restricted deliberation. In its first part it deals with broad and informal deliberations within the public sphere, which may affect all those involved and allow numerous forms of participation. As for the second part, it approaches the restricted deliberations within mini-publics, which serve various rules aiming to promote a better discursive quality, equality among its participants and a tangible impact for the debate. Finally, we present four possibilities for integration (and empirical examples), in different proportions, between amplified and restricted deliberation.
Democracia Ameaçada e a Reconstrução da Justificação Pública
2020
Threats and tensions which exist in the daily lives of democracies demand their revitalization. The general objective is to defend public argumentation as the most important characteristic for the affirmation of democracy, its original characteristics and the adequate mechanism for the construction of references that legitimize and dynamize social justice considering the new contexts of globalization, technology and communication. The established criterion of the majority is insufficient today. Democratic actions should be mediated especially by public argumentation and social participation with up-to-date methods and instruments aimed at correcting the fanaticism and self-interest rooted in leaders and institutions.
JURIES AND DEMOCRATIC LEGITIMACY: THE JURY TRIAL IN THE PUBLIC DEBATE IN ARGENTINA 1
In the last five years Argentina has taken part in many debates regarding the installation of Juries, the institution ordained by the Constitution since its first edition despite being ignored for more than 150 years. In 2004 the province of Cordoba uniquely instituted a system of a Jury of lay people and judges. As an undertone of this process, we find the concern about the democratic legitimacy of the justice system and the expectation that the introduction of Juries could rebuild trust in the justice administration among the citizenship. The questions that guide this paper revolve around learning why after centuries (since 1832) of purposive ignorance, it is decided to comply with the constitutional mandate. That is, what is the political context that allowed the resurgence of the issue, to what 1 The translation of this paper was made by Florencia Ini public matter do the new initiatives for the regulation of jury trial respond, and what happened in this new wave of debate that led to the exclusion of mixed tribunals almost without further ado? Is jury trial a way of democratic re-legitimization?
O Ativismo Judicial e Sua Validade No Âmbito Do Estado Democrático De Direito
Revista da Faculdade Mineira de Direito, 2021
The actual article aims to analyze the validity of judicial activism within the scope of the Democratic State of Law under the bias of the Systems Theory. For that purpose, the following aspects will be investigated: the distinction between society, system, communication, programming and coding; the luhmannian theory and its systems; the evolution of systems and the and the communicative forms of propagation; the time according to Luhmann, the conception of a systemic unity and the existence of autonomous branches of the law, and the distinction between judicial activism, motivated free conviction of the judge and judicial pro-activity and the risk to the Democratic State of Law in the face of an eventual dictatorship of the judiciary. In order to obtain the results intended by this research, the method of approach to be followed will be the empirico-dialectic, making use of a bibliographic and legislative research, having as a background a reference system based on the linguistic turnaround, represented by the Logical Semantic Constructivism taken from Paulo de Barros Carvalho. In conclusion, it is demonstrated that judicial activism does not have validity within the Democratic State of Law, if it is based on the theoretical framework adopted here.
Deliberative Democracy and Public Reason
Veritas (Porto Alegre), 2010
O artigo reexamina as concepções habermasianas de política deliberativa e democracia procedimental à luz de outras teorias deliberativas, de forma a explorar as suas semelhanças e diferenças e investigar o quanto devem à ideia de razão pública e as implicações práticas daquela ideia.