It is a thesis that investigates the theoretical and historical foundations that supported the new
configuration of diffuse constitutionality control in the STF (Supremo Tribunal Federal), with
the institution of the Repercussão Geral (RG). The methodology used required a cadence. In
order to identify the foundations for the institution of the RG as a filter of admissibility of the
Recurso Extraordinário appeal in Brazil, we deal with each possible foundation in a specific
chapter. The first possible foundation considers the role of the vertex courts based on the
description of the role of judges and of the top courts, given the current guidelines of conduct.
From the observation that the process has evolved, from a means to the realization of
subjective rights to an effective protection of rights through fair decisions and/or the
promotion of the unity of law, the study analyzes how the process and functions of the vertex
courts. Would the RG help the STF to configure itself not as a court of justice, but as a court
of precedents? The second possible foundation supposes the recognition that there is a
worldwide tendency to solve the phenomenon of congestion of the Vertex Courts by
restricting access, in order to build them into true courts of precedents. Would RG be the
Brazilian version of this trend? The third possible foundation comes from the finding of the
separation of the STF from the court corresponding to the historical and political justification
of its conception and the conception of the Recurso Extraordinário itself, of which the RG is a
current and special requirement of admissibility. In this sense, from the Constitution of 1891
onwards, the embryonic destination of this resource to sustain the supremacy of the
Constitution, the authority, validity and completeness of federal law, the nature and type of
Brazilian federation, is evident. Could these scopes be pursued today with the knowledge of
only a relevant part of the extraordinary appeals together with the operation of other
instruments, such as the actions of concentrated constitutionality control, which did not exist
in 1891? The fourth possible foundation is based on the assumptions of the model found in
Mitidiero (2015) or Taruffo (2011), which distinguishes the Supreme Courts from the
Superior Courts. It states that a constitutional court cannot be seen as the final source of
justice in the specific case, but as a court of precedents, and that ways of selecting resources
according to criteria related to the general importance of the issues raised is a fundamental
requirement for that a vertex court is seen as supreme. Would RG be in line with this model?
The study concludes that the RG joins a list of previous attempts, thought or implemented, to
overcome the centenary crisis of the Supreme Court. That currently, the RG is inserted in a
positive procedural context (repetitive appeals, collective actions...) in favor of the
rationalization of the practice of the Brazilian vertex courts. And that the set of grounds
exposed gave support to the implementation of the RG as a solution to the STF crisis and as a
directing factor of our constitutional court towards an orderly action in pursuit of its
nomophylactic, standardizing and paradigmatic functions in the field of constitutional law.
|
