O uso inadequado da interpretação da lei das inelegibilidades na justiça eleitoral: críticas à interpretação teleológica como recurso hermenêutico interpretativo tradicional
Description
This study investigates the application of the Law of ineligibility (Complementary Law No. 64/90) by the Electoral Courts and the Supreme Court, which in its jurisdictional action routinely use the method called teleological interpretation, which contradicts the contemporary form of interpreting, but finds support in the art. 5º of the Introductory Law to the rules of the Brazilian Law, Decree-Law No. 4.657 / 42. Aiming to demonstrate that such interpretative method offends the democratic state is pointed out, by analyzing judged, the existence of a pattern that deforms without any justification, the meaning of the rule leading to positions in violation of the letter of law and the Federal Constitution. The recognition and the use of contemporary hermeneutics, based on studies of Heidegger and Gadamer, is identified as a correction to this situation, it proves to be the subject no longer a mere observer of the event to be interpreted, but part of the process of understanding itself. Then comes analysis of the importance of neoconstitutionalism that only served to undermine the exegetical positivism, and could not overcome the discretion (im) posed by modern positivism, trampled on the theories of Hart and Kelsen. This movement encouraged the use of pamprincípios, confusing values with principles, and normativity of legal texts with personal will of the interpreter. In overcoming this culture (anti) hermeneutics, a theory of judicial decision must be (re) presented, with strong bases in hermeneutic philosophy and the recognition of a fundamental right to constitutionally adequate judicial decision, as advocated Lênio Streck in some of his works. Therefore we propose a hermeneutical script as a tool to inhibit arbitrary solutions based on Brazilian law, signed by five criteria to be followed in the wake of a theory of judicial decision defended by Streck, in the process of law enforcement, seeking to link the interpret the Constitution, the law and the facts presented by means of due process.Nenhuma