A morosidade da prestação jurisdicional e a efetivação do direito fundamental à razoável duração do processo: construindo alternativas possíveis.

Abstract

The proposal to develop the judicial procedures without undue delay should be developed through practices that are in accordance with the constitutional dictates. For the completion of judicial review, it is necessary that such practices, and comply with the safety of the legal system and able to enforce the fundamental right to a reasonable duration of the process, contribute, effectively, to the goals set by Constitution. The preliminary hearing will be investigated as a procedural tool that will prevent undue delays during the process, either through the possibility of conciliation between the parties, either through the restructuring process. Allows more active participation of the process’s, through the use of orality. In this sense, forms a dynamic procedural system, allowing "access to justice" in a broad sense, covering the people, the adjective of citizen participatory democracy and spreading as a proposed rule to be adopted to contemporary society. In this context, we can see that the machinery of article 331 of the Brazilian Civil Procedure Code, contributes to the effectiveness of the fundamental right of a reasonable duration of the process, aiming at the reduction of procedural delay unjustifiable. For this, use it to judges is a hermeneutic interpretation of constitutional principles coupled with external factors which will influence him, adopting the theory as formalism evaluative procedures. The questioning concerned intends to study the society at present, which yearns for the consecration of the fundamental right to process in reasonable time, which should be promoted by the state, since the constitutionally enshrined it even with the advent of constitutional emendment 45/2004. In this context, the State must answer for the undue delay of the procedural time. And the repair should be manifested through indemnity in favor of the citizen who had checked his right, as a consequence of a state act, or, if the preliminary hearing, his inertia.