Audiências públicas no Supremo Tribunal Federal como seara argumentativa: cientificismo, discursividade e democracia na abordagem dos argumentos pelos Ministros

Abstract

In the present study, it analyzed how the arguments of the participants in the public hearings by the Brazilian Supreme Court were discussed by ministers, seeking to identify the institutional practice of the Court in the application of this legal institute. In still exploratory stage, research has indicated that audiences do not promote effective integration of civil society in judicial review exercised by the Brazilian Supreme Court. It investigated the hypothesis that these hearings do not influence the decisions of the Court, due to its use only to gather technical and scientific information and democratically legitimate their decisions, regardless of argumentative aspect. The research started the theories of Jürgen Habermas as to overcome the paradigm of the philosophy of consciousness by the communicative paradigm, with the expansion of the concept of rationality beyond the instrumental. Methodologically, it undertook to content analysis of the manifestations of the participants at the hearings and of the judgments. From the speeches of the exhibitors were cataloged and categorized all the arguments raised in order to confront them with the votes of the Brazilian Supreme Court ministers. After the study of the legal system about the institute and analysis of all public hearings already subsidized judgments and their judgments, the research showed that the current institutional practice of the Supreme Court on the use of the audience has been marked primarily by emphasis on hearsay of experts, by the absence of ministers and passivity, by omitting the arguments of the exhibitors, the lack of dialogue and formal search democratic legitimacy for its decisions in spite of the discursive performance in the audience. It was concluded that this practice has not only prevented the full scope of the institute's purposes, as has simulated an increase in democratic legitimacy of the Court's decisions. Thus, positive changes have been proposed to overcome the shortcomings of the current Supreme Court practice in the conduct of public hearings, emphasizing that the suggestions will be ineffective if there is no internalization of the communicative paradigm that translates into dialogical postures with civil society.