The Brazilian, worldwide, who is more demand in the judiciary; in 1990, 01 of every 40 Brazilians seeking justice; in 1998, rose to 01, and 21 each in 2012, 05 out of 10 Brazilians seeking justice, according to the latest report by the CNJ.
Complicating the situation further is when you know that the largest customer of the system is the state itself, represented by all its organs. It has been said that the slow pace of justice will be settled on the day that the state comply with the law.
The situation resembles the creation of an entity to distribute largesse and the creator become the first and most constant user of what was intended.
It did not help the creation of regulatory agencies, for any difficulty in the area of health service delivery of utilities, such as the telephone, banks, electricity flows into the judiciary. Moreover, these organs to represent the consumer, are driven by related undertakings, hence the lack of credible people.
The mechanisms installed by the Judiciary to filter the demands that can climb to higher authorities, such as the general repercussion of standardization of case law or "súmula vinculante", were not adequate to prevent, for example, that the bite of a dog cross the first degree with the sentence, the judgment of the State Court and the final decision depend the Supreme Court and even the Supreme Court.
In 1988, when the Federal Constitution was enacted, being handled at all levels of the judiciary, 350,000 shares; in 2013, that number rose to 92 million, according to the report CNJ; now it is estimated at 100 million in the current year. The embarrassment grows as it is not ready for the judicial system to work the minimum infrastructure.
To get an idea of what this phenomenon is called "judicialização" is known that, in the United States, the Supreme Court justices decide around 120 claims per year, while the Supreme Court resolves over 90,000 causes.
The search for solutions to the crisis on the large volume of cases in the Supreme Court has attracted the attention of the legal world. The path found by the Supreme Court, consisting of the permission for each minister, monocratically decide many processes, is rebuked by lawyers, because there have been many conflicting decisions of one with another minister about same kind of action, in addition to reflecting uncertainty in the system. Furthermore, there is talk that the Supreme radicalized because over 90% of cases are decided monocratically.
In the same vein goes the STJ, because in 2012, were about 30% of decisions taken by each Minister in 2013, this percentage rose to 77% of cases defined in the offices.
In 2011, the retired Minister Cezar Peluso presented the so-called "PEC Resources" to amend the constitution to streamline and reduce the number of features in the STF and STJ.
That project proposes immediate enforcement of judgments, after the judgment of the courts of the states, thus ending the suspensive effect of appeals.
The lawyers were positioned firmly against this measure and the ministers of the STF and STJ still deciding any suit initiated in counties, passing through the state courts and one day land in Brasilia to remain there until there is time to final resolution.
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário