Diálogos hermenêuticos em Direitos Humanos: em busca da(s) pergunta(s) adequadas(s) para a aplicação dos tratados internacionais de direitos humanos no Brasil

Abstract

The theme of this thesis is the relationship between the Constitution and International Human Rights Treaties as an expression of internationalization of Law. The thesis was dedicated to developing a solution to the problem of how to establish another rationality, one that is able to answer to the difficulty of using the hierarchical-normative view (spread in the doctrine of the Supreme Court) in the Constitution-International Treaties on Human Rights relationship with a direct impact on the pragmatic and interpretative framework. The hypothesis was outlined as follows: that upon reflection able to use the hermeneutic level of understanding, in search of his historical-critical link based on dialogic-hermeneutic structure, you can densify and guide constructions theoretical and build a new structure of rationality, in this case, for the implementation of international treaties on human rights in Brazil, as an expression of autonomy of law and constitution material supremacy in exception to the hierarchical-normative vision. On the overall objective we point to the seek for establishing structural and theoretical evidence to develop a new epistemological and hermeneutic horizon with regard to international treaties on human rights in Brazil as a result of (hermeneutic) dialogue beyond the hierarchical-normative view. Based on the specific objectives, we then proceeded to: describe and critically analyze the dominant paradigm, anchored in the hierarchical-normative view of international human rights treaties in the jurisprudence that is consolidated in the Supreme Court and the dominant doctrine; reorient the understanding of constitutional supremacy considering the internationalization of Law movement and the constitutive character of human rights; propose Hans-Georg Gadamer’s dialogical hermeneutical “way-of-being” as previous reflection (structured) for proper epistemology (hermeneutics) able to translate other theoretical and normative possibilities arising from the relationship between the Constitution and international treaties. The approach method was the phenomenological-hermeneutic one, due to its engagement on both sides of the speech, that helped to revolve the linguistic ground on which sit the dominant discourses and also aided the ontologically rooted reflection. From this we came to the conclusion that Gadamerian hermeneutic dialogue is structured as a productive “way-of-being” for the construction of sense in law, in particular for the proper understanding of the role of international human rights treaties in the Brazilian constitutionalism. The hermeneutic dialogue, structured in the dynamics of question and answer, revealed the predominant role of the question as responsible for unveiling the obviousness of the speech. Consequently, it shed light on other hermeneutic epistemological possibilities for the (ontological) relation between human and fundamental rights, with direct impact on the thesis of the unconstitutionality of section 3 of the 5th article of the Federal Constitution inserted by Constitutional Amendment No. 45/2004. Also, we concluded that the construction and consolidation of the concept of constitutional block emerges from the appropriate (dialogical) question by the interpretative dimension of human rights in the face of the despised vigor of contents on sections 1 and 2 of the 5th article of the Federal Constitution. Indeed, by assimilating the historical-comprehensive nature of human and fundamental rights, the constitutional block became feasible as epistemological-hermeneutic vector for changing the comprehension on the given treatment to international human rights treaties as a dimension of constitutional materiality.