Limites e possibilidades hermenêuticas da jurisdição constitucional contemporânea no estado democrático de direito: a jurisprudência do Supremo Tribunal Federal no mandado de injunção a partir da possibilidade e necessidade de respostas corretas no direito

Abstract

This Master’s Dissertation assesses the jurisprudence of the Federal Supreme Court in face of the writ of injunction, in the context of constitutionality control. We bring up a debate especially about the hermeneutical limits and possibilities of the contemporary constitutional jurisdiction in the Democratic State of Law. This work intends to show that the writ of injunction must be founded on a theory of judicial decision guided by the thesis of possibility (and need) of right answers in the Law, so that there is effectiveness through the fusion between the philosophical hermeneutic and the theory of integrity from Dworkin. In the first part of this text, we argue about the main fundaments for a theory of judicial decision in the Democratic State of Law. To reach this goal we develop a brief analysis about the origin of the constitutionalism and the constitutional jurisdiction, and we also mention the contributions from Dworkin and from the philosophical hermeneutic. In the second part of the text, there is an analysis of the writ of injunction, considering its origins as the evolution of the comprehension about the Federal Supreme Court, based on philosophical hermeneutic. As an approach method, the phenomenological hermeneutic method will be used. As procedure methods, the historical, monographic and comparative approaches will be used. As research techniques, direct documentation (jurisprudence) and indirect documentation (bibliographical research) will be used.