ASSUMPTIONS FOR NORMATIVE CONSTITUTIONAL STARE DECISIS L AND WRITING DECISIO-NMAKING MODEL AT BRAZILIAN SUPREME COURT: A NORMATIVE-INSTITUTIONAL APPROACH
Stare Decisis. Writing Decision-making Model. Brazilian Supreme Court. Institutional Design.
This normative research aims, in the foreground, set theoretical assumptions to the operationalization of stare decisis in constitutional level and, from these assumptions, define the ideal characteristics of a written decision mode for the brazilian Supreme Court. The need to reconfigure the stare decisis in constitutional framework emerges on two findings provided by a legal-institutional approach to constitutional precedents. Such an approach would establish normative-ideal principles without losing sight of the concrete operational aspects. Its application allows, first, percieve that the horizontal and vertical dimensions of stare decisis seem to have different theoretical foundations, which in itself breaks the idea of a monolithic concept for such category. Second, the carousel of criticism directed by the constitutional theory for the constitutional jurisdiction makes harder to establish justifications for such a doctrine. As a direct implication, Constitutional Courts decisions have to have differentiated justifications in relation to decisions in other courts. With the redefinition of these presupposes it is essential to redefine the way written decisions of the Supreme Court are to be made under penalty of adopting an institutional design that does not favor the realization of new theoretical assumptions found.