"AN OPINION JUST LIKE ANY OTHER"? THE ROLE OF THE JUSTICE RAPPORTEUR IN DELIBERATION IN BRAZILIAN SUPREME COURT
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.21783/rei.v1i1.21Keywords:
Judge Rapporteur, Deliberation, Brazilian Supreme CourtAbstract
The role of the Justice rapporteur in the Brazilian Supreme Court still has not been subject of great scholarly attention. The most widespread view is that the Justice rapporteur has a prominent role, because he or she is the Justice who most intensively studies the case. Statistics show that the other ten Justices tend to follow the written opinion of the Justice rapporteur in almost every case. Beyond the numbers, however, the actual influence of the rapporteur's opinion on the deliberation is unclear when the case attracts more attention of the legal community, as well as of the society as a whole and the media. Inasmuch in those cases – contrary to what usually occurs – every Justice uses to bring a written opinion to the deliberation session, it is possible for the role and the influence of the Justice rapporteur to be different than it usually is. This article presents parts of the results of a broader research aiming at grasping what the Justices of the Brazilian Supreme Court themselves think of the deliberation and decision-making process within that court.Downloads
References
DUARTE, G.; FREIRE, D.; MARTINS, R. Revisitando o Supremo Relator: Teorias e Modelos Explicativos. V Seminário Discente do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ciência Política, 2 de maio de 2015. São Paulo: Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e Ciências Humanas da Universidade de São Paulo, 2015. Disponível em: <http://www.sistemas.fflch.usp.br/ocspkp/sdpscp/Vsem/paper/view/402>. Acesso em: 3 de janeiro de 2016.
GAROUPA, N.; GILI, M.; GÓMEZ-POMAR, F. Political Influence and Career Judges: An Empirical Analysis of Administrative Review by the Spanish Supreme Court. Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, Vol. 9, 4, 2012.
KRANENPOHL, U. Herr des Verfahrens oder nur Einer unter Acht? Der Einfluss des Berichterstatters in der Rechtsprechungspraxis des Bundesverfassungsgerichts. Zeitschrift für Rechtssoziologie, Vol. 30, 2, 2009.
______. Hinter dem Schleier des Beratungsgeheimnisses. Wiesbaden: VS Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, 2010.
OLIVEIRA, F.L. de. Supremo Relator: processo decisório e mudanças na composição do STF nos governos FHC e Lula. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Sociais, Vol. 27, 80, 2012.
OLIVEIRA, F.L. de. Processo decisório no Supremo Tribunal Federal: coalizões e “panelinhas”. Revista de Sociologia e Política, Vol. 20, 44, 2012.
PELLEGRINA, L.D.; GAROUPA, N. Choosing between the government and the regions: An empirical analysis of the Italian constitutional court decisions. European Journal of Political Research, Vol. 52, 4, 2013.
POSNER, R.A. What Do Judges and Justices Maximize? (The Same Thing Everybody Else Does). Supreme Court Economic Review, Vol. 3, 1, 1993.
SILVA, V.A. da. Deciding Without Deliberating. International Journal of Constitutional Law, Vol. 11, 3, 2013.
SPRIGGS II, J.F.; MALTZMAN, F.; WAHLBECK, P.J. Bargaining on the U.S. Supreme Court: Justices’ Responses to Majority Opinion Drafts. The Journal of Politics, Vol. 61, 2, 1999.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
The authors hold their copyright and concede to the JOURNAL OF INSTITUTIONAL STUDIES the right to the first publication, in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution license.
Authors are strongly encouraged to publish their manuscripts in other medias, such as institutional repositories and personal pages. The Journal only requires the credits of the first publication.
