{"title":"CONTROLE DE CONSTITUCIONALIDADE DO DECRETI-LEGGE ITALIANO","authors":"Esmar Custódio Vêncio Filho","doi":"10.29327/270098.15.25-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article will compare the constitutional institutes of the Italian decree-legge and the Brazilian provisional measure. Therefore, we will verify the structure of each of these institutes. We compare the elements of each legal system in its various aspects such as initiative, requirements, assumptions, effectiveness, among others. The constitutional system of Italy and Brazil will be compared specifically regarding the control of constitutionality of the decree-legge and the provisional measure. To this end, we will also make a brief exposition about the Italian and Brazilian Constitutional Court, its composition and competences. The comparative constitutional approach between Italian and Brazilian law raises intriguing questions, especially with regard to legal nature, material limitations, effectiveness and, especially, the litigation of constitutionality. In the wake of this investigation, we will proceed to the comparison of the referred institute with the corresponding one in the Brazilian Federal Constitution. We will use the exploratory/descriptive method to compare constitutional aspects. This method familiarizes the researcher with the problem, which makes it more evident in the construction of hypotheses and the description allows identifying variables (GIL, 2010, p. 27). Technically, we used bibliographic and documentary collection, collecting doctrinal material as well as a survey of judgments from international and national courts, especially those of constitutional competence.","PeriodicalId":31433,"journal":{"name":"Revista ESMAT","volume":"3 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista ESMAT","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29327/270098.15.25-2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
This article will compare the constitutional institutes of the Italian decree-legge and the Brazilian provisional measure. Therefore, we will verify the structure of each of these institutes. We compare the elements of each legal system in its various aspects such as initiative, requirements, assumptions, effectiveness, among others. The constitutional system of Italy and Brazil will be compared specifically regarding the control of constitutionality of the decree-legge and the provisional measure. To this end, we will also make a brief exposition about the Italian and Brazilian Constitutional Court, its composition and competences. The comparative constitutional approach between Italian and Brazilian law raises intriguing questions, especially with regard to legal nature, material limitations, effectiveness and, especially, the litigation of constitutionality. In the wake of this investigation, we will proceed to the comparison of the referred institute with the corresponding one in the Brazilian Federal Constitution. We will use the exploratory/descriptive method to compare constitutional aspects. This method familiarizes the researcher with the problem, which makes it more evident in the construction of hypotheses and the description allows identifying variables (GIL, 2010, p. 27). Technically, we used bibliographic and documentary collection, collecting doctrinal material as well as a survey of judgments from international and national courts, especially those of constitutional competence.
本文将比较意大利法令法和巴西临时措施的宪法制度。因此,我们将对每个研究所的结构进行验证。”我们比较了每个法律制度在各个方面的要素,如主动性、要求、假设、有效性等。具体比较意大利和巴西的宪法制度对法令和临时措施的合宪性的控制。为此目的,我们还将简要介绍意大利和巴西宪法法院及其组成和权限。意大利和巴西法律之间的比较宪法方法提出了一些有趣的问题,特别是在法律性质、物质限制、效力,特别是合宪性诉讼方面。在这项调查之后,我们将着手将所提到的研究所与巴西联邦宪法中相应的研究所进行比较。我们将使用探索性/描述性的方法来比较宪法方面。这种方法使研究人员熟悉问题,这使得它在假设的构建中更加明显,并且描述允许识别变量(GIL, 2010, p. 27)。从技术上讲,我们使用书目和文献收集,收集理论材料以及对国际和国家法院的判决进行调查,特别是那些具有宪法管辖权的法院。