Entre Demandas de Direitos e a “Peça de Defesa Padrão”: uma análise dos Conflitos nos Juizados Especiais Federais do Rio de Janeiro

This article is the result of research and reflections carried out since 1999 on the Special State Courts and Special Federal Courts, developed at the Faculty of Legal and Social Sciences of the Iguaçu University; in the Post-Graduate Program in Law of the Gama Filho University and in the Post-Graduate Program in Law of the Veiga de Almeida University, respectively, the latter with a research project, still in progress, executed in the Center for Research in Institutional Processes of Conflict Administration (NUPIAC). Our reflections demonstrate the alternate and alternative use of different logics that guide judicial practices and the interpretation of laws. Logics based sometimes on a Law considered traditional, based on an intervening and tutelary State, and sometimes on the invocation of a Law considered modern, innovative, based on a minimal State (as in the example of the implementations of restorative justice, special courts, and pre-trial confession as alternative ways to manage conflicts and crimes before our traditional justice model). And although they are different and sometimes even opposed to each other, they do not cancel each other out, but coexist, sometimes overlapping one another, sometimes creating hybrid models of "justice", extralegal, according to the institutional interests about the case to be managed, feeding back discourses and practices that repeatedly make the new the reaffirmation of the old, in the sense of travesty traditional inquisitorial and hierarchical practices in the field of Law with egalitarian, modern and inclusive discourses (as the uses of the "standard defense piece", observed in the research). With this movement, they intend to legitimize a legal bureaucracy that is personalized, secretive, and that antagonizes practices, legal discourses, and current norms, in order to relativize and interpret them arbitrarily, with no limits other than those internal ones, of institutional ethics. Thus, similar to what occurs in practice with due legal process in Brazil, the agreements and conciliations, whether in federal or state courts, unlike what they propose to do, do not always serve to protect the citizen from the State, but to protect the State from the citizen, something made explicit through the uses of the "standard defense piece" in the observed field.