Sobre a motivação da sentença no processo civil: Estado constitucional democrático de direito, discurso justificativo e legitimação do exercício da jurisdição

Abstract

This work, shaped in juridical methodology, critically reflects on the problem of motivation of civil judgment as an element of organization and functioning of the Democratic Constitutional State of Law. Motivation is an essential condition of jurisdiction, in the sense that without motivation there is no legitimate exercise of the jurisdictional function. The work makes an approach to the nature of motivation as a justificative discourse, juridical and rational, of the validity of choice or valuation criteria employed by the judge in its decision. The reasoning of the judge ispresented in double feature: internal decision-making reasoning (context of discovery or deliberation) and external justificative reasoning (context of justification or validation). The set of the technical-instrumental function (endoprocedural) and the political-rights assurance function (extraprocedural) is object of investigation. Motivation, in the theoretical and practical levels, also exerts the function of guarantee of the procedural right assuring mechanism. The thesis of the juridical validity of the judgment has three theoretical axes: total omission of the graphical motivation; lack of ideological motivation, equated to the hypothesis of nonexistence of the graphical motivation; radical logical incompatibility between the premises or between premises and the finalconclusion, which is also equivalent to the total lack of motivation. The work depicts a model of timeless injustice vivified by the judge Crono, opposite to the motivation as an invaluable factor of argumentative legitimacy of jurisdiction. Mandatory public motivation is the characteristic feature of the jurisdiction of our times and represents the greatest civilizing conquest of equal and fair proceeding.