CONTROLLING THE ABUSE OF POWER AND JUDGMENT OF REASONABLENESS

Authors

  • Felipe Teles Tourounoglou

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.56238/revgeov17n3-095

Keywords:

Reasonability, Jurisdiction, Public Administration, Power Abuse, New Code of Civil Procedure

Abstract

It is not possible to dismiss the Jurisdiction of the Public Administration. The peaceful pacification of social conflicts must be based on the current structure of legality. Therefore it is the duty of the Judge, the maximum duty of the law enforcer, in saying the law, to apply the legal order in all its complexion, without abuse of power. It is very important to reveal that reasonableness is closely linked to legality. Date of conclusion, this is not an unfolding of the principle of proportionality, is not in line with the idea of applying what is necessary to reach the desired goal. Reasonability, in this analysis, has the power to establish the magistrate's position as a managerial public administrator. Reasonability must link the enforcer to the law itself. Obviously, this link to the law does not refer to law in the strict sense of its cold letter, which little glimpses the social claims. The link referred to here can be interpreted within the "inventive" activity, in the words of the best, "creative" doctrine of the Judge, an activity that contemplates the interpretation of legal rules and principles, contemplates the application and interpretation of all juridical framework, including , the own jurisprudential production. In this sense, it is when the interpretation and application of the law escapes the antecipated and predicted by the legislator, and when the social demands are dissociated from the common, that the Judge can not abuse its power, it is at this moment that must be reasonable, it is in this time that can not turn its back on its mission as a public administrator, which is bound to parameters and guiding criteria.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

ABELHA, Marcelo. Manual de Direito Processual Civil, 6 ed.- Rio de Janeiro: Forense, 2016.

BANDEIRA DE MELLO, Celso Antônio. Discricionariedade e controle jurisdicional. 2ª ed.. São Paulo: Malheiros, 2014.

BRASIL, Constituição da República Federativa do Brasil. Brasília, DF: Senado Federal, 1988.

BRASIL. Código de Processo Civil (2015). Código de Processo Civil Brasileiro. Brasília, DF: Senado, 2015.

CANOTILHO, José Joaquim Gomes. Direito constitucional e teoria da Constituição. 7. ed. Coimbra: Almedina, 2003.

CUNHA JÚNIOR, Dirley da. Curso de Direito Constitucional. 7ª. ed. Bahia: Juspodivm. 2013.

DIDIER JR., Fredie. Curso de Direito Processual Civil: introdução ao direito processual civil, parte geral e processo de conhecimento, 17 ed. – Salvador: Ed. Jus Podivm,2015. V. 1.

JÚNIOR, Humberto Theodoro. Curso de Direito Processual Civil, 56 ed.- Rio de Janeiro: Forense, 2015.

SILVA, José Afonso da. O Estado Democrático de Direito. Revista de Direito Administrativo. Rio de Janeiro, n. 173, p.15-34 jul./set. 1988. Disponível em http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/ojs/index.php/rda/article/viewFile/45920/44126>.

WAMBIER, Teresa Arruda Alvim; CONCEIÇÃO, Maria Lúcia Lins; RIBEIRO, Leonardo Ferres da Silva; MELLO, Rogerio Licastro Torres de. Primeiros Comentários ao Novo Código de Processo Civil Artigo por Artigo, São Paulo: Revista dos Tribunais, 2015.

Published

2026-03-13

How to Cite

Tourounoglou, F. T. (2026). CONTROLLING THE ABUSE OF POWER AND JUDGMENT OF REASONABLENESS. Revista De Geopolítica, 17(3), e1847 . https://doi.org/10.56238/revgeov17n3-095