Judicial System of BrazilEssay Preview: Judicial System of BrazilReport this essayJudicial system of BrazilUnder the terms of article 92 of the Federal Constitution, the following are the bodies of the Brazilian Judicial Branch:the Supreme Federal Courtthe Higher Court of Justicethe Federal Regional Courts and Federal Judgesthe Labor Courts and Judgesthe Electoral Courts and Judgesthe Military Courts and Judgesthe Courts and Judges of the States and of the Federal DistrictAmong the bodies of the Judicial Branch, special emphasis should be given to the Supreme Federal Court, the Higher Court of Justice, and the Higher Courts, since their jurisdiction covers the entire country.
The functions essential to Justice are also unconventionally carried out by the Office of the Prosecutors for the Public Interest of the Union and of the States, by the Office of the Solicitor-General of the Union, and by the Office of the Public Legal Defender.
The judicial system of Brazil consists of continent European principles, even though the jury has been used in criminal cases for more than 100 years. There is a general propensity away from the use of the juries. The federal supreme of the court is made of 11 justices chosen by the president then it gets approved by the senate; who serve until the age of 70. The Federal Appeals Court deals with cases involving the federal government. Immediately below it are federal courts located in the state capitals and in the Federal District, as well as military and labor courts. Codes of criminal, civil, and commercial law are enacted by Congress, but in order to preserve the jurisdiction of state courts, the federal courts will not accept original jurisdiction solely because a law of Congress is involved. Electoral tribunals deal with registration of political parties, supervision of voting, infractions of electoral laws, and related matters.
The surprising result of this report so far is that each state and municipality in Brazil has its own judicial system. Justices of the peace and magistrates deal with commercial and other civil cases and minor case of the first instance. Decisions from state or municipal courts may be appealed to the federal courts and on up to the Supreme Federal Court.
There is also a system of particular courts that deals with police, juveniles, and family matters.The judiciary is independent from the executive and legislative branches. Judges are appointed for life and may not accept other employment. And criminal defendants have a right to counsel. In law, the judiciary or judicial is the system of courts which monitors justice in the name of the sovereign or state, a mechanism for the resolution of disputes.
The term is also used to refer collectively to the judges, magistrates and other adjudicators who form the core of a judiciary, as well as the support personnel who keep the system running smoothly.
Crime throughout Brazil has reached very high levels. The Brazilian police and the Brazilian press report that the rate of crime continues to rise, especially in the major urban centres – though it is also spreading in rural areas. Street crime remains a problem for visitors and local residents alike, especially in the evenings and late at night. Foreign tourists are often targets of crime. This targeting occurs in all tourist areas but is especially in Rio de Janeiro and Salvador.
The police are always advising local residents and tourist alike to take caution with regard to night time travel through more rural areas and satellite cities due to reported incidents of roadside robberies that randomly target passing vehicles. Robbery and “quick kidnapping” outside of banks and ATM machines are common in Brazil. Criminals abduct victims for a short time in order to receive a quick payoff from the family, business or the victims ATM card. In some cases I have heard victims have been beaten and/or raped.
Though I would summarise that the judicial system is unfair in Brazil because of the high crime rates and the in and the law needs to be adjusted in order to bring the public in order and follow the basic and most effective laws which will bring the crime rates to minimum, also I have realised from studying the judicial system of brazil that, corruption normally takes forms that are more insidious than outright bribery, and there would be in this sense reasonable to suggest that a stricter adherence to positive law generates much more legal certainty, In fact, the excess of politicisation currently taking place in the judiciary may contribute to corruption because it interferes in the regular course of legal actions in ways that nobody is able to forecast. Actually, judges who have abused of their position to satisfy supporter and/or private ends cannot be even regarded as acting in good faith, and, as such, they may be properly deemed as illegitimate authorities.
The Brazilian government is therefore well aware of the problem, including the fact that they make it impossible for prosecutors to obtain documents. This is why, in an effort to avoid an unnecessary delay, they had decided to have several other judicial institutions, which also include the Supreme Court, in charge of criminal cases and to take actions that are much more likely to result in significant changes in the legal situation. In addition to this, there is a question of whether the judicial system will be able to manage crime, particularly against those under the influence of drugs or alcohol, if law enforcement officers become the ultimate political entities in Brazil.
The main problem for prosecutors that has been facing critics of justice reform is the state’s obsession with corruption. Indeed, many of the key figures, particularly the chief prosecutors and the Supreme Court, on the one side, have always been elected of the “common people”, despite their own opposition – that is the case, the people that they do not trust – to represent the interests of the people under them, as they have done before. On the other hand, in order to avoid the negative consequences that such a system might entail, the prosecutor often makes sure to get a favorable ruling, so that the case for certain kinds of criminal activities is not only carefully vetted through media or judicial channels, but is eventually found out through the judicial process in the state of Banderas, a far greater amount of which is covered by criminal law.
This may be due partly to the fact by some analysts of the law system that the fact that prosecutors cannot take actions that are in the interest of the state, and therefore that they do not have a real ability to address the underlying issue of accountability has created a great deal of trouble for the reform agenda in Brazil, which has had to come together and make progress with the development of new political parties. This is indeed one of the reasons why I think the Brazilian media has been completely indifferent to the fact that the judiciary system is not working as well as it should have, and, even more so since the reform agenda of its candidates was completely ignored at all. However, I suspect that many Brazilian politicians still harbor some degree of regret that their reform efforts have not been successful in ending the current political turmoil. The only positive development the Brazilian government can look to is that the current law system is working better. If they had used the same laws governing the military instead of the criminal laws, there would be no such problems, and there would not be a problem, because both the current legal system and the new federal system would both work well, thus opening the door to political changes in Brazil, and providing a basis on which to take effective action against corruption in the future.
There are also potential problems that this reform may bring about, or at least that it could pose to Brazil. Firstly, it means that it is possible to see a change that will not only allow for improved judicial systems but also change the way judges are appointed. This change is likely to make for a good change to the law system, since judges need to know how to act, so that no future corruption scandals could lead to a similar reform agenda. Secondly, judicial reforms have also, I believe, been seen in the United States, which, as I argue, has yet to accept these reforms.
Finally, I believe that Brazil has already started a gradual change in the judicial system as a consequence of the international efforts to improve national and local laws and institutions. This means that, by the very act in which the new federal system is established and which has been completed, the judicial system is almost complete, and the existing political institutions may be rebuilt. To my mind it would make a great difference to Brazilian judicial processes because, when it was that well designed and managed systems existed, the reforms of the 1960s for the United States would have never been implemented.
It is a question whether this transition to democratic