O controle de convencionalidade do sistema interamericano de direitos humanos e uma análise crítica do diálogo interjurisdicional entre o Supremo Tribunal Federal e a Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos.

Abstract

The objective of this dissertation is to analyze the practical and theoretical development of the control of conventionality in the inter-American system of human rights and also to make a critical analysis of the interjurisdictional dialogue between the Federal Supreme Court (STF) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. With this, it is proposed to answer the following question: if and in what way does the STF conduct an inter-jurisdictional dialogue with the Inter-American Court, promoting or not an effective control of conventionality? To better address the proposed problem, this paper is divided into three chapters. In the first one, the phenomenon of the internationalization of human rights, as well as their protection through the regional systems, is analyzed. Regarden to regional systems for the protection of human rights, a special focus is given to the Organization of American States (OAS), an international body from which the normative instruments that make up the inter-American human rights legal framework emerge, including the main ones: the Convention American Commission on Human Rights (ACHR), the founding instrument of the Inter-American Court. In the second chapter, we intent to find out how the Inter-American Court has developed the theory of internal linkage in relation to international decisions. This theory bases the obligation of the domestic Judiciary to promote the control of conventionality not only on the basis of the norms that compose the inter-American corpus iuris, but also based on the interpretation that the regional court has made of them. Also, an evaluation of the institute of conventionality control in the perspectives of the Inter-American Court and the jurisprudence of the STF is made. The third chapter aims to evaluate the theory of inter-jurisdictional dialogue between national courts and regional human rights courts. Afterwards, a critical analysis of the decisions handed down by the STF is made, in which case the Court of Human Rights has cited the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights, seeking to identify which type of dialogue has been pursued and whether, in this way, conventionality has been effectively promoted. The conclusion was that this topic is still very incipient in the jurisprudence of the STF. There were few decisions that included a quotation from the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. But in these few cases, there was a significant prevalence of decisions that were receptive to the inter-American jurisprudence, and in many of them, without saying so, the STF promoted effective control of conventionality based on the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court. The research technique used was the bibliographical one, mainly through the research in books and scientific articles. The documentary research technique was also used, through an analysis of the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights and of the Supreme Court, as well as the pertinent national and international normative instruments. The method of procedure used is predominantly historical-critical, through the evaluation of constructed doctrinal concepts, especially from the mid-twentieth century, such as the internationalization of human rights, internal linkage resulting from decisions of International Courts and the most recent Of all: the control of conventionality. Moreover, the method of approach is eminently deductive, departing from general premises towards specific conclusions. In relation to the last chapter of the dissertation, in turn, a "case study" is carried out, evaluating the decisions of the STF in which there is a quotation from the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court.