Análise textual discursiva das decisões do Tribunal de Justiça do Amazonas enquanto representante funcional da cidadania social nos contextos da pragmática da crise e da juridicidade responsiva

Abstract

This thesis has as its object of study the decisions of the Court of Justice of Amazonas (TJAM) in conflicts of public interest in which the Executive Powers of the state and municipal spheres have used the discursive strategy of the crisis. The objectives of this research are: to build the decision-making profile of the TJAM regarding its external alignment with the Executive Powers of the state and municipal spheres in the face of the crisis discourse; assess the institutional metamorphosis of the Judiciary in the pragmatics of the crisis; and find out which theoretical conception can support the application of Law in its post-modern complexity. An inductive method was used, with qualitative research, implemented by discursive textual analysis, with its respective phases: unitarization, categorization and production of the metatext. As for the results, cases related to fundamental and social rights and the supremacy of the public interest were identified, such as those related to personnel expenses, nomination in public competition, twelfth to the city council, suspension of the bidding process, right to health, tariff of collective transport and exoneration or postponement of tax collection. In the identified cases, it was intended that the concrete effects of the crises were presumed, in a kind of crypto-pragmatism that honored economic consequentialism, which was not accepted by the TJAM. In this way, the TJAM acted as a functional representative of social citizenship, shielding the pretension of establishing states of exception, as a complement to political representation in a post-democratic environment. The Judiciary is democratically competent and legitimated to enforce the limits of substantial democracy, deliberatively, from the perspective of demodiversity, when the argument of judicial activism is superficial in view of all the factors that must be overcome to avoid the institutional weaknesses of the courts amidst its interinstitutional fragility. Finally, legal pragmatism can theoretically and practically encompass the legal complexity in postmodernity, which is contingent and prospective, the basis of Atienza's post-positivist vision, which faced the excesses of neoconstitutionalism, by promoting offenses to legal integrity with too much openness. The TJAM followed its remarkable historical background in the defense of fundamental rights, which shows that the legal practice is a continuous process of self-correction without rupture, of a responsive nature to the social environment.