MAIA, H. E. S.; MAIA, Helio Eduardo Silva.
Abstract:
The scientific work that however il presents is based in the next problem : consisted
the unconstitutionally and innocuty of the brinding abridgement, it is possible to
present alternatives proposalsto its adoption? Yes, it has seen that proposals of
emedations constitutinal, undertaken in the direction to move away it from the native
legal system, abready they ventilate the possibility of adopition of the imoeditive
abridgement of resources. With effect, the considerd objectives had been, exacthy,
the study of the binding abridgement in its doctrinal and legal aspects; the
demonstration of its unconstitutionality and inocuity and the analysis of the alternative
proposals to its adopition. For in such a way, it was used the methods descriptionevolutive,
bibliographical, comparative and interpretative-legal study. As il it sees, the
subject is still excellent for the scientific community inits totality, rank that does
notreach equality of opinions, justifying its constant reexamination. Of the inquiry it
results that the binding abridgement is unconstitutional because wounds innumerable
rules of the cf/88; and innocuity because it does not reach its desideratum, as much
that did not have the adoption of the impeditive abridgement of resources is not,
indeed, the best alternative, litting innumerable other measures more effective in the
reform of the judiciary.
