Abstract
The little effectiveness of environmental law does not correspond to the importance that this branch of law has for today's society and for the future of mankind on Earth. The aim of the present study was to analyze the role of the Judiciary in dealing with environmental issues through the identification of the categories of reasoning of legal discourses arising from environmental demands trials. The methodology used was critical discourse analysis based on the categories formulated by Fairclough (2001). The sample consisted of a Direct Action of Unconstitutionality (ADI) judged by the Federal Supreme Court and an environmental Public Civil Action (ACP) judged by the Federal Judicial Section of Piauí (SJPI). The study showed that the discourses captured in the interviews of the practitioners are against the written legal discourses, however their discursive practices have not yet been sufficient to transform the ideological positions demarcated in the Judiciary. It is believed that legal discourses are in many cases the consequence of a doctrinal formation based on individual rights and cultural values that do not have the environment as a priority, and also due to the divergence of position regarding the eminent issues of society when compared to environmental issues.
Open public full textRights: ALLOWED · cc-by · Source: journal-auto-sync:CROSSREF_ISSN