FORMAS DE RESOLUÇÃO DE CONFLITOS: Autotutela, Autocomposição e Heterocomposição (DIFERENÇAS)

Summary

Cíntia Brunelli explains different conflict resolution methods, including autotutela (self-defense), autocomposição (self-resolution through dialogue), and heterocomposição (third-party resolution). She highlights the problems with self-defense, such as violence breeding more violence, and emphasizes the importance of dialogue for peaceful solutions. Autocomposição can be done without a court process or after one is started, while heterocomposição involves impartial third parties like arbitrators or judges. Brunelli also introduces the concept of voluntary and contentious jurisdiction in the legal system and offers a course to help people better understand law in a simple way.

Takeaways

• 😀 Autotutela (Self-help) refers to resolving conflicts through force or intimidation, which is now considered a crime in modern law.
• 😀 In ancient times, conflicts were resolved by the strongest, with autotutela being the primary method, leading to injustice and violence.
• 😀 Autocomposição (Self-composition) involves resolving conflicts through peaceful dialogue, where the parties come to an agreement on their own or with the help of a mediator or conciliator.
• 😀 The key difference between a conciliator and a mediator is that a conciliator can propose solutions, while a mediator only facilitates communication.
• 😀 Autocomposição can happen either extrajudicially (outside of the court process) or endoprocessually (after a legal case has been filed).
• 😀 Heterocomposição (Third-party composition) occurs when a neutral third party, such as an arbitrator or judge, resolves the conflict.
• 😀 Arbitration is a form of heterocomposição where parties choose an arbitrator to resolve disputes, usually for matters related to private rights between adults.
• 😀 Jurisdição (Jurisdiction) refers to conflict resolution through the state, with two types: contentious (involving a conflict of interests) and voluntary (where no conflict exists, but the state validates an agreement).
• 😀 In contentious jurisdiction, the state substitutes the will of the parties to determine the outcome, while in voluntary jurisdiction, the state merely validates an agreement made by the parties.
• 😀 Cíntia Brunelli’s course, 'Primeiros Passos no Direito' (First Steps in Law), is designed to simplify legal concepts, making them accessible to beginners and those struggling with complex legal texts.

Q & A

What is the meaning of autotutela, and why is it considered problematic?

Autotutela, or self-defense, refers to individuals resolving conflicts through their own actions, often involving force or intimidation. It is considered problematic because it can lead to injustices, where the stronger party exploits the weaker one, and it often results in escalating violence. In modern law, autotutela is illegal, classified as a crime of arbitrary exercise of one's own rights.

What is the legal consequence of autotutela today?

Today, autotutela is considered a crime, specifically the 'crime of arbitrary exercise of one's own rights,' meaning individuals cannot seek justice through their own actions except in cases where the law permits, such as self-defense.

How does autocomposição differ from autotutela?

Autocomposição, or self-composition, is the peaceful resolution of conflicts through dialogue, where the parties involved come to an agreement without the intervention of a judge. In contrast, autotutela involves force or intimidation to resolve conflicts.

What is the difference between a conciliator and a mediator in the context of autocomposição?

A conciliator can propose solutions to the parties involved in a conflict, while a mediator does not offer solutions but facilitates dialogue to help the parties reach an agreement themselves.

Can autocomposição occur outside of the judicial process?

Yes, autocomposição can occur extrajudicially (outside of a legal process) or intra-judicially (after a lawsuit has been filed), depending on whether the parties are encouraged to settle before or after legal action is initiated.

What is heterocomposição, and how does it differ from autocomposição?

Heterocomposição refers to conflict resolution through the intervention of a third party, such as an arbitrator or judge. Unlike autocomposição, where the parties resolve the conflict themselves, heterocomposição involves an external authority providing a solution.

What is arbitration, and when is it applicable?

Arbitration is a private method of resolving disputes, where the parties choose an arbitrator to settle their conflict. It is only applicable to cases involving private rights, such as financial disputes, and cannot be used for criminal matters or cases involving public law.

Why does arbitration not play a significant role in many societies?

Arbitration has not gained widespread use in many societies because people often lack trust in private arbitrators, particularly when they have concerns about the impartiality or effectiveness of the judicial system itself.

What is the difference between voluntary and contentious jurisdiction?

Voluntary jurisdiction refers to situations where there is no conflict, and the state plays a role in facilitating an agreement, such as in cases of marriage or property agreements. Contested jurisdiction, on the other hand, arises when there is a dispute, and the state steps in to resolve the conflict by substituting its decision for that of the parties involved.

What is the role of the judge in voluntary jurisdiction?

In voluntary jurisdiction, the judge's role is integrative, meaning they simply confirm and approve the mutual agreement of the parties involved, such as when a married couple requests a change in their marital property regime.