OMISSION IN THE DECLARATION OF UNCONSTITUTIONALITY: SPEECH ANALYSIS ABOUT THE SUITABILITY OF “AMENDMENT OF JUDGMENT” IN THE DECLARATIONS OF UNCONSTITUTIONALITY

<p>The object of this paper talks about the speech analysis of judgments from Federal Supreme Court in the “Amendment of Judgment” directed against declaration of unconstitutionality that did not appreciated the temporal modulation of the effects due to the lack of requirement by the litigant. The study begins on the question if is suitable the use of “Amendment of Judgment” in thirst for concrete control opposite the absence of manifestation of Brazilian Constitutional Court about the temporal modulation of the effects in the declarations of unconstitutionality? it Should be highlighted that the “Amendment of Judgment” are relied on against a decision that shows an omission, contrariety or obscurity while the declaration of unconstitutionality of a norm produces its own effects by declaring null and void the acts done based on that norm because of its ex tunc effect. Therefore, our hypothesis consists in the impossibility of be upheld “Amendment of Judgment” in the declaration of unconstitutionality when there is no request in the proceedings about the temporal modulation of the effects. Finally, this research uses the theoretical matrix of speech analysis developed by Patrick Charaudeau.