- Avenida das Hortênsias, 2040, Sala 17-A, Segundo Andar, Centro, Gramado/RS, Brasil, CEP 95670-000
- +5551991737519
Bruno Irion Coletto
Uniritter, Direito - Campus FAPA, Faculty Member
- Bruno Irion Coletto holds a Master of Arts in Politics from The New School for Social Reserach, New York City. He holds a J.D. cum laude and a LL.M. from the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. He also holds a diploma magna cum laude in Advanced Social, Economic, and Political Studies from the University of Notre Dame / The Phoenix Institute. Currently he practices law as a Senior Partner at Coletto, Gregoski & Gavronski Law Firm. He is also a Professor of Law... moreBruno Irion Coletto holds a Master of Arts in Politics from The New School for Social Reserach, New York City. He holds a J.D. cum laude and a LL.M. from the Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. He also holds a diploma magna cum laude in Advanced Social, Economic, and Political Studies from the University of Notre Dame / The Phoenix Institute. Currently he practices law as a Senior Partner at Coletto, Gregoski & Gavronski Law Firm. He is also a Professor of Law at Uniritter - Campus FAPA. He has been General Attorney for the Municipality of Gramado.edit
The right to healthcare in Brazil is seriously protected by the courts. Judicialization of everyday implementation of this public policy is a fact. One explanation may be provided by the way judges understand the effectiveness of this... more
The right to healthcare in Brazil is seriously protected by the courts. Judicialization of everyday implementation of this public policy is a fact. One explanation may be provided by the way judges understand the effectiveness of this right. People hold subjective right to individualized healthcare benefits, and so they hold standing to sue the state in order to achieve it, regardless any consideration of public policies. Through an analysis of the jurisprudence on this issue, this paper aims to provide a critical understanding not just about what is actually happening in Brazilian courts regarding healthcare, but also to criticize it. The conclusion is that a “strong” conception of constitutionalism and fundamental rights may revel itself as “weak,” from the standpoint of general equality. Judicialization ends up empting the public debate, leading the task of solving the distribution of scarce resources to a “gowned aristocracy.”
Research Interests:
The article explores the critics and comments of Leo Strauss on one of Carl Schmitt’s main books, titled The Concept of the Political. Under the assumption of a “hidden dialogue” between these two philosophers, and with the background of... more
The article explores the critics and comments of Leo Strauss on one of Carl Schmitt’s main books, titled The Concept of the Political. Under the assumption of a “hidden dialogue” between these two philosophers, and with the background of the dispute between Political Theology and Political Philosophy, fundamental aspects of Schmitt’s work are explored initially, framing it as an assertion of the political framework before the project of a modern depoliticizing individualistic liberalism. Once the fundamental aspects of Schmitt’s thoughts are understood, Strauss’s concordances and critiques are analyzed, especially regarding the politics existence criterion, i.e. the criterion that separates men between friends and foes, founding the politics. Strauss, reinterpreting what Schmitt called “question of life and death,” demonstrates how community’s internal plurality, unlike what Schmitt thought, comes from human nature. Strauss therefore makes a rereading of the question of life and death, establishing the fundamental difference between what he calls Political Philosophy and Schmitt’s Political Theology.(This paper was published in Portuguese)