Análise sobre a (in)adequação da inserção da desjudicialização da execução cível no Brasil

Abstract

The objectives of this master’s thesis are to explain the main debates surrounding the idea of the dejudicialization of civil enforcement in Brazil, particularly its validity and convenience, and to outline the current state of these discussions. To this end, the research was primarily based on a literature review, along with analyses of statistical and normative sources. The idea of dejudicializing civil enforcement is inspired by the European experience, especially the Portuguese experience, in which the creation of a dejudicialized model was part of an enforcement reform that appears to have yielded excellent results in that country—although this does not necessarily mean it would work the same way in Brazil. In addition, the research demonstrates that such a measure would be constitutional in Brazil, but it is not certain that it would bring about the intended benefits, namely addressing delays and improving civil enforcement, particularly in terms of speed. The dejudicialization of civil enforcement encompasses a variety of models, particularly regarding the type of enforcement agent that could be appointed—whether a delegate or a public servant—and whether this would involve creating a new role or assigning the function to an existing one. Should this idea be implemented in Brazil, it would also be necessary to consider whether this extrajudicial route would be mandatory or merely optional in comparison to the judicial path, as well as the implementation method, which—like any other public policy involving major changes—must be gradual. The dejudicialization of civil enforcement has also sparked other important discussions relevant to the broader context of enforcement in Brazil, such as the debate around establishing something like Portugal's Extrajudicial Pre[1]Enforcement Procedure (PEPEX)