Justiça para quem? Uma análise da conciliação judicial no âmbito de proteção ao consumidor hipossuficiente no 1o CEJUSC do Termo Judiciário de São Luís (MA) no primeiro trimestre de 2022

Abstract

The guarantee of access to a fair legal order, in its current concept, guarantees individuals that they can achieve justice not only through the “traditional” judicial process, but also through alternative means of resolving disputes. In this area, the use of autocompositional methods and especially conciliation has been highlighted. In view of this, the work consists in the analysis of the use of the institute of judicial conciliation in the context of consumer relations, with emphasis on the application of this method in the face of the causes that appear in the active pole a hyposufficient consumer, as well as to verify how the use of the conciliation in practice and its effects on those involved in the procedure, seeking to examine whether in fact this pacifying means has been complying with the promotion of due access to justice. It focuses on the judicial conciliation hearings held at the 1st CEJUSC of São Luís-MA from January to March 2022, so that the practical experiences that occurred in this context were observed. It started with the concept of access to justice, just like the history of self-composition and its national rules, with emphasis on the 2015 CPC and CNJ resolution 125/10, rules that also allowed exploring the principles that guide the activity of the solution peacemaker, also promoting the interaction of procedural principles of conciliation with procedural, constitutional and consumerist provisions, which support the rights of individuals directly involved in the conciliation procedure, namely the consumer. From the applied methodology, through the use of the inductive method allied to the bibliographical and empirical researches (field study), employing, as a technique the case study, it was verified in the end that, in spite of the speed with which the Judicial conciliation provides the solution to the dispute, when, in fact, it achieves its objective, the consensual environment faces several enclaves before the national judiciary practice. One of these challenges, in the procedure involving the low-income consumer, is precisely in relation to its effectiveness, as the procedure is rarely completed successfully. Another point is that, sometimes, even when the agreement is reached, this method tends to be harmful to the fundamental guarantees granted to the low-income consumer. In view of this, it was concluded that the use of judicial conciliation in the hyposufficient consumerist scope is quite questionable, since it takes place in the face of a reality in which it ends up distorting basic principles and resulting in injustices for the most vulnerable.