Private Autonomy and the Protection of Human Rights

Need for conventionality control

Abstract

reality of the state, leading the direction of the economy and violating human rights, without being properly identified. As an example of this premise, there are the tragedies that devastated Mariana and Brumadinho. These sad events demonstrated how harmful actions of some companies, protected by confusing legislation, escape their responsibilities and cause irreparable damage. In view of this, this article analyzes the scope of private autonomy in the face of the impunity of these companies that judge themselves above the laws. It is understood that the responsibility for the risks generated lies exclusively with the State, due to the lack of supervision or intervention in these companies. Furthermore, it is understood that there is a need to establish a hermeneutical dialogue between national and international courts, based on the International Human Rights System, to correct such misinterpretation of private autonomy. Finally, it is concluded that private autonomy cannot be denied, but rather must be limited. This is because, as demonstrated throughout the work, the myth of private autonomy reinforces the lack of responsibility of companies, of all dimensions and nationalities, for their actions that violate human rights. In addition, there is a need for a hermeneutics that has as its starting point the locules of the oppressed and not the oppressor.