Abstract:
In summary, the present work refers to the system currently used in the labor sphere, being this the Electronic Judicial Process (PJe). This system has brought about an enormous evolution in the labor process, making it faster and more efficient. It happens that, there are divergences jurisprudential regarding the protocol of the labor dispute by means of the secrecy, as it is made available as option in the act of the protocol, being this marked, it is only the judge, titular or substitute, to withdraw such documents from the confidentiality. The discrepancies in the case-law on the protocol on defense in secrecy consist in particular of the application of the default to the party complained of, causing unnecessary frustration and procedural harm to the defendant. There is even a magistrate, who understands the protocol in secrecy as being a secret of justice, an understanding that is totally inharmonious with the norm that regulates both institutes. It should be noted that before the PC, defense and documents were received on physical grounds by the magistrate and given to the opposing party only at the opening hearing. Once the present scenario has been presented, the present work aims to answer the following question: With the PJe, access to the defenses can occur before the hearing, if the protocol is done in advance and without secrecy. In this case, in the face of disparate understandings about the protocol of defense in secrecy in the Pje, would this violation violate the principle of ample defense, adversarial and due process? For that, we will analyze doctrinal and jurisprudential concepts, and concrete cases to ponder the problem presented in an attempt to demonstrate a solution to the conflict.
