Procatalepsis: Inter- Institutional Dialogue in Public Law – a Deaf Dialogue or a Legal and Efficient Communication? Case Study

Mutual respect and availability for dialogue are character traits that are so necessary nowadays, since as a rule the contemporary human being frequently manifests as a selfish being, focused only on personal well-being, on the cult of personality or on the distortion of reality, intolerant or indifferent to the sufferings of those who do not share his value system, without knowing the definition of empathy. The pending study aims to highlight the quality of the institutional dialogue, namely the manner in which a court decision is respected by a territorial administrative authority and the mayor, as well as to highlight the fact that in some cases, unfortunately, with the evasion of legal norms, some court decisions pronounced by the administrative litigation courts are framed, like a true work of art, a painting, not being enforced. The title chosen for the study conjures an exercise in rhetoric, as "procatalepsis" represents a figure of speech in which the speaker raises an objection to his own argument and then immediately responds. By doing so, he hopes to strengthen his argument by addressing possible counterarguments before the audience can raise them. The etymology of the word reveals that it comes from the ancient Greek: Ï€Ï Î¿- (pro-, "before") + κατάληψις (katálÄ“psis, "act of catching"), via the Latin "procatalepsis", which implies "anticipation and response to an objection".