Judicialização, ativismo judicial e legitimidade democrática

Abstract: The present thesis is inserted in the research line of Constitucionalism and the Law Production, as the initial result of the research made in the graduate studies in stricto sensu course on the doctorate level at “Universidade do Vale do Itajaí – UNIVALI” as well as in Alicante Universidade de Alicante, Spain, given that the present work is the result of the double degree convention between both universities. The Research begins with an analysis of the social and legal phenomena that give cause to the historical-evolutionary State process, aimed at the jurisdictional activity, defining and characterizing the State and jurisdiction in the global context, starting with the Liberal State, moving on to the Welfare State and extending to the Democratic Rule of Law, theme necessary to understand the current format of the jurisdiction and its forms of conflict resolution existing nowadays. In the sequence, the study is driven to the analysys of Brazilian State and its jurisdiction in the conjecture of redemocratization, mark of the guarantees and fundamental rights. Deserving highlights the fundamental right of the Acess to Justice which, tied to the abscense of a political structure, contributing significantly to the dramatic growth of legal claims , one of the reasons of the current crisis in the Judiciary. Building a reflection on the causes and consequences in the culture of conflict resolution through the endured judicial method, pointing out alternative methods as important ways to achieve a new vision and composition in the dispute's settlement field. Adding the data originated from the National Council of Justice (CNJ), with the results of the judiciary initiatives in the use of alternative methods, notably the Medition an Conciliation, encouraged by the mentioned council. Basing on these data, a reflection on the relevance of the insertion and institutionalization of the Alternative Methods for the resistant conflict's pacification in the brazilian Jurisdiction is brought up, showing them as tools that enable the effective operation of the judiciary towards the society, assumption that bases the State's action aimed to the general good, happiness and social satisfaction, materializing, this way, the desired social function of the Democratic Rule of Law.

Abstract: This article has as general goal to find parameters in order to determine when the judicial activism leaves the field of legal argumentation and becomes an instrument of political decision. To this end, we started trying to define a possible concept of judicial activism and its origins in the United States juridical tradition. In this first moment, we use the historical analytical method to try to contextualize historically the conceptual categories under study and the conditions of emergence of this phenomenon in the United States. Following, on the basis of the critical comparative method, we began to study the fundamental elements that characterize political rationality and legal rationality. At the end, we discuss the prospects for an activist judge in Brazil, especially when acting in the protection of fundamental rights and ensuring the supremacy of the constitution. In general terms, our conclusions points to a set of criteria for the definition of what would be a so-called positive judicial activism, to the detriment of its other sort that is harmful to the wealth of the constitutional order.

Abstract: The 1988 Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil has given health a fundamental social right status and also has created a centralized health system called SUS which is responsible, among other subjects, for health surveillance services. In Brazil, actions and health services are created and implemented as public policies. Those are government actions and programs supported by laws that have been stimulating lawyers to speculate about the subject, notably because of numerous court decisions in public policies, especially those with a social character. In Brazil, health surveillance is jurisdiction of federal government through the National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa). This agency in order to implement public policies in health surveillance enforces acts to regulate such activities. However, such acts are often challenged in court. In order to determine if Judiciary decisions takes into account Health Law / Not Health law Niklas Luhmann's binary system or simply ignores the subject resulting in sentences based on other sources but Health Law and health surveillance public policy. The conclusion was that Federal Judiciary has decided mostly in favor of health, although not much experienced in public health matters they are influenced by health surveillance and health hazard notions.

Abstract: O artigo analisa o debate academico sobre o ativismo judicial. Critica o seu enfoque no problema da autonomia individual do juiz na tomada de decisao e seu proposito normativo de definir o modelo apropriado para o Judiciario numa ordem constitucional democratica. O debate coloca em segundo plano o carater institucionalmente inserido dos tribunais e simplifica as relacoes entre a pratica judicial e o contexto politico. Em seguida, propoe um quadro para a analise das relacoes entre jurisprudencia e politica, baseado nos conceitos de regime governamental e regime jurisprudencial. Enfim, e apresentada uma analise preliminar das mudancas no controle da constitucionalidade pelo STF apos 1988.

Abstract: O objetivo deste artigo e investigar a dinâmica interna do processo decisorio no Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF), com foco nas respostas que o tribunal da as demandas que chegam via controle direto de constitucionalidade. Nossa hipotese e de que as respostas diferem dependendo do perfil dos ministros. Nosso interesse se dirige ao conjunto do tribunal, e nao na individualidade dos ministros. Argumentamos que mudancas na composicao da corte se refletem em mudancas no padrao de decisao. Elegemos para a analise um periodo de grande renovacao na composicao do STF, entre o segundo governo FHC (1999-2002) e o primeiro governo Lula (2003-2006). Mapeamos os padroes de decisao do tribunal nos casos de Acoes Diretas de Inconstitucionalidade e os fatores que influenciariam essas decisoes. A conclusao da pesquisa e de que a composicao da Corte e o perfil dos ministros importam, mas a variavel determinante no resultado da decisao e o voto do relator. Alem disso, os dados permitem afirmar que, ao contrario do que aponta grande parte da literatura, o STF nao e tao parcimonioso em sua atuacao.