Domestic violence in Brazil: social problems and legislative interventions

Recent statistical data confirms that domestic violence is a structural problem of exceptional gravity. We analyze the frequent legislative changes in Brazil since 2000 as a result of social pressure for protection of abused women. Only the Law 11.340 of 2006 was well received by lawyers, judges and the public opinion. We present the innovations and peculiarities of this statute and the allegations on unconstitutionality. We discuss cases of judicial review of this law and reject the arguments of unconstitutionality. That notwithstanding, we argue that penalization decisions is the wrong way from a criminological point of view because they do not take into consideration the desires and needs of the victims.

Disputing the application of laws: the constitutionality of the Brazilian Statute against domestic violence in the courts

This study aimed to map the key positions regarding the constitutionality of the Maria da Penha Law (Law 11.340/2006) in the Brazilian judicial system. The law, the result of political struggles by the Brazilian feminist movement, has been the subject of discussions in the public sphere and actions aimed at consolidating its constitutionality before the Federal Supreme Court. We examined and discussed the arguments used in the Courts, intending to show that the creation of law is not limited to the legislative moment, but rather that its social meaning is also constituted through disputes within the Judiciary.

Courts as healthcare policy-makers: the problem, the responses to the problem and problems in the responses

This article starts by analysing healthcare litigation in Brazil by means of a literature review of articles that contribute with empirical findings on this phenomenon. Based on this review, I argue that health care litigation in Brazil makes the public health system less fair and rational. In the second part of this article, I discuss the three most overarching responses to control the level of litigation and its impact on the public health system: (i) the public hearing held by the Supreme Federal Court and the criteria the court established thereafter; (ii) the recommendations by the National Council of Justice aimed at building courts’ institutional capacity; and (iii) the enactment of the Federal Law 12.401/11, which created a new health technology assessment system. I argue that latter is the best response because it keeps the substantive decisions on the allocation of healthcare resources in the institution that is in the best position to make them. Moreover, this legislation will make the decisions about provision of health treatments more explicit, making easier for courts to control the procedure and the reasons for these decisions.