A Servidão Administrativa e o Estado Regulador: Compatibilidade com o Princípio Constitucional da Legalidade e a Limitação ao Direito Real de Propriedade

The economic changes occurred in the 90s, with the restructuring and privatization of various sectors of the economy have led to a redefinition of the State role, assuming a position of regulator and supervisor of public services in place to direct its role as straight intervenor. It is through the regulatory agencies, autarchies with special legal personality under public law, that the Regulator State will act. In this context, the first objective of this research is to analyze the legality of easements imposed by entities of the Direct Administration and Regulatory Agencies, whose execution is delegated to legal persons of private law, being those public service companies or mixed-economy societies. This examination in question the limits of servitude as a restrictive institute of property rights, observing the principles of function, supremacy of the public interests over the private ones, legality and the separation of powers. Defend the property rights like a fundamental right and your insurance as determining factor of economic development and social justice. Use the procedure in use will be the historiccomparative procedure, in order to demonstrate the legality of the public act as a maximum attempt to preserve the balance between the expansion of public services in various sectors of the economy, and the preservation of property rights, through regulation

A mediação como instrumento concretizador do direito fundamental à saúde: uma alternativa à judicialização de conflitos Natal 2013

In Brazil, the 1946 Constitution enshrined the right to health, having it defined as the possession of the best state of health that the individual can achieve. Already the Federal Constitution of 1988 lifted that right to the status of fundamental social right, which transcends the effectiveness and cure of the disease is based on the joint liability of public entities for the provision of a quality service, efficient and prioritize human dignity and comprehensive evaluation of patients. According to the World Health Organization, the definition of health, first characterized as the mere absence of disease, has become recognized as the need to search for preventive mechanisms to ensure the welfare and dignity of the population. Garantista this context, the growing seem lawsuits that deal with the implementation of public policies, especially in the area of the right to health, the omission of which the Government can result in the risk of death. Hence the concern of law professionals about whether or not the intervention of the judiciary in cases that deal with providing material benefits of health care. It claims to break the principle of separation of powers, disobedience to the principle of equality and the impossibility of judicial intervention in the formulation of public policy to try and exclude the liability of public entities. In contrast, the judiciary has repeatedly guardianships granted injunctions or merit determining the supply of materials indicated by the medical benefits that accompany the treatment of patients who resort to a remedy. In this context, mediation, object of study and resolution presented in this work, is presented as an instrument conciliator between the reserve clause and the right to financially possible existential minimum, as it seeks to serve all through rationalization of health services , avoidance of negativistic influence of the pharmaceutical industry, with prioritizing the welfare of the individual and the quality of relationships. This is alternative way to judicialization that in addition to encouraging and developing active citizen participation in public policy formulation also allows the manager to public knowledge of community needs. It is in this sense that affirms and defends the right to health is no longer the mere provision of medical care and prescription drugs, but a dialogue conscious existential minimum to guarantee a dignified life

Parâmetros de concretização judicial do direito fundamental à saúde no fornecimento de medicamentos

In Brazil, social rights have always been considered secondary legal categories, whose implementation could wait for the pending of political decisions. At the end of the Second World War, International Law emphasizes the protection of human beings, raising his dignity as a legal pillar of the legal orders and one of the main foundations of Constitutions. At the post-positivism Constitutionalism, the realization of social rights receives special attention with the assumption of supremacy and normativity of the Constitutions, while the judiciary participates in the realization of democracy, not only as applicator of laws, but also as the guardian of constitutionality of the acts and administrative omissions, creatively contributing to the constitutional achievement, filling gaps and normative state omissions. In this aspect, the supply of medicines, whose costs can not be supported by the individual, keep a close connection with the right to life, health and dignity of the human being, as the subject of numerous lawsuits directed against the Public Administration. Such phenomenon has caused intense debate regarding judicial activism and legitimacy of these decisions, particularly on the need to define what are the limits and possibilities considering the principle of separation of powers and the principle of reserve of the possible; bieng this the problematic developed in this research. Thus, this research aims to verify the legitimacy of judicial decisions that determines to the Public Administration the compulsory providing of medicine to those who can not afford the cost of their treatment, as well as, contribute to the dogmatic constructions of parameters to be observed by judicial interference. Regarding the methodology, this research has an investigative and descriptive caracter and an theoretical approach based on bibliographical data collection (judicial and doutrine decisions) that received qualitative treatment and dialectical approach. As a result, it is known that the judicial decision that determines the supply of medicines to those individuals who can not afford them with their own resources is legitimate and complies with the democratic principle, not violating the principle of separation of powers and the reserve of the possible, since the judicial decison is not stripped with an uniform and reasonable criteria, failing to contain high burden of subjectivism and witch signifies a possible exacerbation of functions by the judiciary, suffering, in this case, of requirement of legal certainty. It is concluded that the Court decision that determines the government the providing of medicine to those who can not afford the cost of treatment should be based on parameters such as: the protection of human dignity and the minimum existencial principle, the inafastable jurisdiction principle; compliance critique of the possible reserve principle; subsidiarity of judicial intervention; proportionality (quantitative and qualitative) in the content of the decision; the questioning about the reasons for non-delivery of the drug through administrative via; and, finally, the attention not to turn the judiciary into a mere production factor of the pharmaceutical industry, contributing to the cartelization of the right to health

Os limites do poder regulamentar do Conselho Nacional de Justiça no contexto do Estado constitucional brasileiro

The creation of the National Council of Justice (CNJ) through the Constitutional Amendment nº 45/2004, derived from countless gaps in Brazilian law, mainly relating to procedural delays, ineffectiveness of judicial decisions, and the lack of mechanisms that enable, effectively, disciplinary accountability of judges. The council is constitutionally designed as a member of the Judiciary, which has administrative nature and laid assignments in art. 103-B, § 4 of the current Constitution, among which is to edit regulations to instrument its performance. However, since it came into force, the amendment raised extensive discussions, linked in particular to the constitutionality of the CNJ, which was made through the direct action of unconstitutionality nº 3367, against the alleged violation of the principles of separation of powers and federative form, as well as the limits of its regulatory powers, as has fanned out in ADI nº 3823/ DF, this one dealing on Resolution nº 07, which regulates the seal of nepotism practice in the judiciary. However, despite the Supreme Court has already pronounced on the matter, recognizing the constitutionality of the council, as well as the resolution already said, the debate is in a state of latency, and may erupt again with each new manifestation of regulatory CNJ, given the lack of agreement between doctrine and jurisprudence around the constitutional treatment of its regulatory powers. In this context undeniably reflection on the definition of the regulatory power of the CNJ, presents itself as extremely relevant, and current, in particular in the ambience of the Constitutional Rule of Law, where he strives for legal certainty and consolidation of regulatory institutions. So that it could reach a satisfactory result, skilled at resolving the problems raised, the present study analyzed the reasons that gave rise to the creation of the CNJ, demonstrating their indispensability, but also sought to characterize the status of their administrative and constitutional body, noting finally, the compatibility of its regulatory activities to constitutional principles. From this perspective, we adopted the deductive method and carried out research and bibliographic nature documentary.

A democracia participativa na jurisdição constitucional brasileira: o amicus curiae enquanto mediador democrático no controle concentrado de constitucionalidade no Supremo Tribunal Federal

This master thesis aims to research the tension established between the judicial review and democratic theory which was always present in the constitutional doctrine of separation of powers. In this regard, the expansion of the Brazilian constitutional jurisdiction checked after the occurrence of the Federal Constitution of 1988 and the inertia of the Legislature in disciplinary relevant legal aspects of Brazilian society contributed to a hyperactivity of the Supreme Court. However, in a complex society of context, as is the Brazilian society, there are contained demands and political controversies that hardly would be well represented or resolved through the action of the Court of ministers at the expense of other government bodies. Among the supremacy of Parliament and the legitimacy deficit of these magistrates, is the constitutional text and the social fabric that makes this legal status of the political. Participatory democracy established by the guidelines of the Federal Constitution requires this perspective when the Supreme Court acting in place of concentrated constitutionality control. In a plural society, there is no reason to get rid of state decision moments popular participation. Lack the Supreme Court, this time, the democratizing perception that the institute brings to the interior of the Court, as state determination of space in which to come together and meet the aspirations of society and state claims. The dissertation investigates thus the possibility of amicus curiae Institute serve as a mediator of the democratic debate, to assist the Supreme Court in the preparation of the decision is, historically, that which is of greater legitimacy, from the perspective of a theory participatory democracy. Analyzes, likewise, the unfolding of abstract judicial review in the context of Brazilian law. Proposes, incidentally, a rereading of the separation of powers, with the call for the Judiciary be careful not to become the protagonist of national political decisions. It maintains, finally, that procedural opening the interpreters of the constitution, through the amicus curiae Institute, shows up as able to decrease the legitimacy deficit in the performance of the Brazilian Supreme Court.

Plano de desenvolvimento sustentável e articulação de políticas públicas: o controle de políticas ambientais pelo poder judiciário

The right to the preservation of a healthy environment is perceived as a Fundamental Right, inserted in the National Constitution and referring to present and future generations. The preservation of the environment is directly connected to the right to Health and Human Dignity and, therefore, must be treated as a personal right, unavailable, claiming for a positive response from the Brazilian State, through the development of related public policies, control of potentially harmful economic activities, with special focus on the principles of precaution and solidarity. The Brazilian judiciary must thus be attentive to the guardianship of the Fundamental Right. The judiciary control over the execution of public policies is based on obeying the principle of the separation, independence and harmony between the Powers, however it should never deviate from the constitutional obligation of caring for the effectivation of the rights and guarantees within the Magna Carta. In the balance between the principle of human dignity, from which springs the right to a healthy environment and the principle of separation of powers, the former should prevail, maintaining the latter to a core minimum.