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

Saída compulsória do estrangeiro do território nacional à luz dos direitos humanos: análise de casos

This paper aims to review traditional concepts inherent to the general theory of the state and human rights, relating to the legal situation of foreign, understood as the subject of rights, especially when the is case of compulsory legal imposition of exit from national territory. After the serious violations during the Second World War and the importance acquired by the International Law of Human Rights, values as dignity, justice and equality are enshrined in the legal system and its respect required beyond the boundaries of any country. The creation of an international community, which is governed by rules that its members are subordinated, without distinction, as well as state - based on volunteerism, become inspired by one principled nature of these new concepts required of Global Society, as well as the adoption, influenced by neoconstitutionalism, to the model of State Constitutional rule of law, are opposed to the idea of state sovereignty connected to a superiority, absolute and unlimited power which recognizes no other above it, not even the basic principles or axioms that must govern the relationships internally. So looks for a concept of state that includes all the requirements of a democratic society, that have the people as the power holder, understanding that state element has undergone a relativization, because had to adapt to the contemporary values applicable to the individual, inserting in its concept, the indispensable obligation to protect the inalienable rights of citizens, regardless of with whom he have legal and political bond of nationality. It happens that, to consecrate these privileges to individuals, which, because they contain reference to values with supranational characteristics, are very abstract and are in constant collision course with internal rules, making it difficult to reconcile, it will use hermeneutics of human rights, due mainly to international courts, correlated with constitutional exegesis, in particular, legal principiologia, using, among others, the principles of reasonableness and proportionality, the systematic interpretation of the Constitution and international legal standards. Thus, it seek to enshrine the common foundation of all law , the link between the systems, namely, the dignity of human beings. Finally, it will see if Brazilian jurisdiction, through case studies, is tuned in line with these new paradigms, and in line with the International Bill of Human Rights, the Federal Constitution, the values and principles she hired