Ativismo judicial e materialização das políticas públicas infanto-juvenis na constituição da república: Fixação de planos ideais de atuação para os atores do Sistema de Garantia de Direitos (SGD)

The research arose from the necessity of showing ways to be followed by the actors of the System Guaranteeing Rights of the Child and Adolescent (SGD), regarding the implementation of rights for young people, because the legislation in force in Brazil is currently considered a model around the world and, paradoxically, the fundamental rights of children and adolescents are not met, even with the constitutionally guaranteed priority. Thus, the study investigates the fundamentality rights for young people, enshrined in the Constitution of the Republic, as well as the ways of effectiveness of these rights through the actions of actors of the System Guaranteeing Rights, especially the judiciary. Focusing realized, studying theories of fundamental rights, especially Structuring a Theory of Law (Strukturiende Rechtslehre), Friedrich Müller, who emphasizes the need for analysis of social reality in the application of the rule of law. Study also the public budget and public policies concerning children and adolescents, with emphasis on preparation of budget laws and the process of discussion, deliberation, choice and implementation of public policies for children and teenagers. It then presents the typical functions of the members of System Guaranteeing Rights, as well as prepare a plan for optimum performance for each of the actors, with emphasis on analysis of the implementation of public policies at the municipal level. Finally, it analyzes the theory of separation of three powers, and discusses the positive and negative factors for judicial intervention, concluding that the Courts can consider the action activist, from finding the omission of the Executive and legislative branches, as regards the implementation of the rights of children and adolescents, as well as the rights of children and young people are not realized in most cases, due to the omission of actors of the System Guaranteeing Rights

Intervenção judicial nas sociedades limitadas em face da liberdade de iniciativa

The judicial intervention in limited liability company goes through several issues of legislative and hermeneutics origin, based considerably on the small importance given to freedom of economic initiative by the participants in the process of formation and application of the law. In addition, Brazilian law, due to incompleteness, inconsistency or lack of valid grounds, put the judge in a procedural delicate situation. Being forced to judge, the judiciary faces severe uncomfortable interpretive situations, of which derive solutions of dubious constitutionality and affecting, significantly, the dynamics of business activity. In this context, and considering the limited liability company as an expression of free enterprise, corresponding to a lawful association of people in order to undertake economically, in exercise of his freedom of contracting and professional action, intended to be offered safe parameters of constitutionality for judicial intervention in limited liability company in the hypothesis of (i) transfer of corporate shares, (ii) attachment of corporate shares, (iii) dismissal of directors, (iv) appointment of judicial stakeholders, (v) exclusion of shareholders and (vi ) trespass. The hypothetical-deductive approach was adopted, building hypotheses to overcome the gaps and unconstitutionality of the law and subjecting them to tests, reviews, and comparisons with hypothetical facts and case law in order to determine the constitutional validity of the proposed solutions. The procedure aimed to reconcile the historical, comparative, dialectical and scientific methods. The roots of temporal institutes were researched as well as current solutions provided by national and compared law. From problematizations point, addressed by the constitutional interpretation of the law and jurisprudence, responses that bring out the unconstitutionality of certain conceptions were headed

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

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