Should I go to court?: an assessment of the role of the Judiciary in disputes between cattle raisers and meatpackers in Brazil

The main objective of this perspective paper is to analyze the role of the judiciary in resolving conflicts between cattle raisers and meatpacking firms in Brazil. Looking at the transaction for the acquisition of cattle for slaughter in the state of Mato Grosso do Sul (the central-western region of Brazil), the analysis encompasses three steps. First, the authors describe the transaction pattern between cattle raisers and meatpacking firms, identifying a guarantee vacuum within the supply chain. Secondly, the authors present evidence that the guarantee vacuum may give rise to legal conflicts of non-payment, which are indeed prevalent in disputes that reach the courts. Finally, the role of the judiciary in resolving these conflicts is investigated. Results suggest that, on average, producers have little confidence in the legal system, indicating the potential function that informal mechanisms may play in the supply chain. The paper concludes by suggesting some implications for public and private strategies.

Governança judicial: proposta de modelo teórico-metodológico

Governança judicial é um conceito multifacetado, pouco explorado na literatura, e são raros os estudos desse tema com dados empíricos que analisem as variáveis que o influenciam. Este artigo tem como objetivo propor um modelo teórico-metodológico de governança judicial, cuja aplicação futura permita a coleta de dados para descrever e avaliar a validade da relação entre os construtos e variáveis que o compõem em cada contexto. Premissas da teoria da agência e da teoria de custos de transação, dirigidas originalmente para empresas, foram transpostas para elaboração do modelo. Os procedimentos de coleta de dados incluíram análise documental e realização de 10 entrevistas. O modelo proposto inclui a sistematização de sete construtos teóricos - accountability; acessibilidade; independência; recursos e estrutura; práticas de governança; ambiente institucional; desempenho - e variáveis componentes desses construtos.

Análise técnica para a tomada de decisão do fornecimento de medicamentos pela via judicial

OBJETIVO: Analisar a solicitação judicial de medicamentos previstos nos componentes da assistência farmacêutica no Sistema Único de Saúde. MÉTODOS: Foram analisados 81 processos judiciais para fornecimento de medicamentos no Estado de São Paulo, entre 2005 e 2009. As informações dos processos foram obtidas do Tribunal de Justiça do Estado de São Paulo. Portarias que regulamentam a assistência farmacêutica foram consultadas para identificar a solicitação judicial de medicamentos incorporados pelo Sistema Único de Saúde. Para análise do nível de evidência dos medicamentos nas indicações clínicas referidas, foi consultada a base de dados Thomson Micromedex®. RESULTADOS: O número de medicamentos solicitados em cada processo variou entre um e sete itens, nos quais foram identificados 77 fármacos diferentes. Dos medicamentos solicitados, 14,3% deveriam estar disponíveis na atenção básica do Sistema Único de Saúde, 19,5% no componente de medicamentos de dispensação excepcional e 66,2% não pertenciam a nenhuma lista oficial. Medicamentos do componente de dispensação excepcional apresentaram melhor evidência clínica quando indicados no tratamento de doenças cobertas pelos Protocolos Clínicos e Diretrizes Terapêuticas do Ministério da Saúde. CONCLUSÕES: A via judicial tem sido utilizada para garantir o acesso a medicamentos cujo fornecimento está previsto no Sistema Único de Saúde e para solicitar aqueles não incorporados por ele. A avaliação do nível de evidência reforça a necessidade de análise técnica para a tomada de decisão do fornecimento de medicamentos pela via judicial.

Legal and health variations in drug litigation injunctions granted in Minas Gerais

OBJECTIVE To investigate the factors related to the granting of preliminary court orders [injunctions] in drug litigations. METHODS A retrospective descriptive study of drug lawsuits in the State of Minas Gerais, Southeastern Brazil, was conducted from October 1999 to 2009. The database consists of 6,112 lawsuits, out of which 6,044 had motions for injunctions and 5,167 included the requisition of drugs. Those with more than one beneficiary were excluded, which totaled 5,072 examined suits. The variables for complete, partial, and suppressed motions were treated as dependent and assessed in relation to those that were independent – lawsuits (year, type, legal representation, defendant, court in which it was filed, adjudication time), drugs (level five of the anatomical therapeutic chemical classification), and diseases (chapter of the International Classification of Diseases). Statistical analyses were performed using the Chi-square test. RESULTS Out of the 5,072 lawsuits with injunctions, 4,184 (82.5%) had the injunctions granted. Granting varied from 95.8% of the total lawsuits in 2004 to 76.9% in 2008. Where there was legal representation, granting exceeded 80.0% and in lawsuits without representation, it did not exceed 66.9%. In public civil actions (89.1%), granting was higher relative to ordinary lawsuits (82.8%) and injunctions (80.1%). Federal courts granted only 68.6% of the injunctions, while the state courts granted 84.8%. Diseases of the digestive system and neoplasms received up to 87.0% in granting, while diseases of the nervous system, mental and behavioral disorders, and diseases of the skin and subcutaneous tissue received granting below 78.6% and showed a high proportion of suspended injunctions (10.9%). Injunctions involving paroxetine, somatropin, and ferrous sulfate drugs were all granted, while less than 54.0% of those involving escitalopram, sodium diclofenac, and nortriptyline were granted. CONCLUSIONS There are significant differences in the granting of injunctions, depending on the procedural and clinical variances. Important trends in the pattern of judicial action were observed, particularly, in the reduced granting [of injunctions] over the period.

Citizens against the State: the riddle of high impact, low functionality courts in Brazil

The Brazilian federal judiciary offers an interesting riddle to scholars of judicial politics and policy change. While the courts have played a major policy role over the past two decades, constraining and altering federal policy across a range of subjects, the court system has simultaneously been labeled "dysfunctional." This paper investigates this riddle: a system plagued by major systemic flaws in its day-to-day operations, which nonetheless still manages to exert a powerful influence on public policy in Brazil. I adopt a new institutional perspective, focusing on how the institutional and normative structure within which judges and other legal actors operate affects policy outcomes.