O populismo judicial no STF como fenômeno transgressor ao princípio da razoável duração ao processo.

Abstract

The process, generally, is guided by principles that have constitutional basis, and were erected by the doctrine neoconstitutionalism the category of fundamental guarantees, should be respected and applied directly by law operators in order to promotepeaceful coexistence among individuals and social welfare. In Brazil has been entrusted to the Supreme Court the task of ensuring the Constitution, and to make their devices are respected and properly applied. The assigned this function is called "political function" of the Supreme Court, assigned to the Supreme, mainly due to its neutrality and being given to the causes of minorities, applying the law and giving precedence determines what the Constitution with dignity and fairness. But some are figuring regrettable episodes in the history of this Court, in which subjectivity and personhood of ministers have shown a tendency on their partexhibitionist, ending full of populist attitudes, once decisions have been made in an attempt toanswer the public outcry, and political character, so much has been triggering the so-called judicial populism asthe politicization of the judiciary. Such conduct violates both the ministers' constitutional principles guiding the processand the very doctrine preached by the STF, running away, so its function is to safeguard institutional precipua that the Federal Constitution, and giving a bias in face of crisis ibstitucional attitudes of its members. The methodology used in this study was to search bibliographic, and used the exegetical method of legal, the interpretation of legal and doctrinal, aiming to analyze the peformace of the ministers the Supreme Court, and how this has influenced the populist trial processes.