ARAUJO, R. A.; http://lattes.cnpq.br/5674974392357582; ARAUJO, Rodrigo Alves de.
Resumen:
The today‟s Judiciary , as well as power in recent years has acted as protagonist in
the Brazilian institutional life, due to the big problem of constitutional dogmatic and
modern constitutionalism: the phenomenon called syndrome ineffectiveness of
constitutional norms. Therefore, the judiciary has been raised to implement and give
effect to the constitutional rules of fundamental right content, in particular social rights
prestacional size, so those standards do not become inconsequential constitutional
promises. Specifically the social health right, the Brazilian state lives a political chaos
and total mismanagement, with a lack of medicines, medical and health
professionals, efficient and appropriate treatments, lack of beds, among others. All of
these are objections to the realization of the constitutional right to health enjoyed by
the citizens, and the right to life itself. In this environment, in the case of a
constitutionally guaranteed right, the judiciary is caused to intervene by
determinations to the Government to provide health benefits in a range of situations
in order to fulfill the constitutional promise to preserve health, life and dignity of
individuals. These issues have raised the debate on the limits of judicial decisions
intervening in public health policies. And so, the question is: what are the parameters
to be observed by judges when deciding lawsuits that require the condemnation of
the government to provide health benefits materials? As a hypothesis for questioning,
we have the dogmatic construction parameters so that the judges act on health
demands will provide legal certainty to all and full legitimacy judgments. Thus, this
research aims to verify the legitimacy of judicial intervention in the decisions that
determine the Government to providing health benefits, as well as examine the
doctrinal and jurisprudential construction of the parameters to be observed by the
courts and judges in the implementation of the right to Cheers. The study adopts the
approach of the deductive method, the methodology follows the qualitative model,
and as a research technique used to literature, through legislative, doctrinal and
jurisprudential analysis. As a result, it follows that the court decision determining the
Government the supply of health services must respect and take as parameters: the
dignity of the human person; the principles of inafastabilidade jurisdiction, subsidiarity
and proportionality; the limits established by the Supreme Court in the trial of STA nº
175