Alteração do número de ministros da suprema corte: uma análise em perspectiva comparada com outros países.

Abstract

The formation of the Supreme Court of Justice in Brazil, initially faced several difficulties over the years that resulted in several changes in the number of members that constituted the Supreme Court. Seeking to achieve a balance between powers, the Federal Constitution of 1988 adopted the Theory of Separation of Powers in order to assign prevalence to the three powers, making sure that no power overlaps the other. Despite this, the current composition of the Supreme Court has been the subject of debates that propose the issue of changing the number of justices as a hypothesis for reforming the STF, expanding the Court's justices from 11 to 15, as well as, there are already bills that are being processed in Congress in this regard. Considering that the autonomy of the Supreme Court in Brazil had its history marked by the arbitrariness of the Executive Branch, which on several occasions dared to interfere in the number of ministers to favor the perpetuation of authoritarian regimes in power, this monograph seeks to analyze what would be the ideal number of members to compose the Supreme Court, considering the historical moments in which this idea was practiced in order to unravel, if a change in the number of Justices of the STF, considering the Brazilian political, administrative and legal situation, could or could not, cause the rupture of the constitutional order. To carry out the analysis, comparative and historical procedure methods and the deductive approach method were used, in addition to indirect bibliographic and documentary research techniques. The present research used the qualitative method, aiming to demonstrate, through evidence and information, the case in depth, analyzing the context of the change in the number of Justices of the Supreme Court in a broad way. Through the analysis, it was found that the countries that adopted the idea of changing the number of Justices of the Supreme Court, either for more or for less, experienced authoritarian regimes and this measure was used to favor heads of the Executive Branch to maintain undemocratic regimes, in addition to In addition, it was found that this discussion about changing the number of ministers is something that has been gaining visibility in the Brazilian political context. Regarding the quantitative data collected, it was demonstrated that there is no exact number to compose the Supreme Court, because according to the countries presented in the research there are different forms of organization and the number varies from one country to another, in addition, the Supreme Court has more or fewer ministers does not mean that it will be efficient, but the stability in the number proves to be efficient. After the analysis, it is concluded that proposals to change the number of Justices of the Supreme Court can easily break the current constitutional democratic order, whereas in the past, this change for more or less was never beneficial for democracy. In this sense, it is necessary that the issue of changing the number of Justices of the Supreme Court be studied and disseminated by academic research for the legal and political community, and for society in general, reinforcing the constitutional order.