A corte suprema e o seu papel atual perante a sociedade: Judicialização e ativismo judicial, meios adequados?

The present article proposes an analysis of the current performance of the Federal Supreme Court before the society. The Court's action, as well as countermajority, became also representative, in meeting the social demands not satisfied by those elected through a majority system. The "popu...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores: Julias, Lívia Pacheco de Freitas, Leão Júnior, Teófilo Marcelo de Arêa
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión publicada
Fecha de publicación:2019
País:Brasil
Institución:Instituto de Direito Constitucional e Cidadania (IDCC)
Repositorio:Revista do Instituto de Direito Constitucional e Cidadania (Online)
Idioma:portugués
OAI Identifier:oai:ojs2.revistadoidcc.com.br:article/12
Acceso en línea:https://revistadoidcc.com.br/index.php/revista/article/view/12
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Supremo Tribunal Federal
Papel Contramajoritário e Papel Representativo
Democracia
Judicialização
Ativismo Judicial
Federal Court of Justice
Countermajority Paper and Representative Pape
Democracy
Judicialization
Judicial Activism
Descripción
Sumario:The present article proposes an analysis of the current performance of the Federal Supreme Court before the society. The Court's action, as well as countermajority, became also representative, in meeting the social demands not satisfied by those elected through a majority system. The "populism" brought to the Judiciary must be observed so that there is no deviation, and decisions must always be based on the balance, observance of the observance of fundamental rights, norms, values and constitutional principles, always aiming at social welfare. Through the search for the effectiveness of the rights, the number of lawsuits has increased considerably, and the Judiciary, called to manifest itself, in order to guarantee the rights provided for in the laws, gives the final say on political, social, economic or moral issues. , thus, the judicialization. On the other hand, when his role is more proactive and expansive in interpreting the Constitution, he does so through judicial activism, which is not confused.From this point of view, the aim is to demonstrate the importance of judicialization and judicial activism and the balance that must always be observed in order for the State to remain democratic, that is, non-elected judges enforce the laws, which were elaborated by the representatives of the people, those who are elected. Therefore, whenever the Judiciary is called to manifest it must do so in order to ensure the good of all, respecting the will of the majority, which is verified through democracy.