Uma análise do fenômeno “ativismo judicial”: a eficiência do sistema de freios e contrapesos na interferência do poder judiciário no poder executivo na concretização de direitos públicos subjetivos

Abstract

This paper aims to analyze the phenomenon of judicial activism in Brazil, focusing on the efficiency of the system of checks and balances and the Judiciary's interference in public health policies. The study is justified by the increasing judicialization of social demands, especially in the health sector, and by judicial decisions that directly impact the allocation of public resources and management, promoting fundamental rights such as the right to health, as established in the Federal Constitution. The academic relevance of the study lies in the analysis of the limits and implications of judicial activism and the discussion on the separation of powers, highlighting the importance of understanding the Judiciary's role in the context of public policies. The specific objectives include reviewing the literature on the separation of powers and the system of checks and balances in Brazil, investigating the concept of judicial activism and its theoretical and practical implications, assessing the effectiveness of judicial decisions in realizing fundamental health rights, and examining the impact of these decisions on public resource management and long-term policy formulation. The methodology adopts a mixed approach, with the collection of secondary data, such as jurisprudence, academic articles, and government reports. The study focuses on the last two decades, a period during which judicial activism and the judicialization of health have intensified in Brazil. The analysis seeks to understand the efficiency of the system of checks and balances and the Judiciary's interference in public policies, particularly regarding resource allocation and the sustainability of the health system. The conclusions point out that judicial activism has significantly impacted health management, favoring individual demands and creating budgetary imbalances. Although the Judiciary ensures access to fundamental rights, its intervention compromises governance, leading to financial challenges and disorganization of the Unified Health System