Submitted by FERNANDA DE CASTRO NAKAMURA null (jkr.nanda@hotmail.com) on 2017-03-06T18:10:38Z No. of bitstreams: 1 FERNANDA DISSERTAÇÃO.pdf: 896591 bytes, checksum: c674cad38f560727036c1313e3d8f742 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by LUIZA DE MENEZES ROMANETTO (luizamenezes@reitoria.unesp.br) on 2017-03-10T16:28:16Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 nakamura_fc_me_fran.pdf: 896591 bytes, checksum: c674cad38f560727036c1313e3d8f742 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-03-10T16:28:16Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 nakamura_fc_me_fran.pdf: 896591 bytes, checksum: c674cad38f560727036c1313e3d8f742 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-02-16 / Este trabalho tem como foco a análise da atuação do Ministério Público no âmbito do processo de judicialização da saúde na região de Ribeirão Preto. A pesquisa toma como referência o tema da Repercussão Geral nº262 no STF, que trata sobre a propositura de ações civis públicas em benefício de um grupo de pessoas com determinadas doenças. O objetivo é, portanto, a análise da dinâmica da judicialização da saúde por meio da atuação do Ministério Público do Estado de São Paulo, do processo de expansão da Instituição e da sua inserção na esfera da política pública de fornecimento gratuito de medicamentos. Para tanto, a sua realização se deu mediante levantamento bibliográfico, com a utilização de fontes que tratam sobre temas relacionados à judicialização da saúde e à atuação do Poder Judiciário e Instituições paralelas nas políticas públicas. Do mesmo modo, foi realizada uma investigação sobre os pedidos realizados nas ações civis públicas visando o fornecimento de medicamentos propostas pelo Ministério Público de São Paulo nos anos de 2010 e 2011 na região de Ribeirão Preto. A pesquisa teve, ainda, como papel complementar a análise e comparação da Relação Nacional de Medicamentos Essenciais e da Lista de Medicamentos Essenciais do Estado de São Paulo, com os dados coletados nas ações civis públicas, o que permitiu aferir que a judicialização influencia de maneira virtual na reorganização das listas de medicamentos federal e estadual dos anos posteriores aos do recorte temporal da pesquisa. Em conclusão, chegou-se à delimitação de alguns parâmetros que se perfazem na adoção de critérios que atendam as necessidades regionais, por meio de um estudo epidemiológico a ser feito pelo Poder Público, bem como, da eventual elaboração de uma política específica para os insumos, com a utilização dos dados obtidos pela judicialização; o que, consequentemente, acarretaria em uma economia de recursos materiais e institucionais tanto para o Poder Judiciário e Ministério Público como para os entes federativos, por conta da readequação do sistema de fornecimento gratuito de medicamentos. / This work focuses on the analysis of the role of the Public Prosecutor within the process of judicialisation of health in the region of Ribeirão Preto. The research take as reference the issue of the general repercussion nº262 on Brazilian´s Supreme Court, which deals on the filing of public civil actions on behalf of a group of people with certain diseases. The objective is, therefore, the analysis of the dynamics of the judicialisation of health through the perfomance of the São Paulo State Prosecutor's Office, the expansion process of the Institution and its insertion in the sphere of the public policies of free supply of medicines. For this purpose, its realization took place through bibliographical research, with the use of sources that deal on issues related to health litigation and the role of the Judiciary and parallel institutions in public policies. In the same way, it was performed a research on the requests made in public civil actions aiming at the provision of drugs proposed by the São Paulo State Prosecutor's Office in 2010 and 2011 in the region of Ribeirão Preto. The research had as additional role the analysis and comparison of the National List of the Essential Drugs and the list of essential medicines of the State of São Paulo, with data collected in the public civil actions, which has allowed the measurement, in a virtual way, of the judicialisation influences in the reorganization of the lists of medicines, in federal and state governments, of the later years of the temporal cut of the search. In conclusion, some parameters, that are related to the adoption of criteria that meet regional needs, through an epidemiological study to be done by Public Power, as well as, the eventual elaboration of a specific policy for inputs, with the use of the data obtained by judicialisation, were delimited; which, consequently, could result in a saving of material and institutional resources, for the Judiciary Branch, Public Prosecution, and federal entities, because of the revision of the system of free supply of medicines.

The central argument of this work is that the level of aggression of judges sitting in vulnerable courts is a function of their attempt to protect the institutional security of such courts. I argue that in contexts characterised by a lack of a culture of judicial independence, by high levels of judicial delegitimisation, and a high level of public visibility of judicial affairs, judges will attempt to simultaneously construct public support and avoid political conflicts with the Government. As a result, judicial decisions are driven by judges’ calculations of both the public’s reaction and the Government’s reaction to their rulings. I claim the level of aggression of judges’ interventions will increase when the Government's tolerance to decisions against its preferences was is higher and the public appears to be more supportive. I empirically test this theory using the case of Argentine Supreme Court Justices between July 2004 and September 2010. The findings confirm the theoretical expectations according to which judges are simultaneously concerned with the construction of public support and the avoidance of conflicts with the Government. In addition, my study shows three relevant patterns in terms of judicial behaviour. First, the Justices increased their level of aggression by using different modes of involvement when the public appeared to be more supportive and the Government’s tolerance higher during the period under study. Second, the decreased level of aggression occurred by altering the features of the same remedy in response to the political conditions in which decisions were issued. Third, existing legal constraints prevented Justices from being more aggressive.

Purpose: The paper’s purpose is to critically discuss how a government institution, the Migration Court in Stockholm, interprets the law and how this interpretation reflects value choices and value priorities.  Methodology/Design: The present paper employs qualitative research methods focusing on discursive social psychology and the interpretative repertoire of “effortfulness”.  Results/Findings: This paper suggests that the definition of values as behaviour predictors helps us understand how state institutions and, in the present study, the Migration Court in Stockholm can express “other-oriented” values.  Value/Originality: The paper’s socio-legal analysis of the humanitarian sector highlights the emergence of the judiciary system as a new humanitarian actor.

Submitted by Irene Nascimento (irene.kessia@ufpe.br) on 2016-06-27T18:02:37Z No. of bitstreams: 2 license_rdf: 1232 bytes, checksum: 66e71c371cc565284e70f40736c94386 (MD5) DISSERTAÇÃO LÍVIA 15.02.16.pdf: 1521724 bytes, checksum: 8bf247bc14accb37abed30b55bfca71f (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-06-27T18:02:37Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 license_rdf: 1232 bytes, checksum: 66e71c371cc565284e70f40736c94386 (MD5) DISSERTAÇÃO LÍVIA 15.02.16.pdf: 1521724 bytes, checksum: 8bf247bc14accb37abed30b55bfca71f (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-02-02 / CAPES / Reconhecendo a importância do poder judiciário como ferramenta à efetividade dos direitos sociais, dentre os quais estão os direitos humanos, e em especial o direito à saúde, o presente trabalho buscou apresentar um estudo do processo de judicialização da saúde no estado de Pernambuco relacionado aos efeitos direitos e indiretos da Audiência Pública n° 4 do Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF), ou seja, entre os anos de 2009 a 2014, inclusive no que tange aos medicamentos sem registro na Anvisa e de uso fora da bula (off-label). O objetivo, ao se utilizar da quantificação a partir da probabilidade na análise das decisões judiciais, com obtenção de resultados aproximados e não uma verdade absoluta, permite visualizar uma tendência e discutir, a partir de dados da realidade, os vários argumentos e problemáticas acerca do fornecimento de medicamento por via judicial. Especificamente, buscamos analisar os principais argumentos presentes no debate doutrinário e jurisprudencial acerca da efetividade da saúde por via judicial. São eles: a (in)eficiência das políticas públicas vigentes no país; os limites operacionais do Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS); o processo de recepção de novas tecnologias perante a efetividade operacional do SUS; a política nacional de medicamentos; o caso dos tratamentos sem registro na Anvisa e de uso fora da bula (off-label); e a legitimidade do poder judiciário como ferramenta de efetividade do direito à saúde. Em seguida, buscamos verificar os núcleos de assessoria técnica, a exemplo dos Núcleos de Apoio Técnico em Saúde e dos Núcleos de Ações Judiciais, enquanto ferramentas de mitigação dos efeitos negativos da judicialização da saúde a partir da análise da funcionalidade institucional, não só a partir de concepções teóricas, mas, no caso de Pernambuco, a partir do tratamento quantitativo dos dados da judicialização no estado. Por fim, a partir de dados que se destacaram na realização do estudo quantitativo, nos propomos, numa perspectiva qualitativa e com dimensão exploratória, confrontar as estratégias argumentativas utilizadas pelos magistrados de Pernambuco, quando em situações análogas, proferiram sentenças em sentidos antagônicos, ora deferindo e ora indeferindo o fornecimento de medicamentos sem registro na Anvisa. Contatou-se a necessidade de maior conscientização acerca da problemática da judicialização da saúde a partir da atuação integrada entre as esferas de poder público e da sociedade civil; maior exigência acerca do corpo probatório que individualiza a condição do paciente e a real urgência dos casos; maior especialização das ferramentas de monitoramento e controle das demandas judiciais referentes ao direito à saúde; o fortalecimento e a valorização dos órgãos de apoio técnico aos magistrados e aos demais agentes envolvidos, com atuação administrativa e judiciária, objetivando: ao aumento das soluções administrativas; a indicação acerca da existência de tratamentos substituíveis com mesma eficácia, segurança e qualidade; o combate à utilização do judiciário como veículo de promoção para os laboratórios farmacêuticos; a atualização e qualidade da lista de medicamentos; a preservação do Sistema Único de Saúde; bem como, do combate à vulnerabilidade do judiciário acerca do proferimento de decisões frágeis e perigosas através do crescimento da qualidade técnica das decisões judicias. / Recognizing the importance of the judiciary as a tool to the effectiveness of social rights, among which are human rights, and in particular the right to health, this paper aimed to present a study of the process of judicialisation of the health in the state of Pernambuco related to the direct and indirect effects o the Public Hearing No. 4 of the Federal Supreme Court (STF), in other words, between the years 2009 to 2014, including those related to drugs without registration in Anvisa and of off-label use. The goal, when using the quantification from the probability in the the analysis of judgments, as a way of obtaining similar results and not an absolute truth, displays a trend and discuss, from the reality data, the various arguments and problems brought about providing medication through judicial process. Specifically, we analyze the main keyword present in the doctrinal and jurisprudential debate about the effectiveness of health through the courts. They are: the (in) effectiveness of current public policies in the country; the operational limits of the Unified Health System (SUS); the process of receiving new technology before the operating effectiveness of the SUS; the national drug policy; the case of the treatments without registration at Anvisa and of off-label use; and the legitimacy of the judiciary as effective tool of the right to health. After that, we verified the technical advisory centers, like the Centers of Technical Support in Health and Centers of Lawsuits – as tools of mitigation of the negative effects of judicialisation of health from the analysis of institutional functionality, not only from theoretical concepts, but in the case of Pernambuco, from the quantitative treatment of the data of judicialisation in the state. Finally, from data that have excelled in making the quantitative study, we propose, in a qualitative perspective and with exploratory dimension, confront the argumentative strategies used by magistrates of Pernambuco, when in similar situations, sentenced in antagonistic sense, sometimes deferring and in other times rejecting the supply of medicines which are not registered in Anvisa. We noticed the need for greater awareness of the health judicialisation of issues from the integrated action between the spheres of government and civil society; greater demand regarding the probative body which individualizes the patient's condition and the real urgency of the cases; greater specialization of monitoring and control tools of judicial processes relating to the right to health; the strengthening and enhancement of technical support bodies to the magistrates and other officials involved, with administrative and judicial actions, aiming at: the increase in administrative solutions; the indication of the existence of replaceable treatments with the same efficacy, safety and quality; the combat for the use of the judiciary as a promotional vehicle for pharmaceutical companies; the upgrade and quality of the drug list; the preservation of the Unified Health System; as well as the fight against the vulnerability of the judiciary regarding the fragile and dangerous decisions utterance through the growing of the the technical quality of judicial decisions.

A crise das figuras de autoridade próprias da sociedade tradicional faz surgir outras figuras sociais de autoridade que vêm preencher o espaço deixado vago. Nesta pesquisa é proposto que o delegado de polícia é uma dessas novas figuras debruçando-se sobre sua intervenção nos casos de violência doméstica contra a mulher. É discutido sobre quais são essas novas atribuições apresentadas ao delegado e posto que tal fato é trazido e fundamentado pelo fenômeno sociológico da jurisdicionalização das demandas sociais. Também se analisa o movimento que tende a institucionalizar esses novos desafios nas funções do delegado e sobre o ponto de visão dele acerca da jurisdicionalização das demandas sociais. Por fim, faz algumas considerações sobre quais são as tendências a partir do que foi exposto. / The crisis of authority felt by traditional authority beholders, from traditional society, gives rise to other social figures of authority that come on stage to fulfill the space left vacant. This article suggests that the police chief officer is invited to perform a new role in society as one of these new figures bending his intervention in cases of domestic violence against women. It argues over what are these new powers assigned to the police chief officer, and advances a proposition that this occurs as a consequence of the increased judicialisation of social demands as a sociological phenomenon. It also examines the social trend which sets forth pressures for institutionalizing these new challenges as regular functions of the police chief officer and about the view of the police chief officer about the judicialisation of social demands. Finally, it draws some considerations about future tendencies about the sociological phenomenon exposed.

A crise das figuras de autoridade próprias da sociedade tradicional faz surgir outras figuras sociais de autoridade que vêm preencher o espaço deixado vago. Nesta pesquisa é proposto que o delegado de polícia é uma dessas novas figuras debruçando-se sobre sua intervenção nos casos de violência doméstica contra a mulher. É discutido sobre quais são essas novas atribuições apresentadas ao delegado e posto que tal fato é trazido e fundamentado pelo fenômeno sociológico da jurisdicionalização das demandas sociais. Também se analisa o movimento que tende a institucionalizar esses novos desafios nas funções do delegado e sobre o ponto de visão dele acerca da jurisdicionalização das demandas sociais. Por fim, faz algumas considerações sobre quais são as tendências a partir do que foi exposto. / The crisis of authority felt by traditional authority beholders, from traditional society, gives rise to other social figures of authority that come on stage to fulfill the space left vacant. This article suggests that the police chief officer is invited to perform a new role in society as one of these new figures bending his intervention in cases of domestic violence against women. It argues over what are these new powers assigned to the police chief officer, and advances a proposition that this occurs as a consequence of the increased judicialisation of social demands as a sociological phenomenon. It also examines the social trend which sets forth pressures for institutionalizing these new challenges as regular functions of the police chief officer and about the view of the police chief officer about the judicialisation of social demands. Finally, it draws some considerations about future tendencies about the sociological phenomenon exposed.

A crise das figuras de autoridade próprias da sociedade tradicional faz surgir outras figuras sociais de autoridade que vêm preencher o espaço deixado vago. Nesta pesquisa é proposto que o delegado de polícia é uma dessas novas figuras debruçando-se sobre sua intervenção nos casos de violência doméstica contra a mulher. É discutido sobre quais são essas novas atribuições apresentadas ao delegado e posto que tal fato é trazido e fundamentado pelo fenômeno sociológico da jurisdicionalização das demandas sociais. Também se analisa o movimento que tende a institucionalizar esses novos desafios nas funções do delegado e sobre o ponto de visão dele acerca da jurisdicionalização das demandas sociais. Por fim, faz algumas considerações sobre quais são as tendências a partir do que foi exposto. / The crisis of authority felt by traditional authority beholders, from traditional society, gives rise to other social figures of authority that come on stage to fulfill the space left vacant. This article suggests that the police chief officer is invited to perform a new role in society as one of these new figures bending his intervention in cases of domestic violence against women. It argues over what are these new powers assigned to the police chief officer, and advances a proposition that this occurs as a consequence of the increased judicialisation of social demands as a sociological phenomenon. It also examines the social trend which sets forth pressures for institutionalizing these new challenges as regular functions of the police chief officer and about the view of the police chief officer about the judicialisation of social demands. Finally, it draws some considerations about future tendencies about the sociological phenomenon exposed.

In the period from 2009-2020, South Africa has witnessed the rise of "lawfare". Lawfare is understood as the judicialisation of politics - turning to the courts and the use of the law to resolve broadly political matters. This thesis explores the unfolding implications of the judicialisation of politics for judicial legitimacy. In the displacement of the political into the judicial the reach of the courts is expanded and the legitimacy of courts engaging in a "political" role is questioned. Situated in the field of judicial-political dynamics, the interplay between law and politics is observed through the adoption of a historical-institutionalist model. This thesis identifies the causes of the judicialisation of politics and then traces its consequences for broader constitutional stability and the impact on the judicial institution. Guidelines for the Court to navigate lawfare to achieve institutional resilience and maintain judicial legitimacy are then proposed. Judicialisation of politics is caused primarily through the failures of the other branches of government to fulfil their assigned constitutional role. Institutional imbalance in a dominant party democracy means that opposition parties and civil society organisations are left with little recourse but to appeal to the Court to be a constitutional bulwark. The Court is then compelled to step into the breach and fill the accountability vacuum. In identifying the causes of judicialisation, a fuller understanding of Lawfare emerges, expanding current scholarship beyond its traditionally abusive characterisation. It posits a duality to Lawfare in that it can be both an abuse of law and a last line of defence. Through observing the judicial political interactions, a trajectory from the judicialisation of politics to the politicisation of law is mapped. The politicisation of law sees political power refocused on the courts, exposing them to political aggression and attack by the dominant party. The judicialisation of politics that seeks accountability from recalcitrant political actors asks much of the courts, at a time when ensuring executive oversight is the most dangerous, because of the ease with which a hostile executive in a dominant party democracy can implement measures that may undermine the independence of the judiciary. The Constitutional Court has shown a remarkable ability to navigate this era of Lawfare, remaining resolute under fire. However, the more successful the Court is in holding the line against executive abuse of power, the more the judicial route is identified as a powerful weapon to achieve more abusive political objectives. The relationship between Lawfare and legitimacy is identified as a wicked problem that demands expanding boundaries to observe the courts influence on the political environment, and the political environment's influence on the judicial role and its legitimacy. Through advancing a multi-dimensional paradigm of judicial legitimacy, the dialectics of judicial legitimacy are shown to be aggravated by the judicialisation of politics. In this respect it is argued that where the foundations and assumptions on which legitimacy is predicated shift, legitimacy must be re-examined. It is therefore argued that in a culture marked by an impunified disregard of non-judicial regulatory enforcement and increasing non-compliance with judicial orders, the impulse to preserve legitimacy through a detached, formalist stance will not be sufficient. Judicial legitimacy must be relocated in the ability of the Court to be responsive. Pulled into the role of judicial statesmanship, the Court must adopt a robust approach to assertively uphold the rule of law. In tracking the unfolding consequences of the judicialisation of politics, the Court is asked to resolve matters beyond its institutional capabilities. Absent the normative commitment to the rule of law, the internationalisation of constitutional norms, and the political interest to implement remedial orders, the Court is unable to effect workable relief. In tracing the dangers of the continued trend of Lawfare, the thesis sketches a downward spiral of reputational strength of the Court and a decline in democratic responsibility. This leads to an inability to achieve effective reform that ends in disenchantment, questioning the faith placed in the Constitution. It depicts how the Constitutional Court as 'constitutional saviour' can unravel into constitutional blame. The Constitutional Court has been able to hold the line in this era of Lawfare and repel assaults on its integrity and efforts to undermine its independence. However, without a broader culture of commitment to the rule of law, civil education and a suffusion of constitutional responsibility beyond the judiciary, the Court will not be able to continue to shoulder the weight of what is asked of it. This research depicts a circular model of Lawfare and legitimacy, where Lawfare is predicated on judicial legitimacy, but an overreliance on Lawfare will destroy judicial legitimacy.