The court and the delivery of medecines by unified health system in Brazil : recent developments in a difficult relationship between judges and policy-makers

Eduardo Rocha Dias, Gina Vidal Marcílio Pompeu

Résumé


The aim of this study is to examine the dynamics in the relationship between the Legislative and the Judiciary in the implementation of the fundamental right to healthcare in Brazil, based on a documental and bibliographical analysis of lawsuits aimed at obtaining drugs not incorporated by the Unified Health System. The enshrinement by the Brazilian Constitution of 1988 of the right to healthcare as a duty of the State and a right of all, led to the modification of the performance of judges. From the position of self-restraint of the Judiciary on the subject, there was a growing intervention in public policies related to health. The Judiciary itself, from the Federal Supreme Court (public hearing) and the National Council of Justice (recommendations and resolutions), began to dictate guidelines aimed at rationalizing the performance of the judges. Nonetheless, the Legislative also triggered a reaction to the advancements of the Judiciary, through the editing of Law 12.401/2011 and the emphasis on the consensual solutions enshrined in the Code of Civil Proceedings of 2015 and Law 13.140/2015. Recent decisions issued by the Superior Court of Justice and the Federal Supreme Court point to the inflection in the position of the Judiciary. In this sense, it is necessary to emphasize the importance of recognizing the institutional limits for the actions of the Judiciary in the control of public policies related to health as well as the establishment of institutional dialogue between the Judiciary and the Administration to overcome mutual misunderstandings and incomprehension.

Mots-clés


Fundamental right to health; judicialization; medicines; relationship between Legislative and Judiciary

Texte intégral :

PDF (English)

Références


BALESTRA NETO, Otávio. A jurisprudência dos tribunais superiores e o direito à saúde – evolução rumo à racionalidade. Direito Sanitário magazine (São Paulo). V. 16, n. 1, march/june de 2015, p. 87-111.

DIAS, Eduardo Rocha. SILVA JÚNIOR, Geraldo Bezerra da. Evidence-based medicine in judicial decisions concerning right to healthcare. Einstein (São Paulo). Vol. 14, n. 1, Jan./Mar. 2016, p. 1-5.

DIAS DE CASTRO, José Augusto. A questão do direito fundamental à saúde sob a ótica da análise econômica do direito. Direito Público da Economia magazine, year 6, n. 21, p. 149-158, jan./mar. 2008.

ESTORNINHO, Maria João e MACIEIRINHA, Tiago. Direito da saúde. Lisbon: Universidade Católica Editora, 2014.

NUNES, António José Avelãs e SCAFF, Fernando Facury. Os tribunais e o direito à saúde. Porto Alegre: Livraria do Advogado, 2011.

PORTAL DA SAÚDE. Doenças Raras: Ministério da Saúde lança protocolos clínicos para 12 doenças raras. Available at: < http://portalsaude.saude.gov.br/index.php/cidadao/principal/agencia-saude/18086-ministerio-da-saude-lanca-protocolos-clinicos-para-12-doencas-raras> Last access on: Nov 11th, 2016.

__________. Judicialização: Em cinco anos, mais de R$ 2,1 bilhões foram gastos com ações judiciais. Available at: Last access on: Dec 4th, 2016.

REDE RARAS. Observatório de Doenças Raras da Universidade de Brasília. Available at: Last access on: Nov 11th, 2016.

SANTOS, Lenir. Judicialização da saúde e a incompreensão do SUS. Judicialização da saúde no Brasil. Campinas: Saberes Editora, 2014, p. 125-160.

SCAFF, Fernando Facury. A efetivação dos direitos sociais no Brasil. Garantias constitucionais de financiamento e judicialização. A Eficácia dos Direitos Sociais – I Jornada Internacional de Direito Constitucional Brasil/Espanha/Itália. São Paulo: Quartier Latin, 2010, p. 21-42.

SCHULZE, Clenio Jair. STJ inaugura nova posição na judicialização da saúde. Available at: Last access on Sept 4th, 2017.

SCHWARTZ, Bernard. Administrative law. Boston: Little, Brown and Company, 1991.

SUNSTEIN, Cass e VERMEULE, Adrian. Interpretation and institutions. University of Chicago Law School. Coase-Sandor Working Paper Series in Law and Economics, 2002, p. 1 – 48. Available at < http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1279&context=law_and_economics> Last access on Sept 4th, 2017.

SUPREMO TRIBUNAL FEDERAL. Pedido de vista adia julgamento sobre acesso a medicamentos de alto custo por via judicial. Available at: Last access on: Nov 11th, 2016.

VIEIRA JUNIOR, Ronaldo Jorge Araújo. Separação de poderes, estado de coisas inconstitucional e compromisso significativo: novas balizas à atuação do Supremo Tribunal Federal. Senado Federal: Brasília, 2015, p. 1-38. Available at: https://www12.senado.leg.br/publicacoes/estudos-legislativos/tipos-de-estudos/textos-para-discussao/td186, last access on: 12/18/2016.

WANG, Daniel. Courts as healthcare policy-makers: the problem, the responses to the problem and the problem in the responses. São Paulo Law School of Fundação Getúlio Vargas – Direito GV. Research Paper Series – Legal Studies. Paper n. 75. In http://bibliotecadigital.fgv.br/dspace/bitstream/handle/10438/11198/RPS_75_final.pdf?sequence=1, Last access on: 04/20/2014.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.5102/rbpp.v8i3.5507

ISSN 2179-8338 (impresso) - ISSN 2236-1677 (on-line)

Desenvolvido por:

Logomarca da Lepidus Tecnologia