Search

The administrative processes of recognizing Indigenous Lands (ILs) in Brazil can take decades to complete. Indigenous peoples who live in unrecognized ILs are more vulnerable to a series of rights violations, which makes the completion of demarcation processes urgent. This article aims to answer the following question: why do some demarcation processes take longer than others? We listed five conditions found in the literature on the demarcation of indigenous lands that can delay them. Next, we applied the qualitative comparative analysis (QCA) method in its crisp set mode to 40 cases of IL demarcation. We present two conclusions: the presence of economic interests is an important condition to explain the long duration of some demarcation processes, but it is neither necessary nor sufficient, and the conjunction of this factor with the judicialization of the demarcation process explains most cases of long-term demarcations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of A&C - Administrative & Constitutional Law Review - Revista de Direito Administrativo e Constitucional is the property of A&C - Revista de Direito Administrativo & Constitucional (Instituto Bacellar) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

How do state courts in Brazil participate in the debate about Covid-19 policies? I argue that state courts had a role in making decisions on key policies when political actors couldn't agree on how to handle the crisis. This paper compares its findings to what previous research has found on the role of the stf at the federal level. The results show that subnational institutions tried to use state courts to halt such policies in a similar way to what happened in the stf. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Cadernos de Gestão Pública e Cidadania is the property of Fundacao Getulio Vargas, Escola Brasileira de Administracao Publica e de Empresas and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Jurídica (0103-3506) is the property of Revista Juridica and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Jurídica (0103-3506) is the property of Revista Juridica and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Revista Jurídica (0103-3506) is the property of Revista Juridica and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Brazilian Journal of Law & International Relations / Relações Internacionais no Mundo is the property of Relacoes Internacionais no Mundo and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Copyright of Espaço Jurídico: Journal of Law is the property of Espaco Juridico: Journal of Law and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper deals with the judicialization of the right to health, a phenomenon that provokes several studies in different perspectives. The Brazilian Supreme Court will judge two appeals (Recursos Extraordinários n. 566.471/RN e n. 657.718/MG) of great importance to guide the rest of the Judiciary branch, what reveals the actuality of the theme. In Brazil, the legal principles, especially because of the contribution offered by Robert Alexy's theory of principles, are being used by courts to decide concrete cases. In the case of right to health, this principle is invoked to provide medicaments or services not included in health's public policies. The balancing used, however, lacks of a formal structure offered by proportionality norm, a legal principle in David Duarte's vision, adopted in this study. This paper suggests how to apply the proportionality test to judge cases of right to health and integral health care, a material principle of the Brazilian Health System, with support in the Norman Daniels' concept of health. It identifies the kind of normative conflict and the correct form to structure the proportionality norm to examine positive duties arising from the right to health, in order to conclude when there will be a violation of this right. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper presents the issue of judicialization of the right to health in Brazil. Data from the National Council of Justice evidence a substantial increase in the number of lawsuits concerning the right to health. We emphasize that the national doctrine exhaustively discusses ways to make the authority more effective, but it does not, as a general rule, discuss the economic aspect of health judicialization. Using the concept of opportunity cost extracted from economics science, it is shown that the judge, by deferring the lawsuit formulated by the plaintiff, automatically forces the Executive Branch to reduce the scope of other policies to generate resources to meet the court order. In specific contexts, this setting ends up favoring individual rights at the expense of the collective rights of SUS users, in violation of the principle of isonomy and efficiency. Finally, the case of the judicialization promoted by the hemophiliac patients in the Federal District is shown as a way of evidencing, at the factual level, the consequences of judicialization in the SUS policies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Direito da Cidade is the property of Editora da Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (EdUERJ) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

In this article, the right to health is discussed as a social right and an essential requisite in the construction and guarantee of human rights, more precisely human dignity, considering this right as a complex but effective process in the transformation of the social reality. In the first place, the activities of the public power and its difficulties to guarantee universal access to health are highlighted. This scenario ends up inhibiting the practice of the right to health and prevents users from enjoying and using it. In that sense, this article challenges and explores some alternatives to solidify and put in practice the right to health in Brazil. Departing from the analysis of the Unified Health System (SUS) and social participation in Brazil, this article discusses the judicialization of health in the country, highlighting the difficulties the State faces to equitably offer universal healthcare to society. This context offers an opportunity for reflection and a paradigm change, from the “judicialization of health” to the “judicialization of health policies.” Finally, the public health policies adopted by other countries are emphasized, in the attempt to construct the empowerment of human beings in the practice of their rights, particularly social participation and the discussion about the States’ responsibility to put their citizens’ right to health in practice. In conclusion, the political and collective construction of the right to health needs to be encouraged, distinguishing the legitimate interests of the different interlocutors involved. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Revista Ciência & Saúde Coletiva is the property of Associacao Brasileira de Pos-Graduacao em Saude Coletiva and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Judicialization has been in use on several countries as a term to define various phenomena according to their intensity and historicity. Recently, the Judiciary Power has addressed health issues in Brazil, a form of "policy judicialization". The term, however, lacks the precise definitions that would enable a deeper analysis of this phenomenon's range in Brazil. The last years have seen a significant increase on judicial actions aimed at guaranteeing health rights. Among its consequences, this led to a quick assimilation by health administrators of the term "health judicialization". Many health related judicial actions have arrived at the highest level of Brazil's Legal System. This has led the Supreme Court to create a Public Hearing to address civil society's issues regarding health rights, where fifty people were heard. This research analyses the rhetoric observed on these speakers' main arguments to understand their opinion regarding the judicialization phenomenon, and the main consequences to health administration. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This is the result of a research about how the Brazilian Supreme Court (Supremo Tribunal Federal) deals with the judicialization of public policies, especially the social ones. The current text is part of the research conducted by the Study and Research Group on Hermeneutics and Public Policies and there are preliminary thoughts on the judicial intervention on public policies, its concept, phases, methodology of analysis, constitutional dimension, and the role of judges on the enforcement of rights. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Sociologias is the property of Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

The present study has as main objective to demonstrate that the national policy of judicialization and de-bureaucratization of the Judiciary stamped in Provision nº 125/2010 - CNJ, materializes at the moment when legislative measures are put into effect with the intention of reaching this end. Thus, as with the request for recognition of extrajudicial usucapion inserted in the national legal system through Law No. 13,105 / 2015, as well as the possibility of carrying out inventories, shares, consensual separation and consensual divorce through the administrative route authorized by Law no. 11,441 / 2007, it is believed, analogically, imbued with the detrimental core, that the notary of protests of titles and debt documents, after the issuance of a competent law, could be the administrative authority responsible for ratifying the request for extrajudicial recovery, thus suppressing, the judicial homologation required by article 162 of the Bankruptcy Law (Law No. 11,101 / 2005), removing numerous lawsuits from the Judiciary. Such procedure, deductively from the others mentioned above, would begin and be concluded within the scope of extrajudicial services of securities protests. Thus, the withdrawal of cases from the Judiciary makes justice faster, more effective and more economical, providing more sustainable national economic development. This initiative is in line with the new political-legal scenario fostered by the national judicial policy of adequate treatment of conflicts of interest within the scope of the Judiciary and by Provision No. 72, of 07/27/2018, of the same body, which provided for incentive measures the settlement or renegotiation of debts protested in the protest notaries in Brazil. To base this study, the deductive scientific method will be adopted, with the analysis of laws, doctrines, scientific articles, as well as more recent jurisprudence on the subject. As a result, it will be deduced that, in the same way as with judicial usucapion, judicial separation and divorce, now extended to the extrajudicial, after drafting a competent law, the protest notaries, public agents endowed with notary public faith, drivers of de-bureaucratization and dejudicialization of the Judiciary, should be able to ratify the request for extrajudicial recovery, and it is up to the citizen to also use the judicial route. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In Latin America, 'judicialization' for access to healthcare refers to thousands of different claims, conditions, technologies and circumstances. Its impact depends on what is 'judicialized', why, for which benefit, and at what cost to society. Since judges cannot, by themselves, reduce medical uncertainty - or price tags - their health systems are exposed to costly adjudications based solely on interpretations of right to health, or life. The result is a low-governance, inefficient system for deciding coverage. We reviewed lists of judicialised medicines in Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Mexico, and Uruguay, dividing them into types A, B and C. We propose a debate by type, and that judges, facing litigation type-C, consider mandating coverage conditional on results, as requisite for reimbursement.