The lack of concreting of some fundamental rights, as social ones, related with health and education, wich demands costs to State, still represents a challenge to brazilian constitucionalism. In consequence, Courts are facing with issues related with the materialization of suth rights, as supply of medicines that are not able on public healths system or a guarantee of matriculation of an student on public education system. These requests of judicial orders directed to public administration to fulfill its constitucional duty, throught positives obligations. Such phenomenon, included for the great part of doctrine on what its used to call as "judicialization of politics" is not free from criticisms. Against it, there are arguments that (I) Judiciary is assaulting the separation of powers principie because the administrative function with its discricionarity, must be preserved with Executive, and not on judges hands, who are forbbiden to interfer in public politcs; (II) judges have no democratic legitimacy, because they were not elected by the people; (III) Judiciary is not prepared and technicaly capacitaded for such kind of demand; (IV) depending on positives state behavour and public recourse for its concreting, a judicial determination in this way would oppose legality and budget anteriority principies, finding serious obstacles in its concreting because the "possible restriction". This study proposes not only to analize these related arguments, as also examinate borders of juridical and political systems, concluding legitimacy or not of such conduct, as well to analyse the nature, the programatic caracter and the dificult delimitation of social rights and its judicial protection, in others words, seaching, in resume, to examinate brazilian Judiciary function on social rights concreting problem, as "existencial minimum" warranter.
|
