Ativismo judicial em matéria eleitoral : a interferência do judiciário no processo democrático de representatividade popular
Data
2021
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Resumo
As decisões do Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) e do Tribunal Superior Eleitoral (TSE)
declaratórias de constitucionalidade ou inconstitucionalidade de temas correlatos
aos direitos políticos constituem verdadeiros atores do processo democrático de
representatividade popular. Analisando-as, é possível refletir sobre o conceito e o
desenvolvimento dos institutos da soberania popular e da democracia como alicerces
do Estado democrático de direito, bem como analisar o fenômeno do ativismo
judicial e seus desdobramentos a partir dos conceitos de judicialização política, politização
da justiça, procedimentalismo e substancialismo. Também foram analisadas
três decisões em controle concentrado, sendo a primeira sobre a verticalização das
coligações partidárias; a segunda sobre a fidelidade partidária; e a terceira sobre o
fim do financiamento de campanhas por empresas, que refletem na criação de normas
restritivas de direitos políticos. Com base no arcabouço doutrinário e jurisprudencial
hodierno, será demonstrado que, em muitos casos, as decisões proferidas
- ainda que sob o manto da defesa e concretização dos direitos políticos - acabam
conferindo novos contornos ao pleito eleitoral, culminando na modificação do processo democrático de representatividade popular e na violação de vários preceitos
constitucionalmente previstos.
The decisions of the Supreme Federal Court and the Superior Electoral Court, when stating either the constitutionality or unconstitutionality of the subjects related to political rights, place themselves as true agents in the popular representation democratic process. Before analyzing the judgments, it is intended to discourse about the popular sovereignty and democracy concept and development as the founder basis of the Democratic Law State. Immediately thereafter, it is analyzed the judicial activism phenomenon and its consequences, addressing the politics judicialization concepts, justice politicization, proceduralism and substantialism. Going into the central theme of the present paper, three decisions in concentrated control were critically analyzed. The first one dealing with the adherent coalitions verticalization; the second, about adherent loyalty; and the third one, that deals with the end of the graves financed by companies, consisting these decisions in the restrictive norms of political rights creation. Based on the entire doctrinal and jurisprudential framework constructed, it is possible to see that, most of the times, the decisions rendered even though the argument for the defense and realization of political rights ends up giving new contours to the electoral election - that is - culminating in the democratic process of popular representation modification, in order to violate constitutionally protected precepts.
The decisions of the Supreme Federal Court and the Superior Electoral Court, when stating either the constitutionality or unconstitutionality of the subjects related to political rights, place themselves as true agents in the popular representation democratic process. Before analyzing the judgments, it is intended to discourse about the popular sovereignty and democracy concept and development as the founder basis of the Democratic Law State. Immediately thereafter, it is analyzed the judicial activism phenomenon and its consequences, addressing the politics judicialization concepts, justice politicization, proceduralism and substantialism. Going into the central theme of the present paper, three decisions in concentrated control were critically analyzed. The first one dealing with the adherent coalitions verticalization; the second, about adherent loyalty; and the third one, that deals with the end of the graves financed by companies, consisting these decisions in the restrictive norms of political rights creation. Based on the entire doctrinal and jurisprudential framework constructed, it is possible to see that, most of the times, the decisions rendered even though the argument for the defense and realization of political rights ends up giving new contours to the electoral election - that is - culminating in the democratic process of popular representation modification, in order to violate constitutionally protected precepts.
Periodicidade
Notas de conteúdo
Outro(s) assunto(s)
Referência
LUDVIGS, Vitória Dacorégio Miketen de Campos; ANDRADE, Luiz Gustavo de. Ativismo judicial em matéria eleitoral:
a interferência do judiciário no processo democrático de representatividade popular. Paraná Eleitoral: revista brasileira de direito eleitoral e ciência política, Curitiba, v. 10, n. 2, p. 1-31, 2021.
Coleções
Avaliação
Revisão
Suplementado Por
Referenciado Por
Licença Creative Commons
Exceto quando indicado de outra forma, a licença deste item é descrita como Creative Commons Atribuição-NãoComercial 4.0 Internacional

