A judicialização da política no Supremo Tribunal Federal: uma controvérsia pública da pandemia da Covid-19 nos Estados da Bahia e do Rio Grande do Norte

Abstract

The new coronavirus pandemic emerged in the city of Wuhan, China, breaking the borders of the Asian continent and spreading to all countries in the year 2020. This resulted in the declaration of a pandemic by the World Health Organization (WHO). Due to this fact, Brazil ends up enacting Law 13.979/2020, which deals with dealing with public health emergencies, presenting measures of collective protection, social isolation, quarantine and the restriction of public activities. These restrictions culminated in conflicts and effervescent moments between the Federal Union and the federative units of the country, resulting in public controversies that led to a judicialization of the policy, being analyzed by the Superior Federal Court (STF). In this dissertation proposes to offer a study of the legal-judicial conflict between the Union and two federative entities in northeastern Brazil, Bahia and Rio Grande do Norte, around the conduct of the political management of Covid-19. This research has the general objetive of understanding the phenomenon of the judicialization from the public controversies of federeated entities in the conduct of preventive measures against the spread of the coronavirus pandemic in the states of Bahia and Rio Grande do Norte. For this, we will start from the following theoretical problematization: To what extent does the use of law in the management of political conflicts between public agents reinforce or weaken the federative pact provided for in the Federal Constitution of 1988? Seeking to answer this problem, our theoretical contribution was Jürgen Habermas and Marcelo Neves, while the senses of justice with Michael Sandel and parallel authors that connect the approach, whose conceptual means are judicialization, controversy and the sense of justice. Finally, the methodology adopted will be the qualitative method, based on the accomplishment of a bibliographic review, analyze the public controversy between the federated entities, in addition to the use of hermeneutics for interpretation; and the ethnography of the Federal Supreme Court's constitutional review documents.