The Effects of the Novel Coronavirus Pandemic of the Judicialization of the Right to Health Before the Federal Supreme Court

Abstract

Objective: to identify whether the pandemic situation interfered with the extent and way in which issues relating to the right to health were assessed by the Federal Supreme Court. Methodology: documentary research was carried out, which, after consulting the Federal Supreme Court database, with the filter using the term “health”, returned a total of 1,178 rulings, 447 from the pre-pandemic period and 731 from the pandemic period, which were analyzed and classified according to thematic relevance. After the classification stage discards, 70 rulings were identified in the pre-pandemic period and 167 rulings in the pandemic that effectively deal with the right to health. Results: the pandemic imposed numerous challenges on the health system, so that the Judiciary was urged to speak out in the face of the now established controversies. In these manifestations, it was identified that there was an increase in demands for concentrated control and in the absolute quantity of decisions involving the right to health, as well as that qualitatively, in general, the previous decision-making pattern was maintained, although new themes have emerged. Conclusion: the study concluded that the Supreme Court's tendency remains in favor of the recognition of health rights, using arguments such as the non-offense of the separation of powers and the impossibility of arguing on the possible reservation to prevent their granting.

Submission: 01/29/23|Review: 10/24/23|Approval: 10/30/23