O Supremo Tribunal Federal e as omissões inconstitucionais do Congresso Nacional: Limites e possibilidades ao estabelecimento de uma racionalidade decisória em sede de Ações Diretas de Inconstitucionalidade por Omissão

Abstract

With the growing role of the Judiciary in recent years and the Constitution of the Republic as the center of the Brazilian legal system and normative system, it is necessary to talk about issues such as division of Powers, Judicial Activism, Judicialization of Politics and mainly about Constitutionality Control. In this way, this research aimed to permeate these concepts and analyze the decisions of Direct Actions of Unconstitutionality by Omission in the post 1988 Constitution period, to examine to what extent the understanding of the Federal Court of Justice (STF) has changed, bringing a more activist rationality and logic, in the sense of supplying unconstitutional omissions and protecting fundamental rights. Everything, from the perspective of theoretical references such as Jeremy Waldron, Andrei Marmor and Robert Alexy, who have in common the formulation of theories discussing the importance of interpretation by judges, on judicial review and the legitimacy of the Judiciary to do so. To this end, an inductive methodology was adopted, with a qualitative bias, and using jurisprudence analysis as a methodological procedure, in order to be able to understand the influence of such decisions for the implementation of constitutional norms by the National Congress and whether they are in compliance with art. 103, §2 of the Constitution of the Republic of 1988.