THE STF AND JUDICIAL ACTIVISM: ITS ETHICAL IMPLICATIONS

Abstract

Doesn't judicial activism in the STF violate the constitutional principle of separation of the three powers and denotes a serious ethical problem? Can Supreme Court ministers acting outside their competence bring insecurity to the environment that must be founded on ethics, putting the system of separation of the three powers at risk? Can such actions threaten democracy? These are some questions raised in relation to the Brazilian Supreme Court. The “Activist” actions of ministers have gained great repercussions today. From this context, the present work aims to study and analyze the phenomenon of "judicial activism", in order to enable its understanding, as well as its effects and practical consequences. In order to complement the study, it will address the ontognoseological structure of Law and the problem of ontological reductionisms. Identify if there are constitutional foundations for the judicial activism proposed by the STF magistrates and Highlight the Ethical implications of this activism. Observe how the practice of judicial activism violates the principle of separation of the three powers. Analyze the implications and consequences of ideological activism as disrespect for popular suffrage obtained in democratic elections and values. As this practice challenges the effectiveness of the wishes and values ​​that were deposited in the ballot box. The article developed here was worked from a bibliographic review.