Banca de QUALIFICAÇÃO: Leonardo Campos Soares da Fonseca

Uma banca de QUALIFICAÇÃO de DOUTORADO foi cadastrada pelo programa.
STUDENT : Leonardo Campos Soares da Fonseca
DATE: 17/02/2025
TIME: 10:00
LOCAL: MINIAUDITÓRIO DA PÓS GRADUAÇÃO - FACULDADE DE DIREITO - UnB
TITLE:

RIGHT TO HEALTH, REGULATION, AND PRECEDENTS: ANALYSIS OF THE PRECEDENTS ESTABLISHED IN GENERAL REPERMISSION BY THE FEDERAL SUPREME COURT AND RECURSIVE DECISIONS BY THE SUPERIOR COURT OF JUSTICE REGARDING THE REGULATORY ACTS OF ANVISA AND ANS

KEY WORDS:

KEY WORDS: Right to health; Regulation; Judicial precedents; Judicialization of health; ANVISA; ANS; STF; STJ; General repercussion; Repetitive appeals.

PAGES: 152
BIG AREA: Ciências Sociais Aplicadas
AREA: Direito
SUMMARY:

This thesis examines the judicial review carried out by the Federal Supreme Court (STF) and the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) of regulatory acts issued by the National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa) and the National Supplementary Health Agency (ANS) regarding the fundamental right to health. The 1988 Federal Constitution inaugurated the paradigm of the Social State in Brazil, granting citizens a myriad of social, economic and cultural rights, including the fundamental right to health, recognized as a duty of the State, based on the principle of human dignity. In this context, the importance of the Unified Health System (SUS) in promoting the right to health is highlighted, emphasizing the principles of universality, integrity, equity, decentralization and popular participation. However, budget limitations represent an obstacle to the implementation of public policies to guarantee the population's full access to health services and meet their demands effectively, resulting in the exponential growth of the judicialization of health. In order to understand the impact of this phenomenon and the challenges of interaction between the Judiciary and regulatory agencies, decisions issued by the STF and STJ in general repercussion and repetitive appeals between 2006 and 2024 on the supply of medicines and health treatments were analyzed. The results indicate a positive correlation between judicial precedents and the choices made by regulatory agencies, highlighting the importance of judicial deference for the effectiveness of public health policies. The conclusion is that strengthening institutional coordination between the judiciary and regulatory agencies is essential to ensure the protection of the fundamental right to health, promote human dignity and offer more balanced solutions to conflicts between individual and collective rights, thus contributing to the development of more appropriate and socially just public policies.

 

COMMITTEE MEMBERS:
Externo à Instituição - FLÁVIO JAIME DE MORAES JARDIM - UNICEUB
Externo ao Programa - 1115497 - JORGE OCTAVIO LAVOCAT GALVAO - nullInterno - 2292593 - MARCIO NUNES IORIO ARANHA OLIVEIRA
Presidente - 2149902 - TARCISIO VIEIRA DE CARVALHO NETO