SciELO - Scientific Electronic Library Online

 
 issue41The Control of Conventionality and Judicial Dialogue in front of the Environment as a Subject of Protection and ReparationThe term of interposition of the action of unconstitutionality and human rights author indexsubject indexsearch form
Home Pagealphabetic serial listing  

Services on Demand

Journal

Article

Indicators

Related links

  • Have no similar articlesSimilars in SciELO

Share


Cuestiones constitucionales

Print version ISSN 1405-9193

Abstract

HSU CLETO, Vinicius. Separation of Powers and Judicial Supremacy: Case Analyses in Brazil. Cuest. Const. [online]. 2019, n.41, pp.429-455.  Epub Apr 22, 2020. ISSN 1405-9193.  https://doi.org/10.22201/iij.24484881e.2019.41.13953.

Contemporary constitutional jurists notice that the burgeoning role played by Constitutional Courts regarding political and abstract topics represents a threat to the legitimate functions of the Legislative, usually composed by directly elected members. Furthermore, judicial decisions tend to affect the Executive, since the budget is employed to assure the efficacy of abstract and general decisions. This article studies the arguments that emphasize a trend towards a “judges’ government”. Those propositions are confronted with arguments that demonstrate judicial legitimacy on abstract decisions. The hypothesis affirms that, inside functional constitutional systems, nor the Parliament nor the Judiciary have the final say in abstract regulation. In order to demonstrate the validity of the assertion, two different cases are scrutinized: i) same-sex marriage in Brazil; ii) Brazil’s “vaquejada”, a sport considered unconstitutional by the Federal Supreme Court, but subsequently accepted by Constitutional Amendment n. 96/2017.

Keywords : Constitutional jurisdiction; Judicial supremacy; Minority rights.

        · abstract in Spanish     · text in Spanish     · Spanish ( pdf )