ABSTRACT
The article aims to analyze the (legal) appropriateness of judicial decisions on requests for the supply of drugs, treatments or even the adoption of social isolation and lockdown measures during the Covid-19 Pandemic period. We will try to answer the following problems: Given the scenario of uncertainty about the safety and efficacy of the proposed drugs and the scarcity of available resources, has the Judicial Power constitutional legitimacy to compel the Executive Power to provide medicines and treatments for patients diagnosed with Covid-19? What is the permissible scope of judicial intervention in the case of demands aimed at the implementation of public policies of social isolation? The following hypotheses will be investigated: a) the supply, through the Judiciary, of medicines for the treatment of COVID-19, in the current scenario of things, is a measure that must be removed;b) the provision of ICU beds or infirmary is legally acceptable, provided that certain requirements are met;c) the granting of social isolation and lockdown measures through the courts is not possible. The research method is the hypothetical deductive.
ABSTRACT
O presente artigo teve como objetivo identificar a atuação do Conselho Nacional de Justiça no que tange à judicialização da saúde, assim como seu enfrentamento aos colapsos gerados a partir da pandemia de covid-19. Seguindo esse ideário, o problema de pesquisa foi identificar os desafios e as ações estratégicas do Conselho Nacional de Justiça diante da judicialização da saúde em tempos de covid-19. A pesquisa foi desenvolvida por meio de um estudo bibliográfico, seguindo o método hipotético-dedutivo. Como resultado, observou-se que o Conselho Nacional de Justiça vem apresentando diversas ações, culminando no avanço do diálogo interinstitucional para melhorias nos serviços prestados aos cidadãos brasileiros pelo Sistema Único de Saúde. Por fim, concluiu-se que o sistema de saúde vem enfrentando há muitos anos diversas dificuldades, e a chegada dessa pandemia, que se alastrou por todo o território nacional e, consequentemente, disseminou o caos sanitário e humanitário, agravou a situação, tornando mais nítida a ausência de estrutura e de políticas públicas capazes de reduzir os abismos e discrepâncias no setor da saúde.
This article aimed to identify the actions of the National Council of Justice regarding the judicialization of health, as well as its confrontation with the collapses generated from the covid-19 pandemic. Following this ideology, the research problem was to identify the challenges and strategic actions of the National Council of Justice in the face of the judicialization of health in times of covid-19. The research was developed through a bibliographical study, following the hypothetical-deductive method. As a result, it was observed that the National Council of Justice has been presenting several actions, culminating in the advancement of inter-institutional dialogue for improvements in the services provided to Brazilian citizens by the Unified Health System. Finally, it was concluded that the health system has been facing several difficulties for many years, and the arrival of this pandemic, which spread throughout the national territory and, consequently, spread sanitary and humanitarian chaos, aggravated the situation, making clearer the lack of structure and public policies capable of reducing the abysses and discrepancies in the health sector.
Subject(s)
Health CouncilsABSTRACT
The article aims to analyze the (legal) appropriateness of judicial decisions on requests for the supply of drugs, treatments or even the adoption of social isolation and lockdown measures during the Covid-19 Pandemic period. We will try to answer the following problems: Given the scenario of uncertainty about the safety and efficacy of the proposed drugs and the scarcity of available resources, has the Judicial Power constitutional legitimacy to compel the Executive Power to provide medicines and treatments for patients diagnosed with Covid-19? What is the permissible scope of judicial intervention in the case of demands aimed at the implementation of public policies of social isolation? The following hypotheses will be investigated: a) the supply, through the Judiciary, of medicines for the treatment of COVID-19, in the current scenario of things, is a measure that must be removed;b) the provision of ICU beds or infirmary is legally acceptable, provided that certain requirements are met;c) the granting of social isolation and lockdown measures through the courts is not possible. The research method is the hypothetical deductive. © 2022, Instituto de Direito Romeu Felipe Bacellar. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
Objective: the COVID-19 pandemic revealed serious structural failures in the Brazilian health system, aggravating an existing crisis and favoring the judicialization of health. Would the traditional judicial process be the most appropriate to deal with this new wave of judicialization of health? Based on this inquiry, this paper investigates how structural litigation, guided by an experimentalist perspective, can contribute to access to health in times of pandemic. Methodology: The deductive method is used, supported by bibliographic-documental research and qualitative analysis of ADPF nº 709, filed in 2020, which addresses the Union's omissions in the protection of indigenous peoples during the pandemic. Results: The structural litigation, guided by experimentalism, may allow dialogical judicial interventions, which do not usurp the typical competences of the Executive, but which lead to the creation of plans to face structural problems in public health, aggravated by the pandemic. Contributions: Among the various contributions brought by the present study is the analysis of ADPF No. 709, filed in 2020, which deals with the Union's omissions in the protection of indigenous peoples during the pandemic, which seeks to demonstrate the practical applicability of the structural process and investigates the possibility of edition of dialogical and cooperative judicial judgments that assist the majority bodies in the creation of plans to cope with social deficits left by the COVID-19 pandemic. © 2022, Centro Universitario Curitiba - UNICURITIBA. All rights reserved.
ABSTRACT
The Covid-19 pandemic, a disease caused by the new coronavirus (Sars-CoV-2), has put health systems in several countries under severe pressure. In Brazil, this pressure affects a system that already suffered from serious deficiencies - accentuated by fiscal austerity policies since 2016 - of limited capacity to respond to demands, especially from the most vulnerable populations. The pandemic make the shortage of health professionals, personal protective equipment, intensive care unit beds, mechanical respirators, and other supplies more acute. In this scenario, the Judiciary begins to be provoked by actions directly related to the pandemic. The objectives of this article, therefore, were to describe the health-related legal demands between February and April 2020, the beginning of the pandemic in Brazil, and to analyze their repercussions on the justice and health systems. This was a descriptive study of Covid-19 related lawsuits, based on data collected from the websites of the state courts of justice and federal regional courts, and from the monitoring panels at the National Council of Justice and the Federal Supreme Court. By April 30, 2020, 129 lawsuits linked to Covid-19 had been initiated in the country, with access to intensive care unit beds as the most frequent object (71 lawsuits;55%). In addition to the shortage of intensive care unit beds, the discussion about the use of chloroquine by Covid-19 patients may have contributed to the increase in the number of health-related lawsuits. The Judiciary has been adopting specific organizational measures to face the new situation. The health care system, in contrast, has not been prepared for an increase in legal demands.