THE COURTHOUSE AND TWO MEASURES

SUPREME COURT STRATEGIC ACTION ON BRAZILIAN POLITIC CONFLICT CONFRONTATION

Abstract

It is asserted that Judiciary is, nowadays, primal agent on contemporary constitutionalism, with power, including, to annul people’s paramount will by democratic elected representatives. It has been observed, notwithstanding, constitutional jurisdiction role, in practical application, isn’t only tolerated as legitimated, even stimulated, by the others constituted powers. Regarding this, based on concrete situations analysis it is wondered why the Federal Supreme Court (STF) decides similar legal cases concerning politicians and parties in different and opposite ways in a short period of time. Bibliographical research method had been applied, through reading articles and specific works, and empirical, in this respect, was analysed and compared basically four decisions of the STF regarding emblematic cases involving agents and parties in the political crisis in Brazil, from 2014 to 2016. Taking into consideration a case-by-case and comparative examination, the STF, when analysing issues of great political and governmental impact, has legally decided identical cases in a different manner, changing issues understanding, not due to purely legal elements, but essentially on account to case involved parties, socio-political setting, and risks of non-compliance with the Court's decision.

Key-words: Constitutional Jurisdiction. Politics. Control of Constitutionality.