The political role of the Supreme Federal Court

constitutional jurisdiction or judicial activism?

Abstract

This article aims to analyze—within the relationship between politics and law—the political role the Supreme Federal Court has played in recent times, examining whether this conduct falls within the parameters of constitutional jurisdiction or constitutes judicial activism. Specific research objectives include, first, addressing the relationship of both difference and interdependence between law and politics, and subsequently examining how the 1988 Federal Constitution and constitutional jurisdiction altered this dynamic. Furthermore, the study aims to address the concepts of constitutional jurisdiction and judicial activism, distinguishing between them to determine whether the Supreme Federal Court's political role is a natural reflection of constitutional jurisdiction and the greater autonomy granted to the Judiciary by the 1988 framers, or whether it represents the discretionary conduct characteristic of judicial activism. To this end, the research employs a hermeneutic-phenomenological methodology; this approach goes beyond a purely semantic analysis of language and seeks to move beyond common-sense preconceptions in order to reconstruct history based on critical theory.