Da extensão dos preceitos fundamentais constitucionais: Limites à politização da arguição de descumprimento de preceito fundamental (ADPF) e o papel do Supremo Tribunal Federal

Limits to the politicization of the allegation of non-compliance with a fundamental precept (ADPF) and the role of the Federal Supreme Court

Abstract

This article analyzes the control of constitutionality exercised by the Federal Supreme Court, especially in the Argument of Noncompliance with a Fundamental Precept and aims to find out if this, due to its characteristics, would be more susceptible to provoke the phenomenon of judicialization of politics in the STF. For this, it was necessary to study the system of concentrated control of constitutionality, especially by the ADPF, along with its object and regulation. The fundamental precepts, which, due to their non-exhaustive form, allow for a wide range of interpretations. Regarding the judicialization of politics, even though there is a divergence in the opinion of scholars and magistrates as to its effects, the phenomenon permeates the constitutional assessments of wide repercussion regarding fundamental rights, generating a legal intervention in the political sphere. From the analysis of the votes of the STF ministers with the main ADPFs already appreciated by our higher court, or still in progress, it was possible to perceive how the fundamental precepts are placed as a justification in the votes in a dilated way. With the result, it is possible to conclude that, given the breadth and non-exhaustiveness of the concept of fundamental precept, the so-called judicialization of politics is constantly present in the Judiciary, which should, however, act through the normative code, safeguarding legal certainty, the independence and harmony of the Powers of the Republic.