Aspectos gerais de uma crítica à atuação do Supremo Tribunal Federal (2016-2022)

Abstract

This article will analyze the authoritarian escalation of the Supreme Federal Court (STF) in Brazil, as well as the theories used to justify the recurring abuses. It will demonstrate the Brazilian governmental model, a Federative Republic constituted as a Democratic State of Law, which values the separation of powers, representative democracy, and popular sovereignty, meaning that there is no room for one of the three powers to stand out, with no place for a moderating power. The role of the Constitutional Courts will also be shown, and despite having a fundamental function in democracy due to their interpretative attribution, they submit themselves to the constitutional text, not standing above it. The goal is to analyze actions that demonstrate deviations committed by the STF and to examine contradictory decisions, which make it evident that they are justified by the court's convenience and not by legal foundations. This leads us to the conclusion that it is essential to limit the STF's role, as any authoritarianism poses a risk to freedom, and measures that are antidemocratic cannot be accepted in the name of protecting democracy. However, as will be shown, this limitation must be established legally and legitimately, through reforms in the Brazilian system of checks and balances, thus delimiting the STF's area of action and facilitating accountability for abuses committed