JUDICIAL ACTIVISM AND PAN-PRINCIPIOLOGISM

Abstract

The present study aims to discuss judicial activism in the form of panprincipiologism, a variation of judicial activism, but directed towards the creation of principles. To this end, it explains the legal principles, their importance and the context in which they are created; analyzes judicial activism and its impact on constructive or creative manifestations; and sheds light on panprincipiologism as a form of judicial activism. The methodology used in the development of this article was the bibliographical and documental research, subsidized in the dialectical-argumentative method, allowing to conclude that despite the constant offenses that the courts have suffered, especially the Federal Supreme Court - STF, and even recognizing that what conventionally called panprincipiologism has already brought harmful results to Brazilian democracy, it cannot be denied that the Judiciary is decisive in the preservation of democracy against furtive or dissimulated authoritarianism. It is important to know the social, economic, political and cultural changes that can influence the courts in decision-making aimed at regenerating the representativeness of the democratic regime and, consequently, overcoming institutional disarray. However, one cannot applaud or understand panprincipiologism as something harmful to democracy. Activism is sometimes necessary and positive and for this reason, in order to state whether a judicial decision was arbitrary or not, it is important to take into account the concrete case.