Introduction:

This article highlights the Intervention of the Judiciary Power in the face of state omission in guaranteeing the right to health: the judicialization of health, is the theme of this article, resulting from critical dialectical explanatory research applied in Brazilian public health.

Objectives:

To evaluate the importance and effectiveness of urgent protection in guaranteeing the right to health; To identify the causes that lead to state omission in guaranteeing the right to health; Critically analyzing the judicialization of health; Demystifying the role of the Judiciary in the face of the inertia of federated entities; To relate material theory with practice, in order to present this dichotomy and overcome it.

Methods:

This is a bibliographic, inductive - deductive research, in order to demonstrate the requirements for granting provisional guardianship, its importance in the health policy scenario, in addition to critically analyzing the judicialization of health in the State of Goiás.

Results:

Judicialization is still a problem that needs to be reviewed, among the three branches of government, since adverse attitudes towards drug concessions are being unconstitutional, since the Constitution itself provides the powers of each power in the letter of the law, and In this context, what we are experiencing over the years is exactly a reversal of roles, since the responsibility for executing the service and the medication lies with the executive, and the judiciary often fails to exercise its role to play the role of executive power.

Conclusion:

The right to life, health and the dignity of the human person are closely linked, since in the absence of one, there is no possibility of exercising the others. In this context and to conclude this analysis, according to the sources of the law, it is necessary to define precisely what has more strength in the legal system: principles, laws, jurisprudence, customs.

        · resumo em Português | Espanhol     · texto em Inglês     · Inglês ( pdf )