O Supremo Tribunal Federal e a crise democrática: controvérsias públicas em torno da violência policial letal do Rio de Janeiro

Abstract

This dissertation stems from activities related to the research project titled "The Supreme Federal Court and the Democratic Crisis: Public Controversies Surrounding the Accusation of 'Judicial Activism'," approved under the Call 1/2021/PROPESQ for the selection of scientific initiation projects 2021/2022. The aim of this dissertation was to investigate accusations of judicial activism made by conservative agents against Supreme Federal Court justices, as well as the arguments used by the justices to defend themselves against these accusations. Specifically, the research objectives were: a) to investigate social media mobilizations related to judicial activism; b) to analyze the votes and decisions of Supreme Federal Court justices; and c) to examine public statements made by Supreme Federal Court justices, all related to ADPF 635, regarding the public controversy surrounding lethal police violence in Rio de Janeiro. This research involved the analysis of content on social media platforms and documents, particularly the votes of Supreme Federal Court justices in the context of the Arguição de Descumprimento de Preceito Fundamental (ADPF) 635, which approved a series of measures to prevent lethal police violence in Rio de Janeiro. To conduct this analysis, a research instrument consisting of four categories of analysis was utilized and applied to the research corpus: a) accusation of judicial activism; b) responses to accusations of judicial activism; c) suffering/victimization/minorities; d) genocide. During the analysis of the votes, the objective was to understand how accusations of judicial activism are made and how judges handle arguments to justify the expansion of their decisions within the democratic experience.