https://repositorio.uema.br/jspui/handle/123456789/1 Biblioteca Digital da Universidade Estadual do Maranhão Thu, 30 Jul 2026 10:55:57 GMT 2026-07-30T10:55:57Z https://repositorio.uema.br/jspui/handle/123456789/6341 Título: Judicialização do direito fundamental à saúde no Brasil: uma análise sobre o acesso à medicamentos não incorporados ao SUS e os critérios dos Tribunais Superiores para a sua concessão Abstact: This research analyzes the judicialization of the fundamental right to health in Brazil, focusing on access to medications not included in the Unified Health System (SUS) and the criteria established by the Superior Courts for granting them. The study begins with the observation that, although the 1988 Federal Constitution established health as a right of all and a duty of the State, the realization of this guarantee faces structural challenges regarding pharmaceutical services and the incorporation of new technologies into the SUS, thereby driving the growing demand for judicial intervention. In this context, the study seeks to address the following problem: how do the jurisprudential criteria established by the Supreme Federal Court (STF) and the Superior Court of Justice (STJ) for the judicial granting of non-SUS-listed medications attempt to reconcile the guarantee of the fundamental right to health with the organization and sustainability of the public health system? The study operates on the hypothesis that these criteria serve as a mechanism to rationalize the judicialization of health by establishing objective parameters for granting such medications. The objective is to examine how the criteria set by the Superior Courts seek to balance the protection of the individual right to health with the preservation of public administration. To this end, a qualitative approach was adopted—utilizing bibliographic and documentary research—grounded in the analysis of legal doctrine, scientific articles, legislation, and relevant court precedents. The study concludes that established case law points to the use of technical and evidentiary parameters that enable access to non-listed medications without disrupting the administrative, financial, and technical- scientific structure of the SUS. Wed, 15 Jul 2026 00:00:00 GMT https://repositorio.uema.br/jspui/handle/123456789/6341 2026-07-15T00:00:00Z https://repositorio.uema.br/jspui/handle/123456789/6340 Título: A responsabilidade civil das plataformas digitais no combate ao discurso de ódio: uma análise da constitucionalidade do Art. 19 do Marco Civil após o entendimento do STF (2025-2026) Abstact: This research analyzes how the expansion of the internet and hyperconnectivity have profoundly transformed social communication, highlighting the urgent need to debate the actual limits of freedom of expression within social media environments. The primary objective is to re-evaluate the scope of this right when it is instrumentalized to propagate hate speech, thereby directly violating human dignity and the rights of minorities. To understand this issue, the study examines the foundations of the 1988 Brazilian Federal Constitution, which guarantees the freedom to manifest thought and prohibits prior censorship, while simultaneously establishing the inviolability of honor, image, and human dignity. It is essential to differentiate legitimate opinion from hate speech, as legal doctrine maintains that attacks motivated by prejudice do not find constitutional protection. In Brazil, the primary regulatory framework for the network is the Civil Framework of the Internet (Law 12,965/2014). For years, the original mechanism of Article 19 determined that digital platforms could only be held civilly liable for third-party content if they non-complied with a specific judicial order for removal. However, this model faced severe judicial questioning, under the argument that it facilitated the perpetuation of harmful publications and irreparable damages. The central focus of this research is the substantial jurisprudential shift that occurred in June 2025, when the Brazilian Supreme Federal Court (STF) redefined the interpretation of the aforementioned provision. By reviewing the ministers’ votes, it is observed that the Supreme Court established a new normative landscape, imposing a more rigorous duty of care on social media providers and a proactive role in the systemic fight against hate speech. In conclusion, the research synthesizes that the interpretation of the legal framework needed to evolve to align with digital reality, establishing new parameters that preserve the internet as a democratic space while ensuring a secure environment where fundamental rights are respected. Mon, 20 Jul 2026 00:00:00 GMT https://repositorio.uema.br/jspui/handle/123456789/6340 2026-07-20T00:00:00Z https://repositorio.uema.br/jspui/handle/123456789/6339 Título: A equiparação sucessória entre cônjuge e companheiro no direito brasileiro: reflexos do julgamento do RE 878.694/MG na proteção sucessória da união estável Abstact: This study analyzes the succession equality between spouses and partners under Brazilian law, focusing on the legal impacts of the judgment rendered by the Federal Supreme Court in Extraordinary Appeal No. 878.694/MG on the inheritance rights arising from stable unions. The research begins with a historical analysis of the evolution of the family and Family Law, demonstrating that the 1988 Federal Constitution substantially expanded the legal concept of family by recognizing stable unions as family entities deserving special state protection. In this context, the study examines the legislative development of stable unions, from the first regulatory statutes to their discipline under the 2002 Brazilian Civil Code, emphasizing the succession regime established by Article 1,790 and the doctrinal and judicial controversies arising from the distinction between spouses and partners. The research critically analyzes the constitutional grounds adopted by the Federal Supreme Court in Extraordinary Appeal No. 878.694/MG, which declared Article 1,790 of the Civil Code unconstitutional and determined the application of Article 1,829 to stable unions, thereby establishing equal succession rights for spouses and partners. Particular attention is given to the constitutional principles of human dignity, equality, family protection, family solidarity, affection, and the plurality of family entities, as well as their influence on the interpretation of Brazilian Succession Law. The study adopts the deductive method through bibliographical, documentary, and jurisprudential research based on the Federal Constitution, the Brazilian Civil Code, Federal Supreme Court precedents, and leading Brazilian legal scholarship. The findings demonstrate that the Supreme Court's decision constitutes a landmark in the constitutionalization of Brazilian Succession Law by eliminating discriminatory inheritance treatment between spouses and partners and strengthening the legal protection afforded to stable unions. It is concluded that the judgment of Extraordinary Appeal No. 878.694/MG consolidated the constitutional understanding that there is no legal basis for maintaining distinct succession regimes for family entities equally protected by the Federal Constitution, thereby promoting fundamental rights, substantive equality among family models, and a succession system more consistent with the principles of the Democratic Rule of Law. Mon, 20 Jul 2026 00:00:00 GMT https://repositorio.uema.br/jspui/handle/123456789/6339 2026-07-20T00:00:00Z https://repositorio.uema.br/jspui/handle/123456789/6338 Título: A (in)efetividade do controle da improbidade administrativa após a Lei nº 14.230/2021: uma análise da accountability horizontal a partir dos dados do CNJ (2020-2025) com ênfase no estado do Maranhão Abstact: This undergraduate thesis examines the impacts of Law No. 14,230/2021 on the effectiveness of administrative misconduct control in Brazil, focusing on the introduction of a specific intent (dolo específico) requirement and the elimination of the negligence-based modality (modalidade culposa) as new parameters of accountability. Drawing on Guillermo O'Donnell's theoretical framework of horizontal accountability and Ronald Dworkin's test of normative integrity, the study investigates the extent to which the legislative reform, ostensibly aimed at rationalizing the sanctioning system and curbing the phenomenon known as the "pen freeze" (apagão das canetas), undermined the capacity of oversight agencies - particularly the Public Prosecutor's Office - to investigate and sanction dishonest public officials. The research adopts a qualitative approach, with secondary analysis of quantitative data, of an exploratory- descriptive nature and a hypothetical-deductive method, combining bibliographic research, documentary analysis, and descriptive statistical analysis of data extracted from the National Council of Justice's Judiciary Statistics Panel, covering the period from 2020 to 2025. The results reveal a 67.5% decline in the national volume of new administrative misconduct lawsuits between 2021 and 2024, a trend that the multiscale analysis - national, regional, state, and municipal — associates not with a qualitative filtering of claims, but with a process of control erosion, with effects disproportionately concentrated in jurisdictions with lower institutional capacity, such as the state of Maranhão and its interior judicial districts. The study concludes that Law No. 14,230/2021, by uniformly raising the evidentiary standard without providing institutional countermeasures for the most vulnerable oversight agencies, deepened federative inequalities in the protection of administrative probity and compromised the reform's coherence with the constitutional principles it claimed to uphold, thus representing a setback in the republican dimension of Brazilian horizontal accountability. Thu, 16 Jul 2026 00:00:00 GMT https://repositorio.uema.br/jspui/handle/123456789/6338 2026-07-16T00:00:00Z