O Supremo Tribunal Federal e a monocratização das decisões: uma análise acerca da quebra da colegialidade na Corte Suprema brasileira

Abstract

Judgments in the courts, as a rule, are made in collegiate deliberations, so that the judges debate the matter to, in the end, reach a certain conclusion. In that In this sense, the objective of this paper is to analyze the mitigation of collegiality in the Supreme Federal Court. For this, the hypothetical-deductive method was used, in order to understand the problem on two fronts: the powers of the Minister Rapporteur and the monocratization of decisions; which were submitted to an empirical verification. Furthermore, this monograph is divided in three chapters. The first chapter is reserved for exposing the history of the STF, since their training, to date, as well as detailing and explaining what the principle of collegiality. The second chapter elucidates the decision models adopted by the Constitutional Courts in the world, in order to show the model adopted by the Supreme and whether this is the best to meet the Court's needs. Also problematizes the powers conferred on the Minister Rapporteur, analyzing them in two scenarios: in the cases commonplace and in cases of great repercussion. The third chapter analyzes the phenomenon of monocratization from the granting of injunctions by the Ministers, expressing the points positive and negative for the STF, and ending with a critique, in light of three injunctions granted in the year 2021. In the end, the monograph will reach the conclusion that, in fact, there is a breach of collegiality in the Court and, in view of this, it will present three possible solutions