The Basic Rights to Health and the Limits of Judicialization: An Analysis of STF´s restrictions in Topic 6 on High-Cost Medicine

Abstract

The present study addresses the fundamental right to health and the limits imposed by judicialization, focusing primarily on the restrictions established by the Federal Supreme Court (STF) in the judgment of Topic 6, which concerns the provision of high-cost medicines not incorporated into the official SUS list. The central issue to be investigated is understanding how such restrictions may compromise the effectiveness of access to healthcare. The general objective is to analyze how the conditions imposed by the STF in Topic 6 limit access to the constitutional right to health. The specific objectives include: contextualizing the historical evolution of the right to health; examining the limits imposed by Topic 6 on the provision of high-cost medicines; and investigating the effects of these restrictions on the effectiveness of this fundamental right. The methodology adopted is deductive, with an exploratory approach, based on bibliographic and documentary review, using legislation, legal doctrine, and jurisprudence. As a conclusion, the study indicates that although the STF sought to balance the sustainability of the public health system in light of the growing wave of judicialization, the restrictions established in Topic 6 may ultimately weaken constitutional principles by imposing obstacles to access to healthcare. Thus, the study concludes that the current challenge lies in finding a balance between administrative rationality and the preservation of public management, and the protection of human dignity safeguarded by the Constitution, ensuring that technical criteria do not become barriers that prevent the exercise of a fundamental right.