Ambitious constitutions: prominent courts

Vieira, Oscar Vilhena

doi:10.4337/9781785369216.00016

Cited by 3 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…I included a control variable for the year when the decision was made. The literature on constitutional reforms in Latin America suggests that factors like domestic political dynamics (Sanchez Urribarri 2017; Bernal 2017), ideology, and the structure of the judiciary (Landau 2017;Vieira 2017) have shaped rights protection. Tracking time is a way to explore how the council has reacted to these factors; this variable will show whether there are shifts in the council's decision-making over time that could correspond to key political or ideological changes in Colombia.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In the Latin American context, the judiciary has been subject to multiple reforms aimed at ensuring that courtrooms are venues for citizen engagement and social equity; the Colombian Constitution of 1991 is an example of this trend (Wilson 2009;Schor 2009;Landau 2012;Finkel 2004;Côrtes et al 2021). How these reforms have been implemented and their results vary considerably from one country to the other (Vieira 2017;Sanchez Urribarri 2017). Overall, skepticism has grown.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Who Are You and What’s Your Issue? Winning in Collective Litigation in Colombia

Páez

2022

Lat. Am. res. rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article analyzes the role of the Colombian Council of State, the administrative court of highest level in Colombia, in cases of collective litigation (acción popular). It answers the questions: Do outcomes in these cases vary depending on the right under litigation? Do parties with more resources achieve better outcomes? Does the government hold an advantage when facing other parties? The article analyzes quantitatively an original database of collective litigation cases on environmental protection, public security, the rights of consumers, and administrative morality, and interprets these findings using interview data. Results show that parties’ success rates vary depending on the right under litigation. The national government has the highest litigation success rate, but individuals are more likely to win than stronger parties like department and local governments. The article presents implications following the literature on courts and rights protection in the Global South and party capability.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Who Are You and What’s Your Issue? Winning in Collective Litigation in Colombia

Páez

2022

Lat. Am. res. rev.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The 1988 Constitution is a landmark in Brazil's democratisation and contains several justiciable social rights that have led to a broader awareness of rights. It has also strengthened the autonomy of two key institutions: the Defensoria Pública (Public Legal Defence), responsible for providing legal aid for those who need it [19] (article 134), and the Ministério Público (Public Prosecution Office), with the duty to defend inalienable social and individual interests [19] (article 127), along with the courts [20]. The social rights established in the Constitution have been consolidated through legislation, such as the Consumer Protection Code [21], and this context of expansion of rights and strengthening of relevant institutions has led to an increase in claims urging the courts to give decisions on the implementation of those rights and the state's obligation to act in this process [22,23].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Right to Water and Courts in Brazil: How Do Brazilian Courts Rule When They Frame Water as a Right?

Côrtes

2021

Water

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The international protection given to the right to water has increased over the last decades, with two United Nations’ resolutions establishing a freestanding right to water in 2010. Several countries have a right to water enshrined in their constitutions, while in other countries, this right has been recognised by the courts. This study aims to assess whether and how Brazilian courts are deciding water-related conflicts using the “right to water” frame, what the content given to this right is, and whose rights are protected. We created a comprehensive database of decisions issued by Brazilian courts at different levels containing the expression “right to water”. Our main findings are that the great majority of decisions are from lower courts and were issued on individual cases related to water supply. Further, we have seen that courts are frequently prohibiting the disconnection of water supply services when extreme vulnerability is argued. The same has been seen in other Latin American countries, such as Argentina, Colombia, and Costa Rica, with the one main difference that in these countries, the right to water has been carved out by the Constitutional Courts. The Brazilian Federal Supreme Court, which has the last word on the interpretation of the constitution, has not issued any decisions establishing a right to water, but there is legal mobilisation aiming for this and using UN resolutions as a key argument.

show abstract

“…Outro fator que pode justificar os números é o fato de que o governo Bolsonaro (2019-2022) exigiu um papel de supervisão maior do STF devido à questionável constitucionalidade de muitas de suas medidas, como indicam algumas pesquisas(Vieira;Glezer; Barbosa, 2022). Essa hipótese deve ser explorada em trabalhos futuros.…”

unclassified

Era Digital Do Controle De Constitucionalidade Na Pandemia Da Covid-19

Levy Silvério dos Reis,

Souza Queiroz Franco de Oliveira

2024

REI

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

O Supremo Tribunal Federal (STF) instituiu, em meados dos anos 2000, o Plenário Virtual para o julgamento da repercussão geral dos recursos extraordinários. Com o tempo, a ferramenta teve a sua utilização ampliada, possibilitando a análise de todas as classes processuais. Essa expansão alcançou seu ápice na pandemia da Covid-19. Atualmente, a Corte decide casos de controle de constitucionalidade tanto no Plenário Síncrono quanto no Plenário Virtual. Este estudo investiga o seguinte problema de pesquisa: quais características distintas surgem da atuação do STF no controle de constitucionalidade realizado nos ambientes síncrono e virtual? A metodologia empregada nesta pesquisa é empírica quantitativa, apoiada em uma base de dados que reúne todas as decisões colegiadas proferidas pelo STF em casos de controle de constitucionalidade no período de 2019 a 2022. O estudo inclui uma revisão da literatura sobre o Plenário Virtual, apresenta a base de dados utilizada e a metodologia empregada e conclui com as implicações teóricas resultantes da análise exploratória dos dados. Os resultados apontam que o STF mostra diferenças parciais em sua atuação no controle de constitucionalidade, ao comparar o Plenário Síncrono e o Plenário Virtual: existe uma maior capacidade e rapidez em proferir julgamentos colegiados no ambiente digital (1); os Ministros relatores dos casos e os temas discutidos mantêm proporções equivalentes (2); e verifica-se uma pequena taxa de decisões mais favoráveis aos autores no Plenário Virtual (3).

show abstract

Ambitious constitutions: prominent courts

Cited by 3 publications

References 0 publications

Who Are You and What’s Your Issue? Winning in Collective Litigation in Colombia

Who Are You and What’s Your Issue? Winning in Collective Litigation in Colombia

Right to Water and Courts in Brazil: How Do Brazilian Courts Rule When They Frame Water as a Right?

Era Digital Do Controle De Constitucionalidade Na Pandemia Da Covid-19

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About