Search

Based on unfolding of what is sustained in contemporary doctrine, it presents an understanding of the structural litigation, distinct but not incompatible with traditional doctrine. It affirms that the distinctive foundation of the structural litigation stems from a change of rationality (from causal to teleological), directed to a nonimmediate transition between states of affairs. This transition allows the identification of the characteristics of rights directly and indirectly protected by the structural litigation. At the end it is possible to identify the scope of action of the structural litigation and their function in the protection of the rights.

Copyright of Direito e Práxis is the property of Editora da Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (EdUERJ) and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This paper presents some ideas about the impact that court rulings can have on the political system. Unlike what is usually written about the role of the Judiciary on the subject of human rights, when the emphasis is placed on the patterns and methods the courts devise to respond to claims for the justiciability of these rights, the authors - who focus on the Chilean case - illustrate how strategic litigation can, even with adverse judicial outcomes, have a positive impact on the satisfaction of social rights. The paper will also show how this impact depends more on the sensibility of the political system to respond to the desperate situation in which many of its citizens find themselves, and on the fear of political pressure, than on the possibilities opened up by major court rulings. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]