Search

This paper presents a theoretical framework for the comparative study of the causes and effects of pursuing rights through legal strategies. It then tests that framework on the results of a two-year, five-country empirical analysis of the determinants and impact of judicial interventions in health and education policy. The data gathering effort was carried out by in-country teams of up to five people in each country, using both archival research to build a database of judicial decisions and interviews to explore the implementation and impact of these judicial decisions. The paper first presents extensive original data on the nature and extent of economic and social (ES) rights litigation in Brazil, India, Indonesia, Nigeria and South Africa. It then presents comparative data suggesting the conditions that promote the extensive and successful use of legal strategies. Finally, the paper presents preliminary findings on the direct effects of a law-based strategy, as well as the indirect, aggregate social policy impact of the widespread use of legal approaches to extending ES rights. We argue that three elements combine to produce a wave of judicial demands: a) demand side factors (social organization and resources to pursue a legal strategy) must coincide with b) supply side factors (judicial support and a credible judicial system), in c) a policy context that is propitious for judicial intervention because it is prone to policy-making or bureaucratic failures. We further argue that, with significant exceptions, the direct effects of judicial strategies tends to reinforce redistributive inequities, but the indirect effect often extends the benefits far beyond the initial claimants, with positive, equity-enhancing results.The five countries were chosen so as to include common law countries with aggressive ES rights litigation (India, South Africa) and weak or incipient ES rights litigation (Nigeria), and civil law countries with aggressive (Brazil) and weak (Indonesia) litigation. Similarly, two specific issue areas have been selected for analysis in order to provide within-country variation in the effectiveness of litigation as a means of enforcement: although the findings will, we believe, generalize to the entire range of ES rights, the empirical sections will emphasize the rights to health care and education. A key element in the project is the creation of a cross-nationally comparable database detailing the characteristics and outcomes of ES rights court cases (number of cases, likelihood that plaintiffs succeed, individual or collective action, level of court), and an investigation of impact on the ground in a random sample of up to 100 cases in each country. ..PAT.-Unpublished Manuscript [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]