Search

This reflection article offers a critique of management that the Constitutional Court has given the actions for protection against diplomatic missions in labor, because the thesis of relative immunity in labor matters currently holds the Constitutional Court, it has not been sufficient to ensure the immediate protection of the fundamental rights of applicants and instead has created cumbersome mechanisms that disfigure the ultimate goal of guardianship. Also in practical terms, the current position of the highest constitutional court does something different to shift the grounds of breach of public burdens previously located in the diplomatic immunity to personal inviolability and immunity from execution, which prevent compliance Case protection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]