MEANINGFUL ENGAGEMENT: SOUTH AFRICAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO STRUCTURAL LITIGATION IN BRAZIL
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2022 |
Outros Autores: | |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Revista Opinião Jurídica (Fortaleza) |
Texto Completo: | https://periodicos.unichristus.edu.br/opiniaojuridica/article/view/3935 |
Resumo: | Objective:The purpose of this article is to analyze a structural remedy model developed by the Constitutional Court of South Africa, called Meaningful Engagement, which can minimize the impact of traditional objections to structural litigation, as it increases community participation and interinstitutional dialogue between the various actors responsible for the solution of the problem.Methodology: As a research methodology, in addition to the traditional bibliographic research around the doctrine developed on the subject, a more in-depth analysis of the two paradigmatic cases that served as the basis for the development of the South African institute, Olivia Road and Joe Slovo, was carried out.Results: It is concluded that are intrinsic and extrinsic reasons for seeking inspiration in the Meaningful Engagement model. The South African model, by valuing institutional dialogue and public participation, mitigates the usual criticisms to structural litigation.Contributions: From the results, it is observed that: a) in dialogic structural remedies, affected communities are treated with dignity and can influence the formulation of public policies that concern them.; b) public participation guarantees the structural injunctions transparency and, to the judges, greater technical capacity, since only with the inclusion of the social segments affected by the problem that is intended to be overcome will the judge be able to produce measures consistent with the real needs the concrete case; c) finally, public participation and institutional dialogue also collaborate to mitigate the criticisms usually made of structural processes. |
id |
CHRISTUS-2_a074e100ea2cb45f317494f31691ee14 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.unichristus.emnuvens.com.br:article/3935 |
network_acronym_str |
CHRISTUS-2 |
network_name_str |
Revista Opinião Jurídica (Fortaleza) |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
MEANINGFUL ENGAGEMENT: SOUTH AFRICAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO STRUCTURAL LITIGATION IN BRAZILCOMPROMISO SIGNIFICATIVO: CONTRIBUCIONES SUDÁFRICAS A LOS PROCESOS ESTRUCTURALES EN BRASILDireito Constitucional; Direito Comparado; Direitos FundamentaisMeaningful Engagement; South Africa; Structural Litigation; Structural RemediesSudáfrica; Compromiso Significativo; Proceso structural; Remedios estructuralesObjective:The purpose of this article is to analyze a structural remedy model developed by the Constitutional Court of South Africa, called Meaningful Engagement, which can minimize the impact of traditional objections to structural litigation, as it increases community participation and interinstitutional dialogue between the various actors responsible for the solution of the problem.Methodology: As a research methodology, in addition to the traditional bibliographic research around the doctrine developed on the subject, a more in-depth analysis of the two paradigmatic cases that served as the basis for the development of the South African institute, Olivia Road and Joe Slovo, was carried out.Results: It is concluded that are intrinsic and extrinsic reasons for seeking inspiration in the Meaningful Engagement model. The South African model, by valuing institutional dialogue and public participation, mitigates the usual criticisms to structural litigation.Contributions: From the results, it is observed that: a) in dialogic structural remedies, affected communities are treated with dignity and can influence the formulation of public policies that concern them.; b) public participation guarantees the structural injunctions transparency and, to the judges, greater technical capacity, since only with the inclusion of the social segments affected by the problem that is intended to be overcome will the judge be able to produce measures consistent with the real needs the concrete case; c) finally, public participation and institutional dialogue also collaborate to mitigate the criticisms usually made of structural processes.Objetivo: El propósito de este artículo es analizar un modelo de remedio estructural desarrollado por la Corte Constitucional de Sudáfrica, denominado Compromiso Significativo, que puede minimizar el impacto de las objeciones tradicionales a los procesos estructurales, ya que aumenta la participación comunitaria y el diálogo interinstitucional entre los diversos actores. responsable de solucionar el problema.Metodología: Como metodología de investigación, además de la investigación bibliográfica tradicional en torno a la doctrina desarrollada sobre el tema, se realizó un análisis más profundo de dos casos paradigmáticos que sirvieron de base para el desarrollo del instituto sudafricano, Olivia Road y Joe Slovo, se llevo a cabo.Resultados: Concluimos que existen razones intrínsecas y extrínsecas para buscar inspiración en el modelo de Compromiso Significativo. El modelo sudafricano, al valorar el diálogo institucional y la participación pública, mitiga las críticas habituales a los procesos estructurales.Contribuciones: De los resultados se observa que: a) en los remedios estructurales dialógicos, las comunidades afectadas son tratadas con dignidad y pueden incidir en la formulación de las políticas públicas que les conciernen; b) la participación ciudadana garantiza la transparencia de las medidas cautelares y, a los jueces, una mayor formación técnica, ya que solo con la inclusión de los segmentos sociales, afectados por el problema que se pretende superar, el juez podrá producir medidas consistentes con las necesidades reales en un caso específico; c) finalmente, la participación ciudadana y el diálogo institucional también colaboran para mitigar las críticas que habitualmente se hacen a los procesos estructurales.Instituto para o Desenvolvimento da Educacao (Centro Universitário Christus - Unichristus)Casimiro, MatheusMarmelstein, George2022-01-18info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfapplication/xmlhttps://periodicos.unichristus.edu.br/opiniaojuridica/article/view/393510.12662/2447-6641oj.v20i33.p165-201.2022Revista Opinião Jurídica (Fortaleza); v. 20, n. 33 (2022); 165-201Revista Opinião Jurídica (Fortaleza); v. 20, n. 33 (2022); 165-201Revista Opinião Jurídica (Fortaleza); v. 20, n. 33 (2022); 165-201Revista Opinião Jurídica (Fortaleza); v. 20, n. 33 (2022); 165-2012447-66411806-042010.12662/2447-6641oj.v20i33.2022reponame:Revista Opinião Jurídica (Fortaleza)instname:Centro Universitário Christus (Unichristus)instacron:UNICHRISTUSenghttps://periodicos.unichristus.edu.br/opiniaojuridica/article/view/3935/1531https://periodicos.unichristus.edu.br/opiniaojuridica/article/view/3935/1542Direitos autorais 2021 Revista Opinião Jurídica (Fortaleza)http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2022-03-04T10:47:33Zoai:ojs.unichristus.emnuvens.com.br:article/3935Revistahttps://periodicos.unichristus.edu.br/opiniaojuridicaPRIhttps://periodicos.unichristus.edu.br/opiniaojuridica/oaiopiniaojuridica01@unichristus.edu.br || secretaria.oj@unichristus.edu.br2447-66411806-0420opendoar:2022-03-04T10:47:33Revista Opinião Jurídica (Fortaleza) - Centro Universitário Christus (Unichristus)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
MEANINGFUL ENGAGEMENT: SOUTH AFRICAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO STRUCTURAL LITIGATION IN BRAZIL COMPROMISO SIGNIFICATIVO: CONTRIBUCIONES SUDÁFRICAS A LOS PROCESOS ESTRUCTURALES EN BRASIL |
title |
MEANINGFUL ENGAGEMENT: SOUTH AFRICAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO STRUCTURAL LITIGATION IN BRAZIL |
spellingShingle |
MEANINGFUL ENGAGEMENT: SOUTH AFRICAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO STRUCTURAL LITIGATION IN BRAZIL Casimiro, Matheus Direito Constitucional; Direito Comparado; Direitos Fundamentais Meaningful Engagement; South Africa; Structural Litigation; Structural Remedies Sudáfrica; Compromiso Significativo; Proceso structural; Remedios estructurales |
title_short |
MEANINGFUL ENGAGEMENT: SOUTH AFRICAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO STRUCTURAL LITIGATION IN BRAZIL |
title_full |
MEANINGFUL ENGAGEMENT: SOUTH AFRICAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO STRUCTURAL LITIGATION IN BRAZIL |
title_fullStr |
MEANINGFUL ENGAGEMENT: SOUTH AFRICAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO STRUCTURAL LITIGATION IN BRAZIL |
title_full_unstemmed |
MEANINGFUL ENGAGEMENT: SOUTH AFRICAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO STRUCTURAL LITIGATION IN BRAZIL |
title_sort |
MEANINGFUL ENGAGEMENT: SOUTH AFRICAN CONTRIBUTIONS TO STRUCTURAL LITIGATION IN BRAZIL |
author |
Casimiro, Matheus |
author_facet |
Casimiro, Matheus Marmelstein, George |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Marmelstein, George |
author2_role |
author |
dc.contributor.none.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Casimiro, Matheus Marmelstein, George |
dc.subject.none.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Direito Constitucional; Direito Comparado; Direitos Fundamentais Meaningful Engagement; South Africa; Structural Litigation; Structural Remedies Sudáfrica; Compromiso Significativo; Proceso structural; Remedios estructurales |
topic |
Direito Constitucional; Direito Comparado; Direitos Fundamentais Meaningful Engagement; South Africa; Structural Litigation; Structural Remedies Sudáfrica; Compromiso Significativo; Proceso structural; Remedios estructurales |
description |
Objective:The purpose of this article is to analyze a structural remedy model developed by the Constitutional Court of South Africa, called Meaningful Engagement, which can minimize the impact of traditional objections to structural litigation, as it increases community participation and interinstitutional dialogue between the various actors responsible for the solution of the problem.Methodology: As a research methodology, in addition to the traditional bibliographic research around the doctrine developed on the subject, a more in-depth analysis of the two paradigmatic cases that served as the basis for the development of the South African institute, Olivia Road and Joe Slovo, was carried out.Results: It is concluded that are intrinsic and extrinsic reasons for seeking inspiration in the Meaningful Engagement model. The South African model, by valuing institutional dialogue and public participation, mitigates the usual criticisms to structural litigation.Contributions: From the results, it is observed that: a) in dialogic structural remedies, affected communities are treated with dignity and can influence the formulation of public policies that concern them.; b) public participation guarantees the structural injunctions transparency and, to the judges, greater technical capacity, since only with the inclusion of the social segments affected by the problem that is intended to be overcome will the judge be able to produce measures consistent with the real needs the concrete case; c) finally, public participation and institutional dialogue also collaborate to mitigate the criticisms usually made of structural processes. |
publishDate |
2022 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2022-01-18 |
dc.type.none.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.unichristus.edu.br/opiniaojuridica/article/view/3935 10.12662/2447-6641oj.v20i33.p165-201.2022 |
url |
https://periodicos.unichristus.edu.br/opiniaojuridica/article/view/3935 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.12662/2447-6641oj.v20i33.p165-201.2022 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.unichristus.edu.br/opiniaojuridica/article/view/3935/1531 https://periodicos.unichristus.edu.br/opiniaojuridica/article/view/3935/1542 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Direitos autorais 2021 Revista Opinião Jurídica (Fortaleza) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Direitos autorais 2021 Revista Opinião Jurídica (Fortaleza) http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf application/xml |
dc.coverage.none.fl_str_mv |
|
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Instituto para o Desenvolvimento da Educacao (Centro Universitário Christus - Unichristus) |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Instituto para o Desenvolvimento da Educacao (Centro Universitário Christus - Unichristus) |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Revista Opinião Jurídica (Fortaleza); v. 20, n. 33 (2022); 165-201 Revista Opinião Jurídica (Fortaleza); v. 20, n. 33 (2022); 165-201 Revista Opinião Jurídica (Fortaleza); v. 20, n. 33 (2022); 165-201 Revista Opinião Jurídica (Fortaleza); v. 20, n. 33 (2022); 165-201 2447-6641 1806-0420 10.12662/2447-6641oj.v20i33.2022 reponame:Revista Opinião Jurídica (Fortaleza) instname:Centro Universitário Christus (Unichristus) instacron:UNICHRISTUS |
instname_str |
Centro Universitário Christus (Unichristus) |
instacron_str |
UNICHRISTUS |
institution |
UNICHRISTUS |
reponame_str |
Revista Opinião Jurídica (Fortaleza) |
collection |
Revista Opinião Jurídica (Fortaleza) |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Revista Opinião Jurídica (Fortaleza) - Centro Universitário Christus (Unichristus) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
opiniaojuridica01@unichristus.edu.br || secretaria.oj@unichristus.edu.br |
_version_ |
1797052896652558336 |