Methodological assumptions for the comparative study of the monitoring of structural injunctions in Brazil and Colombia

Abstract

The main objective of this article is to question the traditional defense of the importantion of importing the structural process monitoring system developed by Columbian Courts into Brazil. To this end, the methodological principles of Comparative Law described by Ran Hirschl shall be utilized, notably the “principle of selection of the more similar cases”. Using this methodology, the existing similarities between the institutional and political realities of Columbia and Brazil shall be examined, as well as the underlying factors which differentiate the context of the aforementioned countries. By using a methodology of Compared Constitutional Law, the hypothesis shall establish that the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court does not possess the institutional means to permanently monitor the execution of structural actions pertaining to public interest, notwithstanding the continued efforts to do so. The hypothesis was at last confirmed.