A DEMOCRATIZAÇÃO DO ACESSO À JUSTIÇA COMO PONTE PARA TRANSFORMAÇÕES SOCIAIS: ATIVISMO DIALÓGICO EM PROCESSOS ESTRUTURAIS NA COLÔMBIA

Abstract

Is it possible for the Judiciary to intervene in an active and, at the same time, dialogical way in overcoming calamitous situations that involve systemic and repeated violations of fundamental rights? This article seeks to answer the question through an analysis of the material and symbolic effects of Sentence-T025/04 in the Colombian reality. After a difficult period, marked by armed conflicts throughout the national territory and, particularly, after an internal war of the State against drug cartels, Colombian society celebrated the nineties with enthusiasm, hope for political change and the desire to build a State of effective social well-being. The 1991 Colombian Constitution came with great transformative scopes and sought to promote human dignity, freedom, equality and political and democratic participation through ambitious constitutional provisions. The country's Constitutional Court, in this sense, began to play an important role with regard to the protection of fundamental rights, so that access to justice became a powerful and promising mechanism for redistributing political and social power. The deductive method and bibliographic-documentary research are used. It is concluded that the expression “judicial activism” is multidimensional and contingent, so that using it in an arbitrary and subjective way is to engage in an unscientific and merely rhetorical discussion. The term “judicial activism” cannot be used as an argumentative asset for those who disagree with judicial decisions on certain topics, such as decisions involving public policies, especially because demands involving social, economic and cultural rights will reach the Judiciary, whether the academics whether they want it or not. It must, on the other hand, be studied in all its complexity and from all its facets. Thus, after analyzing the case of forced displacement faced by the Colombian Constitutional Court, the possibility of dialogical activism is seen as an interesting alternative for cases involving structural reforms by the Judiciary.