Abstract

Estructural litigation in health: a comparative study based on cases from South Africa, Argentina, India and Colombia. Rev. Fac. Nac. Salud Pública [online]. 2015, vol.33, n.1, pp.111-120. ISSN 0120-386X.

The rise of health legalization has led to explore the conditions that produce a successful intervention of constitutional courts in this field. OBJECTIVE:the purpose of this research is to identify factors associated with the success of the structural litigation in health, particularly when it involves general and complex orders. METHODOLOGY:this topic was analized in four judicial proceedings in South Africa, Argentina, India and Colombia where health guarantee has been mediated, in one way or another, by the judiciary. The cases are discussed using the comparative method proposed by Charles Ragin, in which the independent or explanatory variables are the factors that determine the highest probability of success of the case. RESULTS:the research adopts the point of view that structural litigation in health is successful if it produces four effects explained by Cesar Rodriguez and Diana Rodriguez: unlocking effect, public policy effect, social impact and deliberative effect. The comparison of these processes in different contexts, allows arriving to new learnings in order to guarantee this right in Colombia.

Keywords : structural litigation; Constitutional Court; the right to health; comparative study; monitoring mechanisms.

        · abstract in Spanish     · text in Spanish     · Spanish ( pdf )