Litigating also means imagining possible futures

Strategic litigation is, in essence, a tool for challenging the present and imagining more just futures. Although it is often associated solely with the judicial decisions it produces, its potential exceeds what is contained in a ruling. Litigation can be a way to challenge dominant narratives, start new public discussions, and strengthen ongoing social processes. It is also an exercise in collaboration with other sectors of the human rights movement, with whom we share the conviction that the law, when used creatively and responsibly, can be an ally in social transformation.

Read another article from the latest edition of El Sur Global: Civil society and the legality of public administration: the Google case

At Dejusticia, we have worked with this conviction as our compass. In this edition of the newsletter, we share three cases that reflect not only what we do, but how we do it. Each of these processes has involved rigorous assessments, alliances with local actors, and strategic decisions designed to maximize structural effects: from the production and circulation of evidence to the accompaniment of affected communities and advocacy with the authorities. It is this combination of legal technique and territorial work that allows a court case to become a lever for transformation. These examples show the versatility of litigation as a tool for change, its ability to adapt to different issues, contexts, and needs, and its power to generate impacts beyond the courtroom.

The first case we present is an attempt to broaden the scope of public debate on human rights, even in legal scenarios involving companies that, on the surface, were not designed for this purpose. This is a case in which Google is challenging a decision by the Colombian data protection authority, arguing that the Colombian Data Protection Law does not apply to it and that the Colombian authority lacks jurisdiction because it is a foreign company. In this case, we saw an opportunity to intervene with arguments that highlight the connection between this case and the guarantee of our human rights and the general public interest. This intervention reflects a key idea: that litigation, even in the context of proceedings far removed from the usual sphere of human rights, can also be an exercise that adds a technical element to the debate and allows us to broaden the scope of legal disputes to include other socially relevant issues. Litigation allows society to intervene in favor of the public interest and in defense of human rights.

In the second case, we address the declaration of a state of internal unrest in Colombia’s Catatumbo region, an area historically plagued by violence and institutional neglect. In this case, we present a situation that is more common in the field of strategic human rights litigation, where we use the law to fulfill one of its most essential functions in a democracy: to exercise control over power and its decisions, particularly when these are made in exceptional circumstances. In this case, litigation was a way of demanding more state presence where it is needed. It was also a reminder that strategic litigation not only seeks to protect individual rights, but also to enforce collective commitments and institutional transformations. All of this is of great comparative relevance, since states of emergency are latent in all legal systems and democracy, the rule of law, and rights are at stake in them. 

Finally, the third case we share comes from a place that is particularly relevant to the conversation on human rights and the strength of different social movements. We provided legal arguments in support of a case led by allies of the human rights movement in defense of a child human rights defender, Rubén, whose case exemplifies the risks faced by children who speak out in contexts of conflict and inequality. Our contribution—focused on the special duty to protect child defenders—sought to strengthen the ongoing case and contribute our experience to an urgent cause. This exercise reaffirms that litigation is a collective effort, a gesture of support and recognition for the work of others who are also fighting to build a more just world. Furthermore, it is part of a growing international trend: the recognition of the right to defend rights, recognized by the Inter-American Court in the case of Cajar v. Colombia, decided in 2023.  

Each of these cases highlights a different facet of the work we do, but they all share the same conviction: that strategic litigation is versatile and must be committed to the social struggles of our time. In this sense, we seek to contribute to collective agendas being heard and responded to with the seriousness they deserve.

In contexts where human rights are threatened by authoritarian discourse, regressive decisions, or structural violence, litigation is also a form of hope. It is a rigorous, thoughtful, and technical form, but also a deeply political one, in the best sense of the word: because it involves intervening in the public sphere with the desire and will to transform social reality.

We hope that the cases we share in this newsletter will not only showcase our work, but also inspire new conversations and alliances. Because for us, litigation is an invitation to imagine other possible futures.