Abstract
How can structural litigation go beyond symbolic effects and produce concrete improvements for vulnerable groups? The article seeks an answer in India's experience in structural litigation. From the bibliographic study and the analysis of paradigmatic decisions of the Supreme Court of India, the objective is to understand how the use of socio-legal commissions of inquiry helped the Court to monitor its decisions and to mitigate the criticism that the Judiciary, for lacking necessary technique, it should not intervene in public policies. It appears that the aforementioned commissions have improved the resolution of structural disputes, contributing to the fact that the Court's decisions have not only a rhetorical effect, but a concrete one. Thus, the Indian experience serves as an example to improve structural litigation in Brazil.
Keywords:
Structural litigation; Socio-legal commissions of inquiry; Judicial control of public policies; Supreme Court of India