Judicial activism, full jurisdiction and principles of the labor administrative litigation process

Abstract

This article analyzes the administrative labor litigation process in Peru, recognizing that it is a branch of procedural law whose origins lie neither in legislation nor in case law. Rather, it has a practical origin. It arose from the concern of those subject to the law—public employees and pensioners as former state employees—to assert their rights against the administration as an employer. It focuses on the study of the principles of administrative litigation based on the general principles of administrative law. It emphasizes its primary role in relation to the principles of procedural law and those of civil procedure. It underscores the application of these general principles, given that the underlying basis of the dispute is of an administrative nature. The principles of integration, procedural equality, facilitation of the proceedings, and ex officio intervention constitute the cornerstones of this judicial dynamic. They address legislative gaps by promoting a flexible form of judicial activism. The possibility of applying these principles to administrative labor litigation will be examined in light of the constitutional and legal protection of public-sector workers and pensioners. It is noted that such application, therefore, responds to distinct scenarios. Using hermeneutic, sociological, and historical techniques, the study concludes that this application is justified by the special status of the parties to the proceedings who bring cases before these courts, as they are groups that require appropriate protection. For this reason, greater emphasis is placed on labor administrative litigation than on the general use of this judicial process in relation to the requirement of full jurisdiction.