2025/01/01 by Benjamin Moron-Puech, Marion Kim-Chi Pollaert, Jimmy Kolbe-André +1 · 1 voice
Business, Management and Accounting · Psychology · Social Sciences · #African Sexualities and LGBTQ+ Issues #LGBTQ Health, Identity, and Policy #Political Influence and Corporate Strategies
paper · pdf · doi:10.33134/rds.445
openalex publication_date 2025/01/01 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/28
This paper is a contribution to strategic litigation studies, with most of its materials drawn from the field of ‘LGBTI+’ rights, i.e., issues related to sexual orientation, gender identity and expression, and sex characteristics (SOGIESC). After recalling briefly the history of strategic litigation, this paper reflects on the link between strategic litigation and democracy, by attempting to identify, among the various forms of strategic litigation those who clearly contributes to democracy and which should therefore benefit from provisions facilitating it, such as rules broadening the standing required to initiate a lawsuit or rules favoring its funding. This paper also demonstrates the legitimacy of the contribution of supreme courts to democratic regimes, as long as such courts are cautious of preserving the powers of the other bodies representing the people (mostly Parliament and Government), by making sure that judges’ intervention is compensating for the flaws of democracy and or not a ‘government of judges’. By comparing the process of adoption of judgments and acts of Parliament, the paper also shows the democratic merits of the judicial deliberation compared to the parliament’s one. The paper, therefore, defends the idea that Strategic litigation can be a better tool than other innovative tools usually promoted to remedy the crisis of democracy, especially for marginalized groups.