REPRESSIVE, PREVENTIVE, AND INTROSPECTIVE JURISDICTION: NEW PATHS FOR THE RESOLUTION OF POLYCENTRIC CONFLICTS
Jurisdiction. Polycentric conflicts. Dialogical process. Structural process. Informational regulation. Institutional dialogues.
This study examines the limits and possibilities of jurisdiction in polycentric conflicts, proposing an approach that integrates its repressive, preventive, and introspective dimensions. Based on an analysis of rationalist and constitutionalist paradigms, it argues that, under constitutionalism, procedural forms must subordinate to the substance of rights, ensuring substantive justice guided by constitutional principles and 2 the specificities of each case. Employing a methodology that combines dogmatic analysis and a comprehensive literature review, the research advocates for the convergence of theory, principiology, and normative instruments as the key to resolving such conflicts. Introspective jurisdiction is highlighted as a mechanism to uncover hidden institutional practices and complement the actions of other branches of government, fostering social regulation through dialogue. The study concludes that the Judiciary can consolidate its role as a transformative agent by collaborating in the protection of fundamental rights and promoting social justice. Beyond conflict resolution, judicial processes can serve as tools for understanding social dynamics and enhancing public policies in hypercomplex scenarios.