Collective amparo in Guatemala: a guaranteed evolution in the interpretation of the procedural requirement in the standing to sue doctrine

Abstract

Collective amparo proceedings have been the result of a jurisprudential
innovation, which was established by the need to guarantee the enjoyment and
respect of supra-individual or diffuse rights. To this end, there has been an evolution
in the criteria used to determine the standing to sue in amparo proceedings,
in order to guarantee access to constitutional justice and to ensure greater
effectiveness of the amparo proceedings. This paper analyzes the evolution
of the interpretation of the standing to sue requirement in collective amparo
proceedings in the jurisprudence of the Guatemalan Constitutional Court. In the
first part, it provides general concepts about amparo, active legitimation and
supra-individual rights, to contribute to a better understanding of the object of
analysis. In the second part, it examines the evolution of the criteria issued by
the Constitutional Court to determine the standing of a petitioner in collective
amparo proceedings. In this regard, the article proposes the thesis that collective
protection has been the product of an evolutionary process in the interpretation
of the standing to sue requirement.