Effective judicial protection under threat: Gender stereotypes and the breach of the duty to provide judicial reasoning in light of constitutional case law .

Abstract

This article examines the need to reinterpret the right to effective judicial protection through a gender-sensitive and anti-stereotyping approach. Focusing on constitutional case law, it analyzes how the complex and diffuse content of this right —alongside the persistent reliance on formalistic interpretive frameworks— has hindered the recognition of the impact of gender stereotypes in its various facets, particularly regarding the requirement of reasoned and legally grounded decisions. The study explores the relationship between the duty to provide judicial reasoning and the prohibition of judicial stereotyping. Against this backdrop, through the analysis of Constitutional Court Judgment 48/2024 of April 8, the aim is to shed light on the hermeneutical shift adopted in the constitutional interpretation of this right, highlighting —beyond its instrumental dimension— the transformative and emancipatory potential it holds in contexts of structural inequality.