
This article explains how judicial review shapes political relations between national and subnational governments in Brazil, Colombia, and Spain. The analysis centers on two core questions: how supreme courts become pivotal arbiters of vertical intergovernmental disputes, and how national and subnational politicians deploy judicial review to advance their own interests.
📌 What Was Compared
The study contrasts judicial review processes across three systems: federal Brazil, quasi‑federal Spain, and unitary Colombia. Comparison focuses on disputes that originate at the subnational level and on how courts intervene in those disputes.
🔎 How the Comparison Was Conducted
🔑 Key Findings
⚖️ Why It Matters
The findings show that courts are not merely legal referees but active political actors in territorial disputes. Understanding these different patterns of judicialization is essential for explaining how judicial institutions influence center–region relations and for anticipating how political actors will use judicial channels in diverse constitutional settings.

| The Judicialization of Territorial Politics in Brazil, Colombia and Spain was authored by Helder Ferreira do Vale. It was published by in BPSR in 2013. |