Proposing non-conventional molds in the processes of jurisdictional human rights adjudications.

In Constitutional States it is possible to find guarantees that protect citizens against constitutional omissions of the authorities. This protection implies that the Constitutional Courts, when addressing violations of rights, are obliged to issue rulings in which they specify the way to fulfill a right. They even provide guidelines on the concrete way to guarantee the exercise of the right in question akin to making public policy.
Interventions like these might prevent the addressees of the decision from making contributions that may be significant for the final outcome of the remedy. This issue highlights the need to explore new paradigms related to the role of the Constitutional Courts in relation to affected populations.
A new paradigm must take into account anthropological, sociological, and worldview elements of the affected groups requiring break with the conventional molds in which the interested parties are given participation in the framework of constitutional processes.