La tensión entre el poder judicial y el poder ejecutivo en la emisión de medidas cautelares innominadas en contra de entidades gubernamentales: un análisis comparativo entre América Latina y Europa continental

The tension between the judicial power ('jurisdictio') and the executive power ('gubernaculum') has long been a contentious issue in the context of issuing unnamed cautionary actions against governmental agencies (Ríos Álvarez, 2015; Tridimas, 2006). This article explores the contrasting approaches to this tension in Latin America and Continental Europe, analyzing the legal and historical foundations, as well as the principles of separation of powers, judicial independence, and individual rights protection within each legal tradition (Cappelletti, 1989; Tridimas, 2006). Historically, Latin American jurisprudence tended to prioritize the protection of governmental prerogatives, hindering the imposition of temporary cautionary measures on the State (Ferrer Mac-Gregor, 2011; Courtis, 2008). Conversely, Continental Europe has seen a more robust evolution of effective judicial control over arbitrary administrative actions, including the development of innovative temporary measures (Caranta, 2018; Tridimas, 2006). Through a comparative analysis, supported by an extensive review of case law, legal frameworks, and academic literature (Guerrero, 2023; Ferrer Mac-Gregor, 2011; Courtis, 2008), this study identifies potential models from European jurisprudence that could facilitate a more balanced interaction between judicial and administrative authorities in the protection of rights in Latin America.