Good governance and proper public administration: the case of the Colombian Constitutional Court and the case of the Supreme Court of Justice of Mexico

Abstract

This study focuses on the evaluation of good governance and proper public administration through the comparative analysis of two high-ranking judicial institutions in Latin America: The Colombian Constitutional Court and the Mexican Supreme Court of Justice. Using a qualitative methodology, this research breaks down the principles and practices that define good governance and effective administration within these judicial environments, identifying how each Court contributes to these ideals through its judicial rulings. The method employed comprises documentary and jurisprudential analysis, reviewing significant rulings, which allow us to understand how they align with the principles of good governance and good public administration. In the Colombian case, the Constitutional Court has developed good public administration as a principle of administrative and constitutional law, while the Mexican Supreme Court has categorized it as a fundamental right. Good governance, in both cases, is classified as a constitutional principle. This makes it possible to identify how, under an exercise of conventionality, the High Courts intend to facilitate institutional access to citizens.