The facts of the case concern the noncompliance with judicial sentences emitted between the years 1996 and 2000, which ordered the reimbursement of municipal workers dismissed for different causals.

The IA Court established the responsibility of the State for the violation of the right to judicial protection in detriment of the workers as a result of the municipal opposition to the execution of the sentences.In this sense, the Court understood that the execution of sentences must be considered an integral part of the right to access an effective remedy, and said execution must include full compliance with the respective decision.

ACHR
1.1, 25.1, 25.2.c)

ACHR
26, 16