Diálogo constitucional: o litígio estratégico como método dialógico entre o supremo tribunal federal e o poder legislativo

Abstract

The debate about jurisdiction and constitutional supremacy is timeless. The phenomenon of judicialization of politics, the omission of the Legislative in the face of controversial issues and the violation of fundamental rights, call for answers that excel at the functioning of institutions and interaction between the Powers. In this sense theories emerge to try to solve this question. The theory of constitutional dialogue is one of them and seeks to achieve a dialogue between the Powers, represents an interaction and objective reciprocal collaboration between institutions in the construction of norms and constitutional interpretation. It is from this conception of constitutional dialogue that strategic litigation can be a means of stimulating dialogue, since it has as its setting a strategy of political claim and social transformation in order to drive new demands, is used in the Court to claim new sense of the laws before the judiciary, as well as enabling the dialogue between the institutions and society. Through the deductive method based on bibliographical and documentary research, this work investigates the possibility of strategic litigation succeeding as an instrument for promoting dialogue between the Powers, enabling the overcoming of the decisions of the Supreme Federal Court by the Legislature through deliberations compete: presentation of projects and drafting of laws, constitutional amendments. As a technician, strategic litigation was successful as an instrument to promote dialogue between the Powers, as it generated responses from the Legislative Power through the presentation of draft laws. This research used the deductive method with bibliographic and documentary research