EVIDENCE IN CONCENTRATED CONSTITUTIONALITY CONTROL

Abstract

This article aimed to address the basis of evidence in the concentrated controlof constitutionality. To do so, it explains the diffuse and concentrated constitutionality control to, in the sequence, analyze how the evidentiary system works in this context. The methodology used for the development of this article was the bibliographical research carried out in already published doctrines, in addition to the legislation that help in the understanding of the subject under analysis, allowing to conclude that the Federal Supreme Court, by acting in the defense of fundamental rights, fulfills a political role of activation and representation of collective memory, in addition to regulating the continuous adjustment process of the Constitution, taken as a social contract. This is because the legitimacy of the Supreme Court is neither greater nor less than that of representative bodies, or politicians. It comes from the Constitution and, for that reason, it is democratic. If, on the one hand, the trivialization of theuse of principles weakens the “normative force of the Constitutionâ€, on the other hand, the insufficient use of these same principles can lead to the same consequence. The so-called “principled hyposufficiency†manifests itself, therefore, as a by-product of “pamprincipiologismâ€. Thus, in concentrated constitutionality control, it must be based onfundamental rights, and the evidence must focus on demonstrating that fundamental rights have been violated.