Abstract
The unquestionable precariousness of the Brazilian penitentiary system, discussed in ADPF 347/2015, led the Federal Supreme Court, in the judgment of the injuction, to declare the unconstitutional state of affairs, thus inaugurating a relevant discuss in the Court, which calls for discussion, reflection and, possibly, a review of concepts and theories already established, such as the question of the powers separation and the democratic legitimacy of the Judiciary, especially with regard to the conception, implementation and monitoring of public policies which refracts, directly, in the relation of judicial review on the democratic system. Considering the scope of the debate and the alternatives proposed for the resolution of structural problems is developed the present study, with the purpose of verifying the feasibility of the practice of dialogical constitutionalism and the celebration of the meaningful engagement, once recognized the unconstitutional state of affairs. In this sense, it is necessary to build an open debate between the elective bodies and the Supreme Court, as a way to the construction of consensus able to overcome common challenges, related to the constitutional order. For this purpose, a bibliographic-documentary research was conducted, revealing itself as a pure, qualitative and exploratory research.
Keywords:
unconstitutional state of affairs; dialogical constitutionalism; meaningful engagement; separation of powers; democracy