A REFLECTION ON THE SPECIAL PROCEDURE OF THE WRIT OF MANDAMUS: IS IT POSSIBLE A DIALOGICAL SOLUTION FOR THE BEST REALIZATION OF FUNDAMENTAL RIGHTS?

Abstract

There is a relationship between justice, rational argument and deliberative democracy. Neoconstitutionalism and evaluative formalism demonstrate the importance of effective protection of fundamental rights. Definitive solutions should be prioritized as an instrument of access to the just legal order, with the presentation of plural arguments and the exercise of rational persuasion. The constitutional action of the mandamus aims to rule out possible illegal acts, making the probationary delay unfeasible. The case law of the TJPA was analyzed from the point of view of the recognition of valuation formalism and when possible procedural irregularities were found in the Writ of Mandamus. It was concluded on legal and philosophical foundations of dialogue for procedural advance in MS.

Keywords

• access to justice
• writ of mandamus
• dialogic procedure
• persuasive rationality
• fundamental rights.