Constitutional review as a means of formal and substantive protection of fundamental rights

the case of ADPF 635

Abstract

Objective: this article examines how constitutional review functions as an instrument for the formal and substantive protection of fundamental rights, using the motion for non-compliance with a fundamental precept (ADPF) nº 635 as a case study. Methodology: It uses bibliographic research to initially analyze the objective and subjective nature of these rights and highlights that their binding, directive, and radiating effectiveness requires judicial action capable of realizing them in practice; it then describes the historical evolution of constitutional review in Brazil and demonstrates how the current mixed model allows the Supreme Court (STF) to act both repressively and preventively to ensure constitutional supremacy; uses ADPF 635, within the scope of concentrated review, to highlight the structural role of constitutional jurisdiction, showing that the STF recognized systemic flaws in Rio de Janeiro’s public security policy and ordered the development of a plan to reduce police lethality, including measures such as body cameras, use-of-force protocols, and independent investigations by the Public Prosecutor’s Office. Conclusion: Structural decisions expand the substantive protection of fundamental rights, reinforce the Court’s democratic legitimacy, and point toward a trend of rationalization and dialogic openness in constitutional jurisdiction, especially in the face of polycentric and multipolar problems that require profound institutional reforms.