The guardrails of democracy and state attorney

Abstract

It is public and notorious that democracy is historically under constant threat. While demagogues insist on continuing to emerge in all parts of the globe, it is necessary that democracy protection grids be developed, through written norms, such as constitutions and laws that strengthen democratic institutions, and unwritten ones, such as mutual tolerance and the institutional reserve, in order to avoid the practice of constitutional hard game. In this context, State Advocacy, which does not configure the advocacy of rulers, appears, in the Federal Constitution of 1988, as a true protection grid for democracy, in all levels of the federation, that is, in the Federal Union, Federated States and Municipalities, above all because it exercises relevant internal legal control over the acts performed by the Public Administration. In addition, as it has no party ties and is not submissive to sectarian political interests, the State Advocacy can carry out its mission impartially. In this line, a serious misfortune to be faced is the phenomenon of political capture of the Prosecutor's Offices. In order to carry out their constitutional role, Public Prosecutions must be strong, autonomous and duly equipped. Only in this way, the State Advocacy can be an effective protection grid for democracy, fulfilling the mission designed by the constituent in the Federal Constitution of 1988.