ABSTRACT
Jurists have traditionally grown accustomed to handling three core problems of legal theory: identifying the law, interpreting it and applying it. Dogmatic models with concepts, classifications and distinctions seek to build tools to handle these problems. Since the 19th century, continental European legal theory has been producing detailed technology to deal with these issues, mainly with the first two (identification and interpretation), as the problem of application of the law was dealt with in a manner subsidiary to the problems of identifying and interpreting the law, as can be seen in the discussions about the autonomy of procedural law. The 're-politicisation' of the judiciary – a theory posited in the political realm by those who defend the so-called 'alternative use of the law', and technically called 'neo-constitutionalism', however, presents a problem that is not easily solved.
