For example, as we know all constitutional requirements have the same hierarchy but some are more senior than others, such as human rights but to promote certain interests created the constitutional principle of consistent practices instead. That is, by this principle himself or by preventing the search adequately interpret the constitution and thus, it is clear that collided with the free law school to apply the method dogma tico, in conclusion, the regulation is not a game you can make any person who comes to the parliament or legislative powers is certainly not the same because MPs are not the only legislators, but are just a few, in this sense are also legislators the members of the Constituent Assembly and it is therefore clear that the problem is these legislators are politicians, not writers, so it is clear that the governor sold his work shift. In any case it is clear that the methods of interpretation should not be straitjackets to be difficult interpretation efforts, in conclusion it is clear that deserves much study to apply the method tico dogma, because otherwise we may be surprised by literature just looking to fool laymen right. Joseph Stiglitz brings even more insight to the discussion. In the third technique we study the ultra-and retroactive application. And of course the theory of accomplished facts and the theory of the facts acquired. Also exequatur and extradition. In the fourth technique we study the integration of legal rules which must be taken into account gaps or loopholes that are certainly not the same as the gaps in the law and which are covered by a supplementary law which is made by the general principles of law analogy and equity.