This doctoral thesis in Law examines the interaction between the legislative reforms introduced by the Anti-Crime Package (Law number 13.964/2019) and the subsequent interpretation of these reforms by the Supreme Federal Court (STF), particularly in the Direct Actions of Unconstitutionality (ADIs) numbers 6298, 6299, 6300, and 6305. The study analyzes how the STF, in interpreting Article three-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, retained aspects of the inquisitorial system, allowing for an active judicial probative initiative. Additionally, it addresses the judicial control over the archiving of police inquiries, contradicting the legislative intent to simplify the process. The thesis also explores the limitations imposed on the judge of guarantees in specific contexts, such as cases of domestic violence and the Jury Court, highlighting the tension between legislative reforms and established judicial practices. The thesis also highlights the issue of the interpretation according to the Constitution by the STF, which often contradicts the legislator s intention and limits the effective implementation of reforms. It concludes with a reflection on the need for continuous dialogue between the Legislative and the Judiciary to ensure a more just and efficient criminal justice system, as well as suggestions for future research directions that can deepen and expand the understanding of this dynamic.