Secondary directives
Chiassoni (2020, p. 162) identifies three groups of secondary directives, which hierarchize the use of primary directives: 1) selective directives; 2) procedural directives; 3) and preferential directives.
Selective directives establish which primary directives interpreters should use to assign a correct legal meaning to a provision. These selective directives prescribe, for example, whether only one primary directive should always be used, two or more primary directives, or all of them (Chiassoni, 2020, p. 162-163).
Procedural directives can either leave the order of use of primary directives to the interpreter’s discretion or prescribe an order for the use of primary directives (Chiassoni, 2020, p. 163-164).
Preferential directives define criteria for choosing between meanings obtained using primary directives (Chiassoni, 2020, p. 165). Preferential directives are subdivided into inhibitory and comparative directives (Chiassoni, 2020, p. 165-185). Inhibitory directives establish conditions under which a meaning reached with a primary directive cannot be considered correct. Comparative directives establish which of two or more meanings resulting from the use of primary directives and that have passed through the filter of inhibitory directives should be chosen.
Tertiary directives
Chiassoni (2020, p. 191) further describes third-level directives, which are supreme rules that prescribe what policy purpose of law should be pursued when interpreting provisions. These third-level directives establish the purpose for which primary and secondary directives should be used. As an example (Chiassoni, 2020, p. 194), one can mention the static third-level directive, which determines that this use ensures the maximum degree of subordination of the interpreter to the law.
Bibliographic references
CHIASSONI, Pierluigi. Técnica da interpretação jurídica: breviário para juristas. Translated by Daniel Mitidiero, Otávio Domit, Rafael Abreu and Vitor de Paula Ramos. São Paulo: Thomson Reuters Brasil, 2020.