The evolution of law has given rise to principles of interpretation that can be applied to several formal sources. Thus, the principles of interpretation of the law and the Constitution were developed. The modern trend towards the materialization of law raises questions about the principles of interpretation of fundamental rights. This interpretation of fundamental rights indicates a paradigm shift towards material justice. During the 20th century, the principles of interpreting constitutions were established in the main constitutional democracies of the world. Over the years, in the democratic constitutional regimes of the world, judges have developed or borrowed principles of constitutional interpretation from other constitutional jurisdictions. It was also during this period that human rights became the object of widespread recognition and development in the universal sphere, which initiated a profuse phase of generation of international instruments of individual rights, which became known as human rights. From the point of view of individual rights, several principles of interpretation of fundamental rights have been developed, which apply regardless of whether they are recognized in the legal text, in the constitutional text or in the convention. The latter is what could be called the rule of autonomy of the principles of interpretation of rights. Therefore, the interpretation of the law and the Constitution - in the state order - and the interpretation of international treaties - in the international order - will be at the same level of analysis, relative to the formal source. On the other hand, the interpretation of fundamental rights would correspond to an analytical category different from the previous one, where the formal source containing the right would not be a determining element of the interpretation. Throughout the history and evolution of law, various mechanisms of applying general and abstract legal norms to a specific case have been developed. In order to implement the specified application, which takes the form of concretization, especially in constitutional law, the judge proceeds to the interpretation of the norm.