The information on this site is not “legal advice” that might help you achieve favorable outcomes in a court. If you seek an outcome rather than to take a principled position or reform the system, you should consult a local lawyer familiar with the facts and “law” in your case, preferably one that is well-connected. Keep in mind that legal practices everywhere are corrupt and incompetent in various ways and to varying degrees, and always have been, but it makes a difference in what ways and to what degree, and it requires a continual struggle by good people to reduce corruption and incompetence to the extent that can be done. The legal system is imperfect, but violence is likely to be worse, so it is usually better to give the legal system a chance to work before resorting to other alternatives. We urge you to regularly devote some part of your time and resources to trying to get the legal system to produce just outcomes, not only for yourself but for everyone else, but also to be prepared to resort to extrajudicial methods, such as educating and organizing the public, lobbying, and working to elect reformers, if judicial methods become hopeless, and never support any candidate for public office who does not demonstrate a commitment to reform.
If we define “constitutionalism” as a commitment to strict enforcement of a written constitution of government as it was originally understood by its framers and ratifiers, then its opposite is the doctrine and practice of “legal realism”, which holds that the “law” is whatever judges do or can be expected to do, whose main tenet is the doctrine of stare decisis as presently practiced, and which is fundamentally in conflict with adherence to a written constitution.