O pacote anticrime e seus conflitos de sistemas inquisitório e acusatório no âmbito do processo penal brasileiro
Carregando...
Tipo
TCC
Data de publicação
2022-06
Periódico
Citações (Scopus)
Autores
Scarlatti, Gustavo Henrique
Orientador
Cury, Rogério Luis Adolfo
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Membros da banca
Programa
Resumo
A relação do juiz com às provas no âmbito do processo penal geram diversas discussões entre vários doutrinadores, como Aury Lopes Jr. e Nucci. Se estabelece isso por conta dos tipos de sistemas processuais penais caracterizados, onde no inquisitório há a iniciativa e produção probatória do juiz e no acusatório é preservada e inerência do juiz no processo. O sistema acusatório busca a verdade processual, aquela contida apenas dentro do processo, limitada pelas provas trazidas pelas partes. O sistema inquisitório busca a verdade real, instigando ao magistrado a utilização de seus poderes de procurá-las até mesmo fora do processo, sendo o réu um instrumento de obtenção de prova. A Constituição Federal de 1988 propaga, de maneira implícita, o sistema acusatório como o de modelo a ser usufruído no Brasil. O Código de Processo Penal, em seu artigo 156, declara, também de maneira implícita, que o processo penal brasileiro utiliza características de um sistema inquisitório. Em já havendo uma contradição estabelecida, o artigo 3º-A da Lei 13.964/2019 afirma a estrutura acusatória para o âmbito do processo penal brasileiro.
O artigo 3º-B da mesma nova Lei instaura mais uma contradição ao afirmar poderes conferidos aos juízes que possuem características inquisitivas. É feita a análise para concluir se, de fato, foram estabelecidas mais contradições no ordenamento processual penal ou foram sanadas todas as dúvidas existentes a respeito do tema tratado. Assim, é exposto o embate dos grandes doutrinadores em discussão de qual o processo penal é utilizado e como o novo “Pacote Anticrime” gerou ainda mais ambiguidade e contradições ao tema.
The judge's relationship with the evidence in the context of criminal proceedings generates several discussions among several scholars, such as Aury Lopes Jr. and Nucci. This is established because of the types of criminal procedural systems characterized, where in the inquisitor there is the initiative and probative production of the judge and in the accusatory it is preserved and the judge's inherence in the process. The accusatory system seeks the procedural truth, that contained only within the process, limited by the evidence brought by the parties. The inquisitorial system seeks the real truth, urging the magistrate to use his powers to look for them even outside the process, with the defendant being an instrument for obtaining evidence. The Federal Constitution of 1988 implicitly propagates the accusatory system as a model to be used in Brazil. The Criminal Procedure Code, in its article 156, also implicitly declares that the Brazilian criminal procedure uses characteristics of an inquisitorial system. Since there is already an established contradiction, article 3-A of Law 13.964/2019 affirms the accusatory structure for the scope of Brazilian criminal proceedings. Article 3-B of the same new Law establishes yet another contradiction in affirming powers conferred on judges that have inquisitive characteristics. The analysis is carried out to conclude whether, in fact, more contradictions were established in the criminal procedural system or all existing doubts regarding the subject matter were resolved. Thus, the clash of the great scholars in discussion of which criminal procedure is used is exposed and how the new "Anti-Crime Package" generated even more ambiguity and contradictions to the theme.
The judge's relationship with the evidence in the context of criminal proceedings generates several discussions among several scholars, such as Aury Lopes Jr. and Nucci. This is established because of the types of criminal procedural systems characterized, where in the inquisitor there is the initiative and probative production of the judge and in the accusatory it is preserved and the judge's inherence in the process. The accusatory system seeks the procedural truth, that contained only within the process, limited by the evidence brought by the parties. The inquisitorial system seeks the real truth, urging the magistrate to use his powers to look for them even outside the process, with the defendant being an instrument for obtaining evidence. The Federal Constitution of 1988 implicitly propagates the accusatory system as a model to be used in Brazil. The Criminal Procedure Code, in its article 156, also implicitly declares that the Brazilian criminal procedure uses characteristics of an inquisitorial system. Since there is already an established contradiction, article 3-A of Law 13.964/2019 affirms the accusatory structure for the scope of Brazilian criminal proceedings. Article 3-B of the same new Law establishes yet another contradiction in affirming powers conferred on judges that have inquisitive characteristics. The analysis is carried out to conclude whether, in fact, more contradictions were established in the criminal procedural system or all existing doubts regarding the subject matter were resolved. Thus, the clash of the great scholars in discussion of which criminal procedure is used is exposed and how the new "Anti-Crime Package" generated even more ambiguity and contradictions to the theme.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
sistemas processuais penais , pacote anticrime , sistema acusatório , sistema inquisitório , criminal procedural systems , anti-crime package , accusatory system , inquisitorial system