Detalhes bibliográficos
| Ano de defesa: |
2011 |
| Autor(a) principal: |
Molla, Pedro de
 |
| Orientador(a): |
Silveira, Vladmir Oliveira da |
| Banca de defesa: |
Não Informado pela instituição |
| Tipo de documento: |
Dissertação
|
| Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso aberto |
| Idioma: |
por |
| Instituição de defesa: |
Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
|
| Programa de Pós-Graduação: |
Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados em Direito
|
| Departamento: |
Faculdade de Direito
|
| País: |
BR
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
| Palavras-chave em Inglês: |
|
| Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
| Link de acesso: |
https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/5553
|
Resumo: |
It is the study of the illegal evidence in the Brazilian legal system, especially on its admissibility within the Brazilian legal system. The study in question seeks to arouse in the law enforcement officers the importance of the matter, in order to prevent injustice being perpetrated in the face of pure and simple application of the regulatory system positivised dealing with a case reports more than one principle guarantor of fundamental rights. The fact of the Constitution prohibit the use of illegal evidence can not be understood in its absolute aspect, insofar as the evolution of a democratic state that is heading towards the post-positivism assures litigants all the resources necessary for the preservation of his dignity in face of the arbitrariness of the state. With the preview of the theme constitutional illegal evidence is intended to justify the relaxation of planning, which in certain cases, must give way, deliberately, the rules of hermeneutics to enable better enforcement of the law on a case regarding a value subjective that is assured of its context, rather than aggravate, the mere fact subsume the law and thus nullifying the ideal of justice. For this purpose, we carried out research in doctrine and jurisprudence that sought to outline the evolution of the main theme of this work which, from the rise of democracy, there was a legitimate appearance of this individual right until you reach the maximum level of individual security in the face of fundamental human state. Through dialectical discourse is evident in the opposing viewpoints exist, such as, eg, in addition to peek into the existence of a constitutional provision forbidding the use of illegal evidence and its subsequent regulation by Law 11.690/08, also demonstrate the existence of a permissive general that allows their use which is possible by the technique of weighting values in order to accomplish the real purpose of the law in homage to the supremacy of individual rights protected by the Law Democratic State |
