Detalhes bibliográficos
Ano de defesa: |
2018 |
Autor(a) principal: |
Savoia, Francisco Simões Pacheco
 |
Orientador(a): |
Arruda, Eloisa de Sousa |
Banca de defesa: |
Não Informado pela instituição |
Tipo de documento: |
Dissertação
|
Tipo de acesso: |
Acesso embargado |
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: |
Brasil
|
Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
Palavras-chave em Inglês: |
|
Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
Link de acesso: |
https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/20987
|
Resumo: |
The award-winning collaboration had a procedural regulation by the new criminal organizational law 12.850/2013, and there on, has been broadly debated, especially when its utilization is concerned, in large investigations conducted by police officials, as a means of evidence obstruction. For this reason, reinforce the debate around gaps and controversial issues mentioned in this law, so that the institute be applied in conformity with the federal constitution, and is increasingly solidified in the procedural system. It is worth noting that the analysis of this institute in impartiality with the judge, especially in view of the development of the international courts of human rights. In this manner, the analysis falls on the performance within the procedure of collaboration, to determine whether assurance of the judge's impartiality are violated when the judge who sentenced the case is the same one who acts in the investigation phase, and who ratifies the awarded agreement. Some alternate routes are pointed out with the purpose of constructing a better adaptation of the procedure to guarantee impartiality, by avoiding allegations of inconsistencies and illegalities. Thus, intends are to prioritize the findings and solutions that best match the principles that underlie the democratic state of law and the protection of human dignity |