Detalhes bibliográficos
| Ano de defesa: |
2017 |
| Autor(a) principal: |
Amorim, Maria Carolina de Melo
 |
| Orientador(a): |
Pereira, Claudio José Langroiva |
| Banca de defesa: |
Não Informado pela instituição |
| Tipo de documento: |
Tese
|
| 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: |
Brasil
|
| Palavras-chave em Português: |
|
| Palavras-chave em Inglês: |
|
| Área do conhecimento CNPq: |
|
| Link de acesso: |
https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/20666
|
Resumo: |
The Brazilian criminal procedure has undergone transformations in its form of application, being, nowadays, represented by a new practice – harsher on the defendant – that represents a procedural right more efficient for the prosecution and less concerned with the individuals guarantees. The need for swifter procedures results in faster cases and less susceptible to the prescription of punitive pretention, following the regulations of international treaties and the idea of access to justice listed in the Federal Constitution. However, eagerness in reducing time and procedural phases are resulting in several measures, commonly adopted, that violates another constitutional principle, that of the equality of arms. Analyzing the criminal procedure, it has been noted that these measures to streamline the process are unbalancing the powers between parties and causing inequality between the proof gathering for the plaintiff and the defendant. Therefore, regarding the time of process (being included, also, the pre-procedural phase), there is no equitable treatment for the parties to achieve, on equal terms, the persuasion of the judge. This work sought to identify, from specific situations in the Brazilian criminal procedure, the reasons of unbalance of powers between the procedural parties, discussing such issues under the idea of the need to reestablish the equality of arms and the necessity to follow the regulations and constitutional principles. As a result, are being appointed the failures of the Brazilian criminal procedural law and the misconceptions in the courts jurisprudence that, in the analyzed cases, damage the production of proof by the defense (defendant) during the process, and, from these specific situations, solutions will be appointed to each listed problem |
