Detalhes bibliográficos
Ano de defesa: |
2012 |
Autor(a) principal: |
Mazon, Cassiano
 |
Orientador(a): |
Pereira, Claudio José Langroiva
 |
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/5934
|
Resumo: |
This thesis is a study on the issue of the grounds of court decisions and preventive detention orders, in light of both domestic and foreign legislation and books of authority, including Brazilian case law. The criminal procedure, an enforceable constitutional right, is a fundamental guarantee under a democratic rule of law system, the central pillar of which is human dignity. Under the rule of law, all court decisions must be duly grounded, notably in the case of the need to restrict fundamental rights, such as an individual s freedom, through a preventive detention order. The grounds arising from the due process of law consist in providing all details of the legal and factual basis which led the court to render such decision. The grounds given by the court must be just, dialectic, coherent and rational, as mere references to legal provisions, allusion to vague and generic formulae, which may be adjusted to any circumstance, are not sufficient. Considering the principle of presumption of innocence, it has been established that preventive detention, a provisional remedy par excellence, is marked by its provisional character in that it should remain effective for the same time the urgent situation that justified it lasts - thus qualifying as an exceptional measure - hence, applicable to emergency situations, if and when all other provisional remedies prove to be improper and insufficient. This study has shown that preventive detention may be ordered in view of the presence of certain legal assumptions and requirements, therefore its grounds requires from the court a careful examination of the circumstances and particularities of the case in question, in light of the principle of proportionality. The conclusion is that unjust and defective grounds give rise to the acknowledgement of the nullity thereof as the essential values provided in the Constitution may be harmed and thus adversely affect human dignity |