Animais sencientes não-humanos: considerações acerca da possibilidade de alterar a natureza jurídica dos animais para sujeitos de direito despersonificados

• Autor(a) principal: Marcon, Tiago
• Data de Publicação: 2020
• Tipo de documento: Trabalho de conclusão de curso
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório Universitário da Ânima (RUNA)
• Texto Completo: https://repositorio.animaeducacao.com.br/handle/ANIMA/6209
• topic: Direito animal; Legislação; Dor; Filosofia

OBJECTIVE: the general purpose of this final work is to analyze the possibility of changing the judicial nature on non-human sentient animals to the status of depersonalized subjects of right in the Brazilian legal system. METHODOLOGY: this research makes use of a deductive method, with a qualitative approach, and the level of profundity is determined by the exploratory measure. The data collection procedure is bibliographical and documental, sustained by some doctorate thesis and master’s dissertations, juridical doctrines, jurisprudences, and scientific papers. RESULTS: the researcher noticed that, for a long time, the Brazilian legislation stayed neglectful concerning the preservation of non-human animals, benefiting them only through a reflexive mean. Inside the constitutional sphere, it was in the 1988’s Brazilian Federal Constitution that animals have been acknowledged rightfully, that prohibiting cruel practices to them. In nonconstitutional terms, we could verify that animals are a “thing” to the current Civil Code, coming to be amenable to real rights. On the jurisprudence, we investigated important decisions, aiming to disown cultural practices of causing pain and suffering to the animals. In the comparative legislation, we verified that some countries, like Germany, Switzerland, and France, adapted their Civil Code to cease to consider animals as “things.” Concerning the theory of depersonalized beings, it could be verified that the classification proposed by Fábio Ulhoa Coelho is perfectly capable of including the non-human animals, which would be promoted to depersonalized subjects of right. With the literature investigation done, we could verify that most part of the doctrine, and jurisprudence, is against changing the juridical nature of the animals. Moreover, big animal slaughter companies and the agribusiness militate in favor of the continuity of the current juridical status attributed to the animals. CONCLUSION: even though the theory of depersonalized beings satisfy the requirements for the animals to be considered non-human subjects of right, being able to plead rights in court through a representative, most part of the doctrine, jurisprudence, and society understand those beings as unable to acquire rights — an specific attribute of human beings. Therefore, in the actual moment, it is not possible to change the juridical nature of the animals: they will stay being considered a “thing” to the current Brazilian Civil Code.