Perdoar ou punir: comparativo entre as decisões proferidas pelas Supremas Cortes brasileira e argentina acerca da constitucionalidade das leis de autoanistia.

• Autor(a) principal: Zomer da Silva, João Gustavo
• 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/15468
• topic: Análise do Discurso; Anistia; Argentina; Brasil; Ditadura e ditadores

The scope of this paper is to analyze the differences between the positions of the Brazilian Supreme Court (STF) and the Supreme Court of Justice of the Argentine Nation (CSJN) about the (in) constitutionality of the laws of self-amnesty. The nature of the research in terms of level, is descriptive and, in what concerns the approach, it is qualitative, having as support point the Discourse Analysis of French line developed by Michel Pêcheux. As for the procedure used for data collection, the research is documentary and bibliographic. As for the result, it was possible to verify that the speech of the majority of the ministers of the STF, when the ADPF judgment nº 153/DF, was affiliated with the institutional speech of the Brazilian State, which tries to promote the simple forgetting of crimes against humanity practiced in the advent of the military dictatorship. On the other hand, the speech of the vast majority of CSJN members was based on the integral defense of the human rights of resistance groups of the Argentine exception regime. It is concluded, therefore, that the speeches emanated by each of the Supreme Courts are closely interconnected with the historical-ideological context of their respective countries.