O instituto da colaboração premiada à luz da Lei nº 12.850/2013 e o princípio da imparcialidade

• Autor(a) principal: Zavaski, Marcelo Mello
• Data de Publicação: 2019
• 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/5895
• topic: Direito processual penal; Direito penal; Colaboração premiada; Crime organizado

The institute of award-winning collaboration, currently established in Brazil through Law no 12,850 / 2013, is a historical landmark for combating organized crime, providing a means to help solve the great problem that affects our country, which are crimes committed by criminal organizations, so difficult to investigate. However, there are several discussions on the ethics and constitutionality of the negotiations conducted by the Public Prosecutor's Office, together with the police officer and the accused. Thus, the objective of the present research is to analyze if the institute of the awarded collaboration and its peculiarities in the light of Law nº 12.850 / 2013 end up violating the principle of the impartiality of the judge. For that, a bibliographic and documentary research was carried out, starting from an inductive analysis, with qualitative approach and the exploratory level, using the bibliographic and documentary file as instrument for data collection, considering that the present research was based in national legislation, in doctrines, scientific articles and jurisprudence. From the results obtained, it was concluded that despite being criticized for a good part of the doctrine, the institute of the awarded collaboration is constitutional and ethical, since, once the procedures of the competent legislation have been respected, the acts carried out in the negotiations of the agreement are not vitiated by vices tending to cause nullity or any prejudice to the evidence obtained through the Institute, even though the elements raised through collaboration alone are not sufficient to sustain a conviction. Thus, if the magistrate complies with the limits set forth in the law, not participating directly in the negotiations and only approving the agreement, acting as a prosecutor of the legality, voluntariness and regularity of the collaboration, his acts do not prejudice his impartiality.