Análise acerca da (in)convencionalidade da lei da anistia

• Autor(a) principal: Casiraghi, Francine Rosa
• Data de Publicação: 2021
• Tipo de documento: Trabalho de conclusão de curso
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Repositório do Centro Universitário Braz Cubas
• Texto Completo: https://repositorio.cruzeirodosul.edu.br/handle/123456789/3703
• topic: Lei da Anistia; Direitos Humanos; Tratados e Convenções Internacionais; Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos; CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO

This article seeks to analyze the practical application of the Amnesty Law in Brazil, by letting State agents who committed crimes against humanity go unpunished. To carry out the article, methodological research was used based on international judgments and bibliographical research on the subject. In addition, doctrinal and legal analyzes were carried out on the subject in question. During the study, it was noted that the Inter-American Court of Human Rights declared such crimes to be against humanity and condemned Brazil in the Gomes Lund case and in the case of journalist Vladimir Herzog. The view of the Federal Supreme Court regarding the international treaties and conventions that deal with Human Rights is that they have a supra-legal hierarchy within Brazilian legislation and only those approved by the necessary quorum have constitutional status. As a result, most of the treaties are below the Federal Constitution, of 1988, which makes it impossible to apply more effectively and rigidly the Institutes protected by Human Rights. The harm caused by the decisions that condoned the disregard for Human Rights can be seen in the application of the Amnesty Law, as many of the family members of victims from the time of the military dictatorship still seek accountability from State agents who remain unpunished. The research ends with the conclusion that the Amnesty Law is (un)conventional, that is, it does not adapt to the International Treaties and Conventions to which Brazil adheres.