A LEGITIMAÇÃO PELO CONTRADITÓRIO NA REALIZAÇÃO DA PERÍCIA: A NECESSIDADE DE OPORTUNIZAR A NOMEAÇÃO DE ASSISTENTE TÉCNICO

• Autor(a) principal: Castro, Cássio Benvenutti de
• Data de Publicação: 2020
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Revista da EMERJ (Online)
• Texto Completo: https://ojs.emerj.com.br/index.php/revistadaemerj/article/view/226
• topic: prova; perícia; ilícita; processo; roof; expertise; ilicit; process

The material contradictory is the stone clause and the foundation of the Constitutional State, an indelible methodology that is reflected in the production of expert evidence since the constitutional determination. The Code of Civil Procedure ratifies the right of the parties to influence the judicial decision, as well as the right of them not to be surprised by a surprise issue. The Crime Package also marks the duty to appoint a technical assistant, still in the police investigation phase. Due to the literalness of the rule of law of the Law on Administrative Proceedings, the full adversarial procedure must be ensured, to be exercised by the administrator, with the appointment of a technical assistant in expertise. It is worth saying that the coherence of the legal system determines that the judge or the administrator must cooperate, above all, to be guardians of the adversary, in the production of expert evidence. Therefore, they must make it possible for the interested party to appoint a technical assistant. The text highlights the constitutional primacy of the material contradictory and emphasizes the seriousness with which the institutions have treated the subject. So much so that failure to comply with this true procedural provision, as a fundamental right, renders the expert evidence invalid and, currently, comes to characterize a crime provided for in the Law of Abuse of Authority.