Substantial Truth and the Impossibility of Conviction after Manifestation of the Public Prosecutor's Office for Acquittal

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Garcia, Rafael de Deus
Data de Publicação: 2017
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online)
Texto Completo: https://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/81
Resumo: This paper defends the thesis that the criminal conviction of an accused after a plea of acquittal by the Public Prosecutor's Office in final arguments offends not only the accusatory principle, but also the right to an adversarial process. It is known that we already have an advanced debate on the constitutionality of article 385 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which treats the MP's final allegations as mere opinion and which allows the judge to convict the defendant even when the prosecutor requests the acquittal, so this article intends to contribute to the issue by demonstrating that this legal possibility has on its ground the substantial truth principle, unsustainable both from the epistemological and the political-juridical point of view. It is a fact that the accusatory principle prohibits the judge from replacing the accusation when it abandons any accusatory narrative capable of sustaining any conviction.
id IBRASPP-1_3b718d7f1d3791be2b94ade6eaeab8f0
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.revista.ibraspp.com.br:article/81
network_acronym_str IBRASPP-1
network_name_str Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling Substantial Truth and the Impossibility of Conviction after Manifestation of the Public Prosecutor's Office for AcquittalVerdade Real e a Impossibilidade de Condenação após Manifestação do Ministério Público por AbsolviçãoArticle 385Substantial truthAcquittalPublic ministryAdversarial System.Artigo 385 do CPPVerdade realAbsolviçãoMinistério PúblicoContraditório.This paper defends the thesis that the criminal conviction of an accused after a plea of acquittal by the Public Prosecutor's Office in final arguments offends not only the accusatory principle, but also the right to an adversarial process. It is known that we already have an advanced debate on the constitutionality of article 385 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which treats the MP's final allegations as mere opinion and which allows the judge to convict the defendant even when the prosecutor requests the acquittal, so this article intends to contribute to the issue by demonstrating that this legal possibility has on its ground the substantial truth principle, unsustainable both from the epistemological and the political-juridical point of view. It is a fact that the accusatory principle prohibits the judge from replacing the accusation when it abandons any accusatory narrative capable of sustaining any conviction.Este artigo defende a tese de que a condenação de um acusado após manifestação de absolvição pelo Ministério Público em sede de alegações finais ofende não somente o princípio acusatório, como também os princípios do contraditório e da ampla defesa. Considerando, no entanto, já haver avançado debate doutrinário acerca da constitucionalidade do artigo 385 do Código de Processo Penal, que trata as alegações finais do MP como mero parecer e que faculta ao juiz condenar o réu mesmo quando a instância acusadora pede a absolvição, este artigo tem a intenção de contribuir para a questão demonstrando que essa possibilidade legal prevista no art. 385 só é possível tendo-se por pressuposto o princípio da verdade real, insustentável tanto do ponto de vista epistemológico quanto político-jurídico. Fato é que o princípio acusatório veda ao juízo substituir a acusação quando esta abandona qualquer narrativa processual acusatória capaz de sustentar eventual condenação.Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal - IBRASPP2017-10-14info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/8110.22197/rbdpp.v3i3.81Brazilian Journal of Criminal Procedure; Vol. 3 No. 3 (2017); 1043-1070Revista Brasileña de Derecho Procesal Penal; Vol. 3 Núm. 3 (2017); 1043-1070Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal; V. 3 N. 3 (2017); 1043-1070Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal; v. 3 n. 3 (2017); 1043-10702525-510X10.22197/rbdpp.v3i3reponame:Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online)instname:Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal (IBRASPP)instacron:IBRASPPporhttps://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/81/96Copyright (c) 2017 Rafael de Deus Garciainfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessGarcia, Rafael de Deus2017-10-15T19:43:50Zoai:ojs.revista.ibraspp.com.br:article/81Revistahttps://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPPONGhttps://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/oairevista@ibraspp.com.br2525-510X2359-3881opendoar:2017-10-15T19:43:50Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online) - Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal (IBRASPP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Substantial Truth and the Impossibility of Conviction after Manifestation of the Public Prosecutor's Office for Acquittal
Verdade Real e a Impossibilidade de Condenação após Manifestação do Ministério Público por Absolvição
title Substantial Truth and the Impossibility of Conviction after Manifestation of the Public Prosecutor's Office for Acquittal
spellingShingle Substantial Truth and the Impossibility of Conviction after Manifestation of the Public Prosecutor's Office for Acquittal
Garcia, Rafael de Deus
Article 385
Substantial truth
Acquittal
Public ministry
Adversarial System.
Artigo 385 do CPP
Verdade real
Absolvição
Ministério Público
Contraditório.
title_short Substantial Truth and the Impossibility of Conviction after Manifestation of the Public Prosecutor's Office for Acquittal
title_full Substantial Truth and the Impossibility of Conviction after Manifestation of the Public Prosecutor's Office for Acquittal
title_fullStr Substantial Truth and the Impossibility of Conviction after Manifestation of the Public Prosecutor's Office for Acquittal
title_full_unstemmed Substantial Truth and the Impossibility of Conviction after Manifestation of the Public Prosecutor's Office for Acquittal
title_sort Substantial Truth and the Impossibility of Conviction after Manifestation of the Public Prosecutor's Office for Acquittal
author Garcia, Rafael de Deus
author_facet Garcia, Rafael de Deus
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Garcia, Rafael de Deus
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Article 385
Substantial truth
Acquittal
Public ministry
Adversarial System.
Artigo 385 do CPP
Verdade real
Absolvição
Ministério Público
Contraditório.
topic Article 385
Substantial truth
Acquittal
Public ministry
Adversarial System.
Artigo 385 do CPP
Verdade real
Absolvição
Ministério Público
Contraditório.
description This paper defends the thesis that the criminal conviction of an accused after a plea of acquittal by the Public Prosecutor's Office in final arguments offends not only the accusatory principle, but also the right to an adversarial process. It is known that we already have an advanced debate on the constitutionality of article 385 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which treats the MP's final allegations as mere opinion and which allows the judge to convict the defendant even when the prosecutor requests the acquittal, so this article intends to contribute to the issue by demonstrating that this legal possibility has on its ground the substantial truth principle, unsustainable both from the epistemological and the political-juridical point of view. It is a fact that the accusatory principle prohibits the judge from replacing the accusation when it abandons any accusatory narrative capable of sustaining any conviction.
publishDate 2017
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2017-10-14
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/81
10.22197/rbdpp.v3i3.81
url https://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/81
identifier_str_mv 10.22197/rbdpp.v3i3.81
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/81/96
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2017 Rafael de Deus Garcia
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2017 Rafael de Deus Garcia
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal - IBRASPP
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal - IBRASPP
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Brazilian Journal of Criminal Procedure; Vol. 3 No. 3 (2017); 1043-1070
Revista Brasileña de Derecho Procesal Penal; Vol. 3 Núm. 3 (2017); 1043-1070
Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal; V. 3 N. 3 (2017); 1043-1070
Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal; v. 3 n. 3 (2017); 1043-1070
2525-510X
10.22197/rbdpp.v3i3
reponame:Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online)
instname:Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal (IBRASPP)
instacron:IBRASPP
instname_str Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal (IBRASPP)
instacron_str IBRASPP
institution IBRASPP
reponame_str Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online)
collection Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online)
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online) - Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal (IBRASPP)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv revista@ibraspp.com.br
_version_ 1809281939914358784