The absolute nullity by the non intervention of the public prosecution in essential acts of the public penal action

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Carvalho, Francisco Ortêncio de
Data de Publicação: 2018
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/107
Resumo: The practice of essential acts on criminal proceedings, especially criminal investigation hearings, without the participation of public prosecution, violates the adversarial system. This finding demands a revision of the theme [species of criminal procedural acts (structural and accessories) and their effects], by the intelligentsia, to correct the problem of non-compliance with the paradigm of adversarial system which has caused controversial and chaotic legal precedents and it is clear the paradox between science and legal praxis. The proposal is to re-examine the theme, by the cross-examination paradigm, poiting out that it is out of the utmost importance a proper perception and classification of the legal acts species, using a premise in which one can distinguish what is an essential from what is an accessory act, and its effects. This study neutralize the controversy over criminal investigation hearings without the participation of public prosecution being a void or voidable act, improving the state of the art with the acknowledgement of the direct inquiry of witnesses is an essential act and its absence entails absolute nullity. The essential acts cannot be carried out without their plaintiff and treating it as if it were secondary is an error in procedendo. The pas de nullité sans grief only applies to accessories acts. The epistemological model proposed works as a fundamental premise of interpretation of the theme, contributing to the advancement of the big area.
id IBRASPP-1_429cc70d0d5707ed924f147a102e3ab5
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.revista.ibraspp.com.br:article/107
network_acronym_str IBRASPP-1
network_name_str Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online)
repository_id_str
spelling The absolute nullity by the non intervention of the public prosecution in essential acts of the public penal actionA nulidade absoluta pela não intervenção do representante do Ministério Público em atos essenciais da ação penal públicaCriminal proceedingsabsence of public prosecutorcross-examinationabsence of an essential actabsolute nullity.Processo penalausência do Ministério Públicocross-examinationausência de ato essencialnulidade absoluta.The practice of essential acts on criminal proceedings, especially criminal investigation hearings, without the participation of public prosecution, violates the adversarial system. This finding demands a revision of the theme [species of criminal procedural acts (structural and accessories) and their effects], by the intelligentsia, to correct the problem of non-compliance with the paradigm of adversarial system which has caused controversial and chaotic legal precedents and it is clear the paradox between science and legal praxis. The proposal is to re-examine the theme, by the cross-examination paradigm, poiting out that it is out of the utmost importance a proper perception and classification of the legal acts species, using a premise in which one can distinguish what is an essential from what is an accessory act, and its effects. This study neutralize the controversy over criminal investigation hearings without the participation of public prosecution being a void or voidable act, improving the state of the art with the acknowledgement of the direct inquiry of witnesses is an essential act and its absence entails absolute nullity. The essential acts cannot be carried out without their plaintiff and treating it as if it were secondary is an error in procedendo. The pas de nullité sans grief only applies to accessories acts. The epistemological model proposed works as a fundamental premise of interpretation of the theme, contributing to the advancement of the big area.A realização de atos essenciais no processo penal, precipuamente de audiências de instrução criminal, sem a participação do Ministério Público, viola o sistema acusatório. Tal constatação demanda da intelligentsia uma revisitação do tema [espécies dos atos jurídicos processuais penais (estruturais e acessórios) e seus efeitos], para corrigir o problema da inobservância do paradigma do sistema acusatório, que tem provocado precedentes jurisprudenciais controversos e caóticos, sendo nítido o paradoxo entre a ciência e a práxis jurídica. O propósito é reexaminar o tema a partir do cross-examination, sendo primordial a percepção e a classificação adequadas das espécies dos atos jurídicos processuais, com uso de premissa que distinga ato essencial, de ato acessório, e seus efeitos. Este trabalho neutraliza a controvérsia da ausência do Ministério Público em audiência ser ato nulo ou anulável, aprimorando o estado da arte com o reconhecimento de que a inquirição direta das testemunhas é ato essencial e sua ausência acarreta nulidade absoluta. Os atos essenciais não podem ser realizados sem seu autor e tratá-los como se fossem secundários provoca error in procedendo. O pas de nullité sans grief somente se aplica aos atos acessórios. O modelo epistemológico proposto funciona como premissa fundamental de interpretação do tema, contribuindo com o avanço da grande área.Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal - IBRASPP2018-03-07info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/10710.22197/rbdpp.v4i1.107Brazilian Journal of Criminal Procedure; Vol. 4 No. 1 (2018); 337-368Revista Brasileña de Derecho Procesal Penal; Vol. 4 Núm. 1 (2018); 337-368Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal; V. 4 N. 1 (2018); 337-368Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal; v. 4 n. 1 (2018); 337-3682525-510X10.22197/rbdpp.v4i1reponame:Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online)instname:Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal (IBRASPP)instacron:IBRASPPporhttps://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/107/103Copyright (c) 2018 Francisco Ortencio de Carvalhoinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessCarvalho, Francisco Ortêncio de2018-03-07T14:29:55Zoai:ojs.revista.ibraspp.com.br:article/107Revistahttps://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPPONGhttps://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/oairevista@ibraspp.com.br2525-510X2359-3881opendoar:2018-03-07T14:29:55Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal (Online) - Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal (IBRASPP)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv The absolute nullity by the non intervention of the public prosecution in essential acts of the public penal action
A nulidade absoluta pela não intervenção do representante do Ministério Público em atos essenciais da ação penal pública
title The absolute nullity by the non intervention of the public prosecution in essential acts of the public penal action
spellingShingle The absolute nullity by the non intervention of the public prosecution in essential acts of the public penal action
Carvalho, Francisco Ortêncio de
Criminal proceedings
absence of public prosecutor
cross-examination
absence of an essential act
absolute nullity.
Processo penal
ausência do Ministério Público
cross-examination
ausência de ato essencial
nulidade absoluta.
title_short The absolute nullity by the non intervention of the public prosecution in essential acts of the public penal action
title_full The absolute nullity by the non intervention of the public prosecution in essential acts of the public penal action
title_fullStr The absolute nullity by the non intervention of the public prosecution in essential acts of the public penal action
title_full_unstemmed The absolute nullity by the non intervention of the public prosecution in essential acts of the public penal action
title_sort The absolute nullity by the non intervention of the public prosecution in essential acts of the public penal action
author Carvalho, Francisco Ortêncio de
author_facet Carvalho, Francisco Ortêncio de
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Carvalho, Francisco Ortêncio de
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Criminal proceedings
absence of public prosecutor
cross-examination
absence of an essential act
absolute nullity.
Processo penal
ausência do Ministério Público
cross-examination
ausência de ato essencial
nulidade absoluta.
topic Criminal proceedings
absence of public prosecutor
cross-examination
absence of an essential act
absolute nullity.
Processo penal
ausência do Ministério Público
cross-examination
ausência de ato essencial
nulidade absoluta.
description The practice of essential acts on criminal proceedings, especially criminal investigation hearings, without the participation of public prosecution, violates the adversarial system. This finding demands a revision of the theme [species of criminal procedural acts (structural and accessories) and their effects], by the intelligentsia, to correct the problem of non-compliance with the paradigm of adversarial system which has caused controversial and chaotic legal precedents and it is clear the paradox between science and legal praxis. The proposal is to re-examine the theme, by the cross-examination paradigm, poiting out that it is out of the utmost importance a proper perception and classification of the legal acts species, using a premise in which one can distinguish what is an essential from what is an accessory act, and its effects. This study neutralize the controversy over criminal investigation hearings without the participation of public prosecution being a void or voidable act, improving the state of the art with the acknowledgement of the direct inquiry of witnesses is an essential act and its absence entails absolute nullity. The essential acts cannot be carried out without their plaintiff and treating it as if it were secondary is an error in procedendo. The pas de nullité sans grief only applies to accessories acts. The epistemological model proposed works as a fundamental premise of interpretation of the theme, contributing to the advancement of the big area.
publishDate 2018
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2018-03-07
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/107
10.22197/rbdpp.v4i1.107
url https://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/107
identifier_str_mv 10.22197/rbdpp.v4i1.107
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://revista.ibraspp.com.br/RBDPP/article/view/107/103
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2018 Francisco Ortencio de Carvalho
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2018 Francisco Ortencio de Carvalho
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. 4 No. 1 (2018); 337-368
Revista Brasileña de Derecho Procesal Penal; Vol. 4 Núm. 1 (2018); 337-368
Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal; V. 4 N. 1 (2018); 337-368
Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal; v. 4 n. 1 (2018); 337-368
2525-510X
10.22197/rbdpp.v4i1
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_ 1809281939938476032