The “Anticrime” law and the admissibility of investigative evidence:: Reflections based on the conventional fair trial standards

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Cunha, Vítor Souza
Data de Publicação: 2021
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Revista Eletrônica de Direito Penal e Política Criminal
Texto Completo: https://seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/redppc/article/view/111859
Resumo: The article aims to analyze the interpretation that the § 3 of article 3-C of the Code of Criminal Procedure, introduced by the “Anticrime” Law, is a strict rule of inadmissibility of evidence. The article seeks to answer whether this strict rule of exclusion and prohibition of repeatable investigative evidence is compatible with conventional standards of fair trial. The discussion will start from the premises that the search for truth is the institutional purpose of the criminal procedure and that the right to confrontation, the reason that justifies the exclusion of investigative evidence, has an epistemic function. It will be shown that this interpretation, which considers the imperative exclusion of investigative evidence to be correct, does not observe epistemic rationality since it is not adequate and necessary to achieve the intended ends, which makes it incompatible with the standards of conventional fair trial.
id UFRGS-33_416818a9c9d1a0e9c75d9713833cdf1f
oai_identifier_str oai:seer.ufrgs.br:article/111859
network_acronym_str UFRGS-33
network_name_str Revista Eletrônica de Direito Penal e Política Criminal
repository_id_str
spelling The “Anticrime” law and the admissibility of investigative evidence:: Reflections based on the conventional fair trial standardsA Lei “Anticrime” e a admissibilidade de provas investigativas: : Reflexões com base no justo processo convencionalRegras de exclusão de provasDireito ao confrontoEpistemologiaJusto processo convencionalExclusionary rulesRight to confrontationEpistemologyConventional fair trialThe article aims to analyze the interpretation that the § 3 of article 3-C of the Code of Criminal Procedure, introduced by the “Anticrime” Law, is a strict rule of inadmissibility of evidence. The article seeks to answer whether this strict rule of exclusion and prohibition of repeatable investigative evidence is compatible with conventional standards of fair trial. The discussion will start from the premises that the search for truth is the institutional purpose of the criminal procedure and that the right to confrontation, the reason that justifies the exclusion of investigative evidence, has an epistemic function. It will be shown that this interpretation, which considers the imperative exclusion of investigative evidence to be correct, does not observe epistemic rationality since it is not adequate and necessary to achieve the intended ends, which makes it incompatible with the standards of conventional fair trial.O artigo tem por objetivo analisar a interpretação de que o §3º do artigo 3º-C do Código de Processo Penal, introduzido pela Lei “Anticrime”, é uma regra rígida de inadmissibilidade de provas. Busca-se responder se essa regra rígida de exclusão e proibição de uso de elementos investigativos repetíveis é compatível com os parâmetros convencionais utilizados para se reputar devido o processo penal. A discussão partirá das premissas de que a busca da verdade é o objetivo institucional do processo penal e que o direito ao confronto, fundamento que justifica a exclusão das provas investigativas, tem função epistêmica. Demonstrar-se-á que essa interpretação que defende a exclusão imperativa das provas investigativas não observa a racionalidade epistêmica, uma vez que não é adequada e necessária para atingir os fins pretendidos, o que a torna incompatível com a ideia de justo processo convencional.  Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul2021-07-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionArtigo avaliado por pares (Double blind peer review)application/pdfhttps://seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/redppc/article/view/111859Revista Eletrônica de Direito Penal e Política Criminal; Vol. 9 No. 1 (2021); 89 - 120Revista Electrónica de Derecho Penal y Política Criminal; Vol. 9 Núm. 1 (2021); 89 - 120Revista Eletrônica de Direito Penal e Política Criminal; v. 9 n. 1 (2021); 89 - 1202358-19562358-1956reponame:Revista Eletrônica de Direito Penal e Política Criminalinstname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)instacron:UFRGSporhttps://seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/redppc/article/view/111859/63887Copyright (c) 2021 Revista Eletrônica de Direito Penal e Política Criminalhttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessCunha, Vítor Souza2022-08-09T03:35:21Zoai:seer.ufrgs.br:article/111859Revistahttps://seer.ufrgs.br/redppc/PUBhttps://seer.ufrgs.br/redppc/oairedppc@ufrgs.br2358-19562358-1956opendoar:2022-08-09T03:35:21Revista Eletrônica de Direito Penal e Política Criminal - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv The “Anticrime” law and the admissibility of investigative evidence:: Reflections based on the conventional fair trial standards
A Lei “Anticrime” e a admissibilidade de provas investigativas: : Reflexões com base no justo processo convencional
title The “Anticrime” law and the admissibility of investigative evidence:: Reflections based on the conventional fair trial standards
spellingShingle The “Anticrime” law and the admissibility of investigative evidence:: Reflections based on the conventional fair trial standards
Cunha, Vítor Souza
Regras de exclusão de provas
Direito ao confronto
Epistemologia
Justo processo convencional
Exclusionary rules
Right to confrontation
Epistemology
Conventional fair trial
title_short The “Anticrime” law and the admissibility of investigative evidence:: Reflections based on the conventional fair trial standards
title_full The “Anticrime” law and the admissibility of investigative evidence:: Reflections based on the conventional fair trial standards
title_fullStr The “Anticrime” law and the admissibility of investigative evidence:: Reflections based on the conventional fair trial standards
title_full_unstemmed The “Anticrime” law and the admissibility of investigative evidence:: Reflections based on the conventional fair trial standards
title_sort The “Anticrime” law and the admissibility of investigative evidence:: Reflections based on the conventional fair trial standards
author Cunha, Vítor Souza
author_facet Cunha, Vítor Souza
author_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Cunha, Vítor Souza
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv Regras de exclusão de provas
Direito ao confronto
Epistemologia
Justo processo convencional
Exclusionary rules
Right to confrontation
Epistemology
Conventional fair trial
topic Regras de exclusão de provas
Direito ao confronto
Epistemologia
Justo processo convencional
Exclusionary rules
Right to confrontation
Epistemology
Conventional fair trial
description The article aims to analyze the interpretation that the § 3 of article 3-C of the Code of Criminal Procedure, introduced by the “Anticrime” Law, is a strict rule of inadmissibility of evidence. The article seeks to answer whether this strict rule of exclusion and prohibition of repeatable investigative evidence is compatible with conventional standards of fair trial. The discussion will start from the premises that the search for truth is the institutional purpose of the criminal procedure and that the right to confrontation, the reason that justifies the exclusion of investigative evidence, has an epistemic function. It will be shown that this interpretation, which considers the imperative exclusion of investigative evidence to be correct, does not observe epistemic rationality since it is not adequate and necessary to achieve the intended ends, which makes it incompatible with the standards of conventional fair trial.
publishDate 2021
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2021-07-01
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv info:eu-repo/semantics/article
info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
Artigo avaliado por pares (Double blind peer review)
format article
status_str publishedVersion
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv https://seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/redppc/article/view/111859
url https://seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/redppc/article/view/111859
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://seer.ufrgs.br/index.php/redppc/article/view/111859/63887
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Revista Eletrônica de Direito Penal e Política Criminal
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2021 Revista Eletrônica de Direito Penal e Política Criminal
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
publisher.none.fl_str_mv Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista Eletrônica de Direito Penal e Política Criminal; Vol. 9 No. 1 (2021); 89 - 120
Revista Electrónica de Derecho Penal y Política Criminal; Vol. 9 Núm. 1 (2021); 89 - 120
Revista Eletrônica de Direito Penal e Política Criminal; v. 9 n. 1 (2021); 89 - 120
2358-1956
2358-1956
reponame:Revista Eletrônica de Direito Penal e Política Criminal
instname:Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)
instacron:UFRGS
instname_str Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)
instacron_str UFRGS
institution UFRGS
reponame_str Revista Eletrônica de Direito Penal e Política Criminal
collection Revista Eletrônica de Direito Penal e Política Criminal
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista Eletrônica de Direito Penal e Política Criminal - Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv redppc@ufrgs.br
_version_ 1811812683502059520

Registros relacionados