Princípio da jurisdição universal: a deslocalização judiciária entre o dever ser cosmopolita e a realidade da cosmopolitização

• Autor(a) principal: Mello, Rafaela da Cruz
• Data de Publicação: 2017
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Manancial - Repositório Digital da UFSM
• Texto Completo: http://repositorio.ufsm.br/handle/1/12531
• topic: Jurisdição universal; Cosmopolitismo; Cosmopolitização; Direitos humanos; Universal jurisdiction; Cosmopolitanism; Cosmopolitanization; Human rights; CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO

The process of internationalization of human rights was one of those responsible for making individuals subject to international law and for motivating the development of the principle of humanity. In this context, cosmopolitan ideals, inspired by the philosophical reflections of Immanuel Kant, from the middle of the last century, began to emerge with the intention of providing bases for the interpretation of certain phenomena. In the legal field, observation based on precepts of cosmopolitanism provides important elements for understanding human rights and the need to combat impunity for those who commit global violations of such rights through genocide, war crimes and crimes Against humanity. In relation to these criminal types, internationalization fostered the so-called principle of universal jurisdiction. According to this principle, any State is capable of prosecuting crimes against human rights, even if there is no territorial connection of the facts to its territory or nationality link between victims and / or defendants and the state of judgment. We are faced with the so-called judicial relocation, in which elements such as territoriality and nationality are put in check because of the need to protect human rights. The use of this principle, by generating ruptures with elements of modern understanding of law, jurisdiction and process, raises practical questions in the field of the so-called cosmopolitanization of justice. In view of this scenario, the research problems that guide this work are: To what extent does the process of internationalization of human rights establish a duty of States to exercise universal jurisdiction? When looking at the limits of the real, what are the obstacles to an effective exercise of universal jurisdiction in its absolute form? The general objective of the research was to observe the principle of universal jurisdiction over the dichotomous view of being cosmopolitan, of inspiration in Kantian philosophical reflections and of authors who use Kant as their theoretical basis and of the being of cosmopolitanization, a concept developed in the plane of Sociology by Ulrich Beck and which demonstrates that reality departs from the perceptions of a philosophical cosmopolitanism and approaches the idea that society has become cosmopolitan because of the transnationalization of global risks. The method of dialectical approach and the methods of comparative and typological procedure were used. It has been concluded that philosophically anchored on the premises of cosmopolitanism and, legally in the norms of jus cogens, universal jurisdiction, in its absolute form, is seen as a duty to be able to break with impunity and repair human rights violations. However, the reality of being shies away from universalist pretensions and approaches the particularism of practices, so that the presence of legal and political obstacles to the exercise of universal jurisdiction drastically reduces its spectrum of application. From the duty of punishment, through the application of absolute universal jurisdiction, States have only been able to punish if there are certain conditions, generally stipulated by their respective domestic laws.