Amnesty law, ADPF 153 and trial in the Case of Gomes Land and others vs. Brazil

Detalhes bibliográficos
Autor(a) principal: Barcellos, Rafael Siegel
Data de Publicação: 2023
Outros Autores: Quintanilha Neto, Francisco Veras
Tipo de documento: Artigo
Idioma: por
Título da fonte: Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia
Texto Completo: https://www.revistas.unijui.edu.br/index.php/direitoshumanosedemocracia/article/view/13714
Resumo: The presente papper intends to investigate the scope of the concept of transitional justice, in Brazil, from the analysis of the judgment of ADPF nº 153 by the Federal Supreme Court and the case Gomes Land against Brazil at the inter-american Court of Human Rigths and how the understandings enshrined in these actions have repercussions on the consolidation of democratic regime. Indeed, the traditional idea of a just transition has as its main concern to avoid any risk of authoritarian return, leaving, due to the success of objective, little space for reparation for eventual crimes perpetrated by dictatorial agents. However, it is necessary to inquire whether this concept of transitional justice is suffcient to ensure democratic stability or whether, on the contrary, the lack of punishment for human rights violations during na authoritarian government causes the actors of repression to feel a sense of that democratic freedom and fundamental rights are just concessions that can be withdrawn at any time. In order to analyze the proposed problematization, the historical-political context of the period of redemocratization and the advento of Law 6.683/1979 will be analyzed first. Subsequently, the position of the Federal Supreme Court regarding the constitutionality of the amnesty law and the understanding of inter-american Court of Human Rights in relation to this same legal system will be studied. Finally, it will address how the amnesty for dictatorial agents who committed crimes against human rights during the regime of exception can cause a weakening of democracy and the perpetuation of the violation of human rights. In this scenario, the hypothesis is pursued that the idea of transitional justice as a political agrement that seeks, primarily and almost exclusively, to avoid na authoritarian regression ends up promoting precarious agreements that are not concerned with repairing possible violations of rights perpetrated. By the regime of exception and, as a corollary, it sustains a permanente tacit threat of a dictatorial return, as well as defends the maintenance of practices that violate human rights.
id UNIJ-1_ecde014846f1c5c57d0eb29790f498bc
oai_identifier_str oai:ojs.revistas.unijui.edu.br:article/13714
network_acronym_str UNIJ-1
network_name_str Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia
repository_id_str
spelling Amnesty law, ADPF 153 and trial in the Case of Gomes Land and others vs. BrazilLei de Anistia, ADPF 153 e julgamento do Caso Gomes Land e outros vs. BrasiltransitiondemocracyjusticetransiçãodemocraciajustiçaThe presente papper intends to investigate the scope of the concept of transitional justice, in Brazil, from the analysis of the judgment of ADPF nº 153 by the Federal Supreme Court and the case Gomes Land against Brazil at the inter-american Court of Human Rigths and how the understandings enshrined in these actions have repercussions on the consolidation of democratic regime. Indeed, the traditional idea of a just transition has as its main concern to avoid any risk of authoritarian return, leaving, due to the success of objective, little space for reparation for eventual crimes perpetrated by dictatorial agents. However, it is necessary to inquire whether this concept of transitional justice is suffcient to ensure democratic stability or whether, on the contrary, the lack of punishment for human rights violations during na authoritarian government causes the actors of repression to feel a sense of that democratic freedom and fundamental rights are just concessions that can be withdrawn at any time. In order to analyze the proposed problematization, the historical-political context of the period of redemocratization and the advento of Law 6.683/1979 will be analyzed first. Subsequently, the position of the Federal Supreme Court regarding the constitutionality of the amnesty law and the understanding of inter-american Court of Human Rights in relation to this same legal system will be studied. Finally, it will address how the amnesty for dictatorial agents who committed crimes against human rights during the regime of exception can cause a weakening of democracy and the perpetuation of the violation of human rights. In this scenario, the hypothesis is pursued that the idea of transitional justice as a political agrement that seeks, primarily and almost exclusively, to avoid na authoritarian regression ends up promoting precarious agreements that are not concerned with repairing possible violations of rights perpetrated. By the regime of exception and, as a corollary, it sustains a permanente tacit threat of a dictatorial return, as well as defends the maintenance of practices that violate human rights.O presente trabalho pretende investigar o alcance do conceito de justiça de transição no Brasil, a partir da análise do julgamento da ADPF nº 153 pelo Supremo Tribunal Federal e do caso Gomes Land e outros contra o Brasil na Corte Interamericana de Direito Humanos, e como os entendimentos consignados nessas ações repercutem na consolidação do regime democrático. Com efeito, a tradicional ideia de transição justa tem, como principal preocupação, evitar qualquer risco de retorno autoritário, deixando, pelo sucesso desse objetivo, pouco espaço para a reparação dos eventuais crimes perpetrados pelos agentes ditatoriais. É necessário, contudo, se perquirir se esse conceito de justiça de transição é suficiente para assegurar a estabilidade democrática ou se, ao contrário, a falta de punição às violações aos direitos humanos no decorrer de um governo autoritário faz surgir nos atores da repressão um sentimento de que a liberdade democrática e os direitos fundamentais são apenas concessões que poderão ser afastadas a qualquer momento. Para analisar a problematização proposta, será apreciado, primeiramente, o contexto histórico-político do período de redemocratização e do advento da Lei nº 6.683/1979. Na sequência, serão estudados o posicionamento do Supremo Tribunal Federal quanto à constitucionalidade da Lei de Anistia e o entendimento da Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos em relação a este mesmo ordenamento jurídico. Por fim, se abordará como a anistia aos agentes ditatoriais, que cometeram crimes contra os direitos humanos no decorrer do regime de exceção, pode ocasionar um enfraquecimento da democracia e a perpetuação da violação a direitos humanos. Neste panorama persegue-se a hipótese de que a ideia de justiça de transição como um acordo político que busca, precipuamente e quase que exclusivamente, evitar uma regressão autoritária, acaba por fomentar acordos precários que não se preocupam em reparar as eventuais violações a direitos perpetradas pelo regime de exceção e, por corolário, sustenta uma permanente ameaça tácita de retorno ditatorial, bem como, referenda a manutenção de práticas atentatórias aos direitos humanos.EDITORA UNIJUI2023-12-21info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://www.revistas.unijui.edu.br/index.php/direitoshumanosedemocracia/article/view/1371410.21527/2317-5389.2023.22.13714Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia; v. 11 n. 22 (2023): REVISTA DIREITOS HUMANOS E DEMOCRACIA; e137142317-5389reponame:Revista Direitos Humanos e Democraciainstname:Universidade Regional do Noroeste do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul (UNIJUI)instacron:UNIJUIporhttps://www.revistas.unijui.edu.br/index.php/direitoshumanosedemocracia/article/view/13714/7625Copyright (c) 2023 Revista Direitos Humanos e Democraciahttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessBarcellos, Rafael Siegel Quintanilha Neto, Francisco Veras2023-10-10T11:18:32Zoai:ojs.revistas.unijui.edu.br:article/13714Revistahttps://www.revistas.unijui.edu.br/index.php/direitoshumanosedemocracia/oai2317-53892317-5389opendoar:2023-10-10T11:18:32Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia - Universidade Regional do Noroeste do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul (UNIJUI)false
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv Amnesty law, ADPF 153 and trial in the Case of Gomes Land and others vs. Brazil
Lei de Anistia, ADPF 153 e julgamento do Caso Gomes Land e outros vs. Brasil
title Amnesty law, ADPF 153 and trial in the Case of Gomes Land and others vs. Brazil
spellingShingle Amnesty law, ADPF 153 and trial in the Case of Gomes Land and others vs. Brazil
Barcellos, Rafael Siegel
transition
democracy
justice
transição
democracia
justiça
title_short Amnesty law, ADPF 153 and trial in the Case of Gomes Land and others vs. Brazil
title_full Amnesty law, ADPF 153 and trial in the Case of Gomes Land and others vs. Brazil
title_fullStr Amnesty law, ADPF 153 and trial in the Case of Gomes Land and others vs. Brazil
title_full_unstemmed Amnesty law, ADPF 153 and trial in the Case of Gomes Land and others vs. Brazil
title_sort Amnesty law, ADPF 153 and trial in the Case of Gomes Land and others vs. Brazil
author Barcellos, Rafael Siegel
author_facet Barcellos, Rafael Siegel
Quintanilha Neto, Francisco Veras
author_role author
author2 Quintanilha Neto, Francisco Veras
author2_role author
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv Barcellos, Rafael Siegel
Quintanilha Neto, Francisco Veras
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv transition
democracy
justice
transição
democracia
justiça
topic transition
democracy
justice
transição
democracia
justiça
description The presente papper intends to investigate the scope of the concept of transitional justice, in Brazil, from the analysis of the judgment of ADPF nº 153 by the Federal Supreme Court and the case Gomes Land against Brazil at the inter-american Court of Human Rigths and how the understandings enshrined in these actions have repercussions on the consolidation of democratic regime. Indeed, the traditional idea of a just transition has as its main concern to avoid any risk of authoritarian return, leaving, due to the success of objective, little space for reparation for eventual crimes perpetrated by dictatorial agents. However, it is necessary to inquire whether this concept of transitional justice is suffcient to ensure democratic stability or whether, on the contrary, the lack of punishment for human rights violations during na authoritarian government causes the actors of repression to feel a sense of that democratic freedom and fundamental rights are just concessions that can be withdrawn at any time. In order to analyze the proposed problematization, the historical-political context of the period of redemocratization and the advento of Law 6.683/1979 will be analyzed first. Subsequently, the position of the Federal Supreme Court regarding the constitutionality of the amnesty law and the understanding of inter-american Court of Human Rights in relation to this same legal system will be studied. Finally, it will address how the amnesty for dictatorial agents who committed crimes against human rights during the regime of exception can cause a weakening of democracy and the perpetuation of the violation of human rights. In this scenario, the hypothesis is pursued that the idea of transitional justice as a political agrement that seeks, primarily and almost exclusively, to avoid na authoritarian regression ends up promoting precarious agreements that are not concerned with repairing possible violations of rights perpetrated. By the regime of exception and, as a corollary, it sustains a permanente tacit threat of a dictatorial return, as well as defends the maintenance of practices that violate human rights.
publishDate 2023
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv 2023-12-21
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://www.revistas.unijui.edu.br/index.php/direitoshumanosedemocracia/article/view/13714
10.21527/2317-5389.2023.22.13714
url https://www.revistas.unijui.edu.br/index.php/direitoshumanosedemocracia/article/view/13714
identifier_str_mv 10.21527/2317-5389.2023.22.13714
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv por
language por
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv https://www.revistas.unijui.edu.br/index.php/direitoshumanosedemocracia/article/view/13714/7625
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv Copyright (c) 2023 Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
rights_invalid_str_mv Copyright (c) 2023 Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
eu_rights_str_mv openAccess
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv application/pdf
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv EDITORA UNIJUI
publisher.none.fl_str_mv EDITORA UNIJUI
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia; v. 11 n. 22 (2023): REVISTA DIREITOS HUMANOS E DEMOCRACIA; e13714
2317-5389
reponame:Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia
instname:Universidade Regional do Noroeste do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul (UNIJUI)
instacron:UNIJUI
instname_str Universidade Regional do Noroeste do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul (UNIJUI)
instacron_str UNIJUI
institution UNIJUI
reponame_str Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia
collection Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia
repository.name.fl_str_mv Revista Direitos Humanos e Democracia - Universidade Regional do Noroeste do Estado do Rio Grande do Sul (UNIJUI)
repository.mail.fl_str_mv
_version_ 1798315161371541504