| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 845.02 KB | Adobe PDF |
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
Foi apresentado em 1985 um novo conceito jurídico-penal, pelo penalista alemão Günther Jakobs: o designado Direito Penal do Inimigo. Na altura foi apresentado como mais uma teoria, que não teve qualquer acolhimento por conflituar com os elementares princípios fundamentais. Porém, logo após os atentados de 11 de setembro de 2001, esta teoria ganha protagonismo, sendo para alguns um remédio de combate ao terrorismo. Muitos são aqueles que manifestam dúvidas com o nosso atual quadro jurídico, apesar de já terem sido feitos progressos significativos de adoção de medidas de combate ao terrorismo, porém insuficientes no que diz respeito ao estado de preparação de eventuais ataques. A tentativa de encontrar desenfreadamente instrumentos de combate a potenciais atos terroristas, sem que sejam respeitados certos limites, arrasta consigo um retrocesso civilizacional ao ius puniendi, típico em estados absolutos, que em nada se assemelha ao mundo de hoje. É, portanto, afirmado que a aplicação integral da teoria de Jakobs, Direito Penal do Inimigo é inconstitucional. Existe no nosso ordenamento jurídico, alguns institutos que podem responder à atual crise do terrorismo, como por exemplo, a aplicação da pena relativamente indeterminada - seguindo-se a própria teoria na questão das medidas de segurança - com o objetivo de bloquear a perigosidade do agente, impondo-lhe um regime de desradicalização e de ressocialização.
In 1985, a new criminal law concept was presented by the criminal Gunther Jacobs: the criminal law of the enemy. By then, it was presented as one more theory that didn't have any reception because it conflicted with the basic fundamental principles. However, right after the September 11 attacks, this theory rises up, being for some a solution for the combat of terrorism. There are a lot of people who have doubts concerning our current legal framework. In spite of significant progress concerning the adoption of measures has already been made, it is insignificant when it comes to the state of preparation of eventual attacks. The wildly attempt to find instruments of combat to potential terrorist acts, not respecting certain limits, drags with it a civilizational set back in ius puniendi, typical of absolute states, which have nothing to do with our world nowadays. Therefore, it is said that the total application of Jackobs' theory: the criminal law of the enemy is unconstitutional. In our legal order there are some institutes that can answer the current crisis of terrorism, for example, the application of a penalty more or less determinated, which is followed by the theory related to the issue of security measures, whose goal is to block the danger of the agent, giving it a process of de-radicalization and resocialization.
In 1985, a new criminal law concept was presented by the criminal Gunther Jacobs: the criminal law of the enemy. By then, it was presented as one more theory that didn't have any reception because it conflicted with the basic fundamental principles. However, right after the September 11 attacks, this theory rises up, being for some a solution for the combat of terrorism. There are a lot of people who have doubts concerning our current legal framework. In spite of significant progress concerning the adoption of measures has already been made, it is insignificant when it comes to the state of preparation of eventual attacks. The wildly attempt to find instruments of combat to potential terrorist acts, not respecting certain limits, drags with it a civilizational set back in ius puniendi, typical of absolute states, which have nothing to do with our world nowadays. Therefore, it is said that the total application of Jackobs' theory: the criminal law of the enemy is unconstitutional. In our legal order there are some institutes that can answer the current crisis of terrorism, for example, the application of a penalty more or less determinated, which is followed by the theory related to the issue of security measures, whose goal is to block the danger of the agent, giving it a process of de-radicalization and resocialization.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Direito penal do inimigo Terrorismo Lobo solitário Criminal law of the enemy Terrorism Lone wolf