Loading...
Publication
Do acordo de colaboração à sentença premial : contributo para o desenvolvimento de um novo paradigma processual penal
| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2.93 MB | Adobe PDF |
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
O atual sistema penal português prevê um sistema premial de que pode aproveitar o autor de factos jurídico-criminalmente relevantes em caso de colaboração para a descoberta da verdade material. Porém, a legislação processual penal não acompanhou essa evolução, não estando legalmente previsto qualquer expediente de que o colaborador possa lançar mão como garantia de que essa contribuição para a descoberta da verdade será valorada em sede de determinação da medida da pena no âmbito de uma sentença condenatória. Na verdade, o legislador sentiu necessidade de dotar o sistema processual de um sistema que fizesse repercutir na fase de julgamento um eventual contributo colaborativo do arguido. Assim, o art. 283.º, n.º 3 al. c) do CPP (na redação dada pela Lei n.º 94/2021 de 21.12) estabelece que a acusação deve conter, sob pena de nulidade, para além do mais, todos os factos relevantes para uma eventual aplicação do instituto da dispensa de pena ou da atenuação especial da pena. Parece-nos que este sistema é insuficiente já que deixa exclusivamente na mão do acusador a descrição daqueles factos, não tendo o arguido qualquer capacidade decisória quanto àquela matéria. Assim, o CPP deverá ser dotado de um mecanismo premial de consenso a estabelecer entre o arguido (devidamente representado por defensor/mandatário) e o magistrado do Ministério Público por forma a garantir que no inquérito conste a descrição de todos os comportamentos colaborativos por aquele adotados. Tal mecanismo deverá incluir ainda a participação do JIC a quem caberá a homologação. Mais do que apresentar uma concreta proposta no âmbito do direito a constituir, este estudo pretende participar numa discussão que já se encontra em curso de forma a contribuir para a aceitação da ideia de que é necessário implementar garantias processuais penais no âmbito do inquérito de que o arguido possa mais tarde aproveitar na fase de julgam
The current Portuguese penal system provides for a reward system that can be used by the perpetrator of criminally relevant facts in the event of collaboration to discover the material truth. However, criminal procedural legislation has not kept up with this evolution, and there is no legal provision for the collaborator to use as a guarantee that this contribution to the discovery of the truth will be valued when determining the measure of the sentence in the context of a conviction. In fact, the legislator felt the need to provide the procedural system with a system that would ensure that any collaborative contribution made by the defendant would be reflected in the judgement phase. Thus, Article 283(3)(c) of the CPP (as amended by Law 94/2021 of 21 December) establishes that the indictment must contain, under penalty of nullity, in addition to all the relevant facts for the possible application of the penalty waiver institute or special mitigation of the penalty. It seems to us that this system is insufficient, as it leaves the description of these facts exclusively in the hands of the prosecutor, with the defendant having no decision-making capacity in this area. The CPP should therefore be equipped with an award mechanism of consensus to be established between the defendant (duly represented by a defender) and the public prosecutor in order to guarantee that the investigation includes a description of all the collaborative behaviour adopted by the defendant. This mechanism should also include the participation of the JIC, which will be responsible for homologation. Rather than presenting a specific proposal in the context of the right to be constituted, this study aims to participate in a discussion that is already underway in order to contribute to the acceptance of the idea that it is necessary to implement criminal procedural guarantees in the context of the investigation that the defendant can later take advantage of in the trial pha
The current Portuguese penal system provides for a reward system that can be used by the perpetrator of criminally relevant facts in the event of collaboration to discover the material truth. However, criminal procedural legislation has not kept up with this evolution, and there is no legal provision for the collaborator to use as a guarantee that this contribution to the discovery of the truth will be valued when determining the measure of the sentence in the context of a conviction. In fact, the legislator felt the need to provide the procedural system with a system that would ensure that any collaborative contribution made by the defendant would be reflected in the judgement phase. Thus, Article 283(3)(c) of the CPP (as amended by Law 94/2021 of 21 December) establishes that the indictment must contain, under penalty of nullity, in addition to all the relevant facts for the possible application of the penalty waiver institute or special mitigation of the penalty. It seems to us that this system is insufficient, as it leaves the description of these facts exclusively in the hands of the prosecutor, with the defendant having no decision-making capacity in this area. The CPP should therefore be equipped with an award mechanism of consensus to be established between the defendant (duly represented by a defender) and the public prosecutor in order to guarantee that the investigation includes a description of all the collaborative behaviour adopted by the defendant. This mechanism should also include the participation of the JIC, which will be responsible for homologation. Rather than presenting a specific proposal in the context of the right to be constituted, this study aims to participate in a discussion that is already underway in order to contribute to the acceptance of the idea that it is necessary to implement criminal procedural guarantees in the context of the investigation that the defendant can later take advantage of in the trial pha
Description
Keywords
Arguido Premial Colaboração na descoberta da verdade Fase de inquérito Fase de julgamento Acordo Defendant Award Collaboration for discover the truth Enquiry phase Trial phase Agreement
Pedagogical Context
Citation
Publisher
CC License
Without CC licence