| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 582.29 KB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
Com o surgimento de massivos escândalos corruptivos, com a sua transversalidade e com a débil perceção da corrupção, como um tipo de ilícito que prejudica gravemente a economia dos Estados, e que deslegitima a democracia, os debates jurídicos intensificaram-se e, consequentemente, as estratégias nacionais e internacionais de prevenção e repressão mostraram-se urgentes, inevitáveis e impreteríveis. A par disso, a dificuldade em aferir prova desta realidade que sempre existiu, mas que apenas agora se revigorou, mostra-se custosa, dadas as próprias caraterísticas inerentes a este tipo legal de crime. Nesta esteira, procederemos ao estudo minuciado de possíveis soluções que resultem numa maior facilidade probatória do ilícito, nomeadamente, o instituto do arrependido colaborador e a chamada prova indireta, pois consideramos que estes instrumentos fornecem melhorias no próprio carrear do processo penal e no alcance da verdade material. Naturalmente, pretendemos com este lavor, incitar reflexões, alargar horizontes e mostrar que os institutos posteriormente analisados são ajustáveis aos princípios constitucionais e processuais penais do nosso Estado de Direito Democrático.
Given the emergence of massive corruption scandals, its own transversality, and the worsening perception of corruption as a type of offense that seriously damages the state’s economy and delegitimizes democracy, legal debates about this theme have increased, and consequently, national, and international prevention and repression strategies have become urgent, inevitable, and imperative. Furthermore, the difficulty that always existed in assessing proofs has only now been reinvigorated, which proves to be costly given the inherent characteristics of the legal type of crime. In this regard, we will proceed with a detailed study of possible solutions that may result in greater ease of proof of the type, namely the institute of the repentant collaborator and the indirect proof, since we consider that these instruments may provide improvements in the quality of government and in the conduct of the criminal processes. Naturally, with this work, we intend to incite reflections, broaden horizons, and show that the institutes herein analyzed are adjustable to the constitutional and criminal procedural principles of our democratic rule of law.
Given the emergence of massive corruption scandals, its own transversality, and the worsening perception of corruption as a type of offense that seriously damages the state’s economy and delegitimizes democracy, legal debates about this theme have increased, and consequently, national, and international prevention and repression strategies have become urgent, inevitable, and imperative. Furthermore, the difficulty that always existed in assessing proofs has only now been reinvigorated, which proves to be costly given the inherent characteristics of the legal type of crime. In this regard, we will proceed with a detailed study of possible solutions that may result in greater ease of proof of the type, namely the institute of the repentant collaborator and the indirect proof, since we consider that these instruments may provide improvements in the quality of government and in the conduct of the criminal processes. Naturally, with this work, we intend to incite reflections, broaden horizons, and show that the institutes herein analyzed are adjustable to the constitutional and criminal procedural principles of our democratic rule of law.
Description
Keywords
Corrupção Colaboração premiada Prova indiciária Princípios estruturantes do processo penal Governança Corruption Award-winning collaboration Circumstantial evidence Structuring principles of criminal procedure Governance