Acordo de não persecução penal e justiça restaurativa: é possível uma atuação conjunta?

Abstract

In the first place, it is noteworthy that the present work excelled in analyzing the challenges imposed by the current legal system with regard to the expansion of Criminal Law and the crisis caused as a result, whether from procedural congestion to the alleged lack of legitimacy of Criminal Law, mainly from the perspective of how the "consensual measures in criminal prosecution", especially if the Acordo de Não Persecução Penal, if interpreted in the light of the principles and methods of Restorative Justice, can (re)signify the study/analysis of crime and the criminal and the respective criminalization process. In this way, the central problem consists of verifying, in relation to the typical crimes of a second speed Criminal Law, regarding the possibility of using the Criminal Non-Persecution Agreement as a gateway to Restorative Justice, in the search for complete social pacification, in view of: (i) the inversion of the logic of passive criminal liability of the author of the fact to the active criminal liability of them; and (ii) how the Acordo de Não Persecução Penal can be a means of effectively promoting the rights of victims. In other words, is it possible that the Non- Persecution Agreement – based on dialogue and consensus, as well as restorative values – breaks with traditional logic and promotes effective accountability of the perpetrator of the act and due reparation to the victim? Therefore, this analysis made use of theoretical research, bibliographic review and deductive reasoning, trying to carry out a dialectical and qualitative approach, not limited to legal statutes, but including doctrinal manifestations and decisions of the Courts, starting from a systematic analysis that the process with the effective participation of those involved in the resolution of the conflict, with the legitimation of the consensus, does not violate any fundamental right, but it even allows the recovery of the justice system itself, without an unnecessary procedural march. At the end, a brief analysis is made on how the Judicial Subsection of Uberaba/MG has used the aforementioned procedural instruments in the treatment of said conflicts in a more humanized way, with absolute respect for human rights and the dignity of the human person, basic postulates of the Democratic State of Law.