A confissão no acordo de não persecução penal como prova ou à prova? Aspectos gerais da utilização da confissão do ANPP como prova contra o acordante nas esferas criminal e extrapenal

Abstract

This dissertation investigates the contours of the confession required in the non-prosecution agreement (ANPP), seeking to address the problem of the (im)possibility of its use as evidence against the agreeing party, both in criminal matters, especially in cases of non-compliance with the agreement, and in extra-penal spheres. Based on an analysis of negotiated criminal justice, the theory of evidence, and the constitutional rights and guarantees that structure the criminal process, two distinct responses are identified: the one indicated by practice, which admits the possibility of using the confession in the ANPP as evidence, and the perspective that should be adopted, given the finding that the requirement of confession compromises the autonomy of the agreeing party's will due to the vitiation of consent, because of the pressure inherent in the alternative between entering into the agreement or submitting to criminal prosecution. Thus, between the real and the ideal of confession and its effects, resolutive paths are proposed for both issues, ranging from negotiated solutions to judicial ones, with the aim of providing greater predictability between the parties and ensuring greater legal certainty in negotiations, even to the point of endorsing legislative intervention to objectively regulate the matter and reduce the criticism and uncertainty that arise from the requirement of confession for the conclusion of the ANPP.