O acordo de não persecução penal implementado pela lei nº 13.964/2019 (pacote anticrime): uma análise acerca das controvérsias em sua aplicação

Abstract

The main objective of the research is to analyze the institute of the non-criminal prosecution agreement implemented by Law No. 13.964/2019, known as “Pacote Anticrime” (“Anticrime Package”), especially the controversies in its application. The non-criminal prosecution agreement had already been introduced into the legal system through Resolution No. 181/2017 of the National Council for the Public Prosecution and was subsequently regulated by the aforementioned law. Initially, aspects of the Brazilian criminal procedural system were verified, such as the Code of Criminal Procedure, some of its guiding principles, the existing criminal procedural systems and the criminal action itself. Secondly, an explanation about the consensual justice model in the criminal sphere was conducted, which passed through the North American institute of plea bargaining and through the negotiation mechanisms already existing in the Brazilian criminal system, which are the composition civil damages, the penal transaction, the conditional suspension of the process and the winning collaboration. Then, through the study of the doctrine, the jurisprudence and the norms that deal with the subject, the non-criminal prosecution agreement was examined in its essential aspects, such as the conditions, requirements and prohibitions for its conclusion. Finally, it was carried out a critical analysis about the application of the agreement, notably regarding the interpretation of its devices and expressions. The motivation for the critics is the need to discuss the insertion of new institutes in the Brazilian system and their application in the light of the procedural system adopted in the country, specifically if such mechanisms ensure respect for the fundamental rights and guarantees of those involved in the litigation. The study presented that, although the non-criminal prosecution agreement was finally regulated by a legal norm, several controversial points remained, which need to be resolved so that the institute obtains its maximum effectiveness and attains the aims pursued in its creation, always in line with what is constitutionally guaranteed.