A (In)constitucionalidade da submissão compulsória do condenado à identificação criminal por perfil genético para alimentar o banco Nacional de perfis genéticos

Abstract

The main scope of this research is to analyze whether mandatory criminal identification by genetic profile is provided for in art. 9-A of Law No. 7,210/84 can be carried out compulsorily without this being unconstitutional, based on a balance between the right to produce evidence and the right not to produce evidence against oneself. It is a theme that involves an in-depth discussion on the possibility of producing evidence from bodily interventions by the passive subjects of criminal prosecution in the Democratic State of Law. In this context, the historical evolution of the main techniques for the individualization of offenders is analyzed, up to the adoption of identification through “genetic fingerprints” on national soil. Furthermore, it is examined how the genetic banks, the National Genetic Profile Bank – BNPG and the Integrated Network of Genetic Profile Banks – RIBPG emerged, as well as the structure and functioning of these institutes and their importance for Brazilian Public Security. Finally, it explored the understanding of the homeland doctrine and the Brazilian Supreme Court on the possibility of producing evidence from the bodily intervention of the passive subject of a criminal prosecution, verifying its consonance with constitutional precepts, in light of the balance between rights to the production of evidence and not to produce evidence against you. In the end, it is concluded that body intervention using an invasive technique for criminal identification by genetic profile to feed the BNPG, if there is no consensus of the taxpayer to submit to it, it is unconstitutional for emptying the right not to produce evidence against you and not having a reputable and sufficient legal basis. Keywords: Criminal identification. Genetic profiles. Compulsory interventions. Gene bank.