Jury nullification? Reflections derived from the argumentum a fortiori brought by the opinion of Min. Fachin on the ARE 1225185, Tema/RG 1.087

The paper aims to answer the problem of the legitimacy of the jury nullification through the critical analysis of the argumentum a fortiori that sustains its inadmissibility in trials of heinous crimes against life because if neither the Parliament would be allowed to waive punishment, much less wou...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: Hugo Soares
Format: Article
Language:Spanish
Published: Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal 2021-08-01
Series:Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.ibraspp.com.br/revista/index.php/RBDPP/article/view/468
id doaj-da88244373a34948b92f7460c87b0df7
record_format Article
spelling doaj-da88244373a34948b92f7460c87b0df72021-08-29T22:07:21ZspaInstituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual PenalRevista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal2525-510X2021-08-017210.22197/rbdpp.v7i2.468230Jury nullification? Reflections derived from the argumentum a fortiori brought by the opinion of Min. Fachin on the ARE 1225185, Tema/RG 1.087Hugo Soares0Universidade Humboldt em Berlim (Doutorando)The paper aims to answer the problem of the legitimacy of the jury nullification through the critical analysis of the argumentum a fortiori that sustains its inadmissibility in trials of heinous crimes against life because if neither the Parliament would be allowed to waive punishment, much less would the Jury be authorized to do so. The paper raises the hypothesis that the Jury is indeed not hierarchically inferior to the Parliament, so that the premises of the argumentum a fortiori would be mistaken. A bibliographical review based on the criminal functionalism is carried out regarding the legal nature of the Jury Court in the legal system and its dogmatic consequences, in order to verify the raised hypothesis, which observes that that the Jury corresponds to an institutional guarantee belonging to the People, allowing us to conclude that it is hierarchically superior to the Parliament and that the Jury nullification should therefore be seen as a sovereign waiver of the punishment.http://www.ibraspp.com.br/revista/index.php/RBDPP/article/view/468tribunal do júriclemênciagarantia institucionalpovorenúncia soberana à pena
collection DOAJ
language Spanish
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Hugo Soares
spellingShingle Hugo Soares
Jury nullification? Reflections derived from the argumentum a fortiori brought by the opinion of Min. Fachin on the ARE 1225185, Tema/RG 1.087
Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal
tribunal do júri
clemência
garantia institucional
povo
renúncia soberana à pena
author_facet Hugo Soares
author_sort Hugo Soares
title Jury nullification? Reflections derived from the argumentum a fortiori brought by the opinion of Min. Fachin on the ARE 1225185, Tema/RG 1.087
title_short Jury nullification? Reflections derived from the argumentum a fortiori brought by the opinion of Min. Fachin on the ARE 1225185, Tema/RG 1.087
title_full Jury nullification? Reflections derived from the argumentum a fortiori brought by the opinion of Min. Fachin on the ARE 1225185, Tema/RG 1.087
title_fullStr Jury nullification? Reflections derived from the argumentum a fortiori brought by the opinion of Min. Fachin on the ARE 1225185, Tema/RG 1.087
title_full_unstemmed Jury nullification? Reflections derived from the argumentum a fortiori brought by the opinion of Min. Fachin on the ARE 1225185, Tema/RG 1.087
title_sort jury nullification? reflections derived from the argumentum a fortiori brought by the opinion of min. fachin on the are 1225185, tema/rg 1.087
publisher Instituto Brasileiro de Direito Processual Penal
series Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal
issn 2525-510X
publishDate 2021-08-01
description The paper aims to answer the problem of the legitimacy of the jury nullification through the critical analysis of the argumentum a fortiori that sustains its inadmissibility in trials of heinous crimes against life because if neither the Parliament would be allowed to waive punishment, much less would the Jury be authorized to do so. The paper raises the hypothesis that the Jury is indeed not hierarchically inferior to the Parliament, so that the premises of the argumentum a fortiori would be mistaken. A bibliographical review based on the criminal functionalism is carried out regarding the legal nature of the Jury Court in the legal system and its dogmatic consequences, in order to verify the raised hypothesis, which observes that that the Jury corresponds to an institutional guarantee belonging to the People, allowing us to conclude that it is hierarchically superior to the Parliament and that the Jury nullification should therefore be seen as a sovereign waiver of the punishment.
topic tribunal do júri
clemência
garantia institucional
povo
renúncia soberana à pena
url http://www.ibraspp.com.br/revista/index.php/RBDPP/article/view/468
work_keys_str_mv AT hugosoares jurynullificationreflectionsderivedfromtheargumentumafortioribroughtbytheopinionofminfachinontheare1225185temarg1087
_version_ 1721186263280648192