The indetermination on the decisions taken by the federal supreme court about payments for collective moral damages

Views: 6

Authors

  • Alice Marie Freire Gaudiot Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, UFPE, Brasil
  • Gustavo Neves Forte Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, PUC/SP, Brasil.

Keywords:

Collective moral damages, Criminal procedure, Diffuse rights, Legal safety, Principle of legal reserve

Abstract

During the judgement of Criminal Cases n. 996/DF and 1030/DF, both referring to money laundering crimes, the Second Panel of the Federal Supreme Court discussed the possibility of condemning the defendant to pay for collective moral damages caused in criminal matters. Although the composition of the Panel was almost the same and the Justices repeated their votes, the change of one of the Justices led to the acquittal of the defendants in the first case, but to their condemnation in the second. It is therefore necessary to evaluate the appropriate venue to condemn a defendant to pay collective moral damages, and if its application in the criminal field is not a jurisprudential construction that harms the defendant.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Author Biographies

Alice Marie Freire Gaudiot, Universidade Federal de Pernambuco, UFPE, Brasil

Pós-graduada em Direito Penal Econômico pelo IBCCRIM. Graduada em Direito pela UFPE. Advogada criminal.

Gustavo Neves Forte, Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo, PUC/SP, Brasil.

Mestre em Direito Processual Penal pela PUCSP. Graduado pela PUCSP. Coordenador da Pós-Graduação em Direito Penal Econômico e Corporativa pela Escola de Direito do Brasil. Advogado criminal.

Downloads

Published

2024-07-18

How to Cite

Freire Gaudiot, A. M., & Neves Forte, G. (2024). The indetermination on the decisions taken by the federal supreme court about payments for collective moral damages. Boletim IBCCRIM, 30(350), 14–15. Retrieved from https://publicacoes.ibccrim.org.br/index.php/boletim_1993/article/view/1415

Issue

Vol. 30 No. 350 (2022): Boletim IBCCRIM - Janeiro

Section

Doutrina

License

Copyright of published articles belongs to the author, but with journal rights over the first publication and respecting the one-year exclusivity period. Authors may only use the same results in other publications by clearly indicating this journal as the medium of the original publication. If there is no such indication, it will be considered a situation of self-plagiarism.

Therefore, the reproduction, total or partial, of the articles published here is subject to the express mention of the origin of its publication in this journal, citing the volume and number of this publication. For legal purposes, the source of the original publication must be consigned, in addition to the DOI link for cross-reference (if any).