O requisito da confissão no caso de descumprimento do acordo de não persecução penal

Abstract

The aim of this monographic work is to discuss the Penal Non-Persecution Agreement with a view to analyse the status of confession in such a legal instrument, based on a bibliographic-documentary study of a constraining nature between the positions for and against the use of the requirement, in case of unjustified non-compliance with the ANPP by the investigated. In order to achieve this purpose, it is necessary to: historically situate the emergence of Business Criminal Law; place the Criminal Justice Business in a foreign law; present the evolution of business law in Brazil and the main business law institutes that already exist in Brazilian legislation; present the legal configuration of the ANPP; and discuss the doctrinal positions for and against the use of the confession made at the ANPP in judicial questioning in the event of non-compliance with it. This research is in line with qualitative studies (Minayo, 1994) as it constitutes an investigation with a view to understand the theme in its constitutive and conceptual aspects. The starting point will be the documentary research of legal norms, such as Resolution 181/2017 of the National Council of the Public Ministry, Resolution 183/2018, and Law No. 13,964/19, from January 23th, 2020, the Code of Criminal Procedure and the Constitution; and the bibliographic research of recent legal literature which arguments for and against the use of confession are asserted in case of non-compliance with the ANPP. After analysing the researched positions, three points of view were found: there are authors who consider the possibility of using the confession, since they classify the right to silence as perfectly renounceable; there are authors who oppose its use, considering that confession, in this situation, is used more as a psychological pressure than as a fundamental requirement; and there is also an intermediate position, which the confession could be used in case of non-compliance with the noncriminal prosecution agreement as a reinforcement, an advantage, a reaffirmation of the evidence produced in the context of judicial interrogation. We defend the third position, which the use of the requirement is conceived in case of unjustified non-compliance with the ANPP, doing it, however, in a considered manner, with respect to the constitutional guarantees of the investigated and the current procedural system.