Submitted by PPG Ci?ncias Criminais (ppgccrim@pucrs.br) on 2018-05-08T14:30:33Z No. of bitstreams: 1 TESE - MARCELO ALMEIDA SANT ANNA - 2018.pdf: 2297983 bytes, checksum: e1d2f3ea90e44a6ed1626cb0bfdde1aa (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Caroline Xavier (caroline.xavier@pucrs.br) on 2018-05-14T13:17:08Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 TESE - MARCELO ALMEIDA SANT ANNA - 2018.pdf: 2297983 bytes, checksum: e1d2f3ea90e44a6ed1626cb0bfdde1aa (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-05-14T13:21:36Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 TESE - MARCELO ALMEIDA SANT ANNA - 2018.pdf: 2297983 bytes, checksum: e1d2f3ea90e44a6ed1626cb0bfdde1aa (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018-03-23 / Coordena??o de Aperfei?oamento de Pessoal de N?vel Superior - CAPES / Doctorate thesis in Criminal Sciences, developed in Concentration Area Criminal System and Violence and linked in Field of Research Contemporary Legal-Criminal Systems. The analysis of the criminal field allows us to evidence the existence of a constitutional deficit, especially in the preliminary phase of the criminal process. Investigation, as a space of power and as a procedure for the production of truths, is not properly connected to the procedural stage, which ends up by broadening excessively discretion, producing unilateral knowledge. Adversary proceeding and right to a fair hearing are constitutional principles applicable to both stages of criminal prosecution, albeit at different intensity. Therefore, there is a need for a procedural interim period prior to the criminal complaint, made in the form of a preliminary hearing. In the end, the a result of reaserch allowed device a bill. / Tese de doutorado em Ci?ncias Criminais realizada na ?rea de Concentra??o Sistema Penal e Viol?ncia e vinculada ? Linha de Pesquisa Sistemas Jur?dico-Penais Contempor?neos. A an?lise do campo penal permite afirmar a exist?ncia de um d?ficit constitucional, especialmente na fase preliminar do processo penal. A investiga??o, enquanto espa?o de poder e enquanto procedimento de produ??o de verdades, n?o est? devidamente conectada ? fase processual o que acaba por ampliar demasiadamente a discricionariedade, produzindo um saber unilateral. O contradit?rio e a ampla defesa, por sua vez, s?o preceitos constitucionais aplic?veis a ambas as etapas da persecu??o penal, ainda que em intensidade diferente. Dessa forma, verifica-se a necessidade de um momento de interregno procedimental anterior ? den?ncia criminal, realizado na forma de audi?ncia preliminar. Ao final, como resultado da pesquisa realizada, elabora-se um projeto de lei.

Submitted by PPG Direito (ppgdir@pucrs.br) on 2018-06-25T15:39:42Z No. of bitstreams: 1 MARINA_DAMASCENO_DIS.pdf: 1287729 bytes, checksum: d08b6177aa2b3735020a5895f295cda2 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Sheila Dias (sheila.dias@pucrs.br) on 2018-06-29T17:04:41Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 MARINA_DAMASCENO_DIS.pdf: 1287729 bytes, checksum: d08b6177aa2b3735020a5895f295cda2 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-06-29T17:11:41Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 MARINA_DAMASCENO_DIS.pdf: 1287729 bytes, checksum: d08b6177aa2b3735020a5895f295cda2 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018-02-27 / Conselho Nacional de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento Cient?fico e Tecnol?gico - CNPq / The present dissertation aims to analyze the jurisdictional policies that assist in the construction of a consensus culture. In order to do so, it critically investigates the propositions used in the preliminary hearing of conciliation or mediation brought by the Civil Procedure Code of 2015 (CPC/15). From a deductive approach method, starting from the ideas related to the transformation occurred in the society and, consequently, going through the consolidation of new forms to regulate litigation ? adequate methods of conflicts resolution ? concluding with the analysis of the preliminary hearing that aims the reach of consensus, foreseen in article 334 of the CPC/15. It can be concluded that a culture of consensus is not achieved by imposing a legal device, but through policies that effectively encourage its application, which cannot be restricted solely to the Judiciary. Therefore, the preliminary hearing, in essence, is beneficial to the realization of a jurisdictional policy, once it allows a consensual dialogue before a statement of defense is offered. If critically considered the models exposed by the legislator, there is a distortion in its arguments, which in article 334 prioritize the reduction of numbers through a legal imposition, thereby becoming indifferent or even harmful its application, as it ends up being considered only a mere procedural step. / A presente disserta??o tem por objeto a an?lise das pol?ticas jurisdicionais que auxiliam na constru??o de uma cultura do consenso. Para tanto, investiga criticamente as proposi??es utilizadas na audi?ncia preliminar de concilia??o ou media??o trazida pelo C?digo de Processo Civil de 2015 (CPC/15). A partir de um m?todo dedutivo de abordagem, partindo das ideias relativas ? transforma??o na sociedade e, consequentemente, ? consolida??o de novas formas de regula??o de lit?gios ? meios adequados de resolu??o de conflitos ? at? a an?lise da audi?ncia preliminar com vistas ao consenso, prevista no artigo 334 do CPC/15. Conclui-se que uma cultura voltada ao consenso n?o se concretiza com a imposi??o de um dispositivo legal, mas por meio de pol?ticas que efetivamente incentivem sua aplica??o, as quais n?o podem estar restritas unicamente ao Poder Judici?rio. Diante disso, por mais que referida audi?ncia, em sua ess?ncia, mostre-se ben?fica ? concretiza??o de uma pol?tica jurisdicional, uma vez que possibilita um di?logo consensual antes do oferecimento da contesta??o. Se considerados criticamente os moldes expostos pelo legislador, h? uma distor??o em seus fundamentos, os quais, no artigo 334, priorizam a diminui??o de n?meros por meio de uma imposi??o legal, tornando-se, desse modo, sua aplica??o indiferente ou at? mesmo prejudicial, na medida em que acaba por transform?-la, muitas vezes, em mera etapa processual.