A presente dissertação de Mestrado visa a discutir os limites da imputação penal de delitos de lavagem de dinheiro a funcionários de instituições financeiras que, ordenada ou casualmente, sejam envolvidos em ações praticadas por terceiros, clientes ou não destas instituições, e que possam configurar a realização do tipo objetivo do crime de lavagem de ativos. Com este propósito, são discutidos aspectos como a evolução da ideia de imputação penal vis-a-vis o desenvolvimento do pensamento chamado pós-contemporâneo e suas implicações na dogmática do concurso de pessoas. Ademais, são também descritos detalhadamente os momentos relativos à lavagem de dinheiro que podem ser propícios à participação de agentes financeiros, debatendo-se, em cada caso, a possibilidade ou não de imputação do crime de lavagem a estes agentes. / The following dissertation aims to discuss the limits of criminal imputation of money laundering on financial institutions employees that, casually or not, become involved in actions perpetrated by third parties, clients or not, of those institutions, which may configure the money laundering criminal fattie species. With this purpose, aspects such as the development of criminal imputation idea vis-a-vis the post-contemporary thinking and its implications to criminal participation theory are discussed. In addition, we focus specifically on the probable moment of the money laundering scheme in which the financial agent might be involved, debating, case by case, the possibility of incrimination.

A presente tese se propõe a analisar os limites entre a participação criminal e a conduta impune, com o objetivo de enfrentar a problemática das chamadas ações neutras, a partir do fundamento do injusto da participação criminal. Para tanto, são expostas as diversas teorias que explicam o injusto do partícipe, entre as quais é feita opção pela mais adequada à sistemática brasileira do concurso de pessoas, a qual servirá de base para a apresentação do próprio ponto de vista para resolver a questão da punibilidade das condutas a priori neutras. A teoria da imputação objetiva foi considerada como um instituto essencial na análise da participação criminal, o que permitiu a abordagem sobre o desvalor da conduta do partícipe como objeto de imputação. O desvalor da conduta do partícipe, por sua vez, foi entendido como uma violação do dever de solidariedade, o que implicou no tratamento da solidariedade humana objetiva como elemento imprescindível para a existência social coesa, a partir do pensamento de Durkheim e Giddens. Por fim, aceitando o pressuposto de que nem todos são responsáveis pelo comportamento alheio, a omissão penalmente relevante foi estudada como critério capaz de limitar a responsabilidade penal no caso em que há concurso de pessoas para a prática de crime, na discussão do seu limite mínimo. / The present work aims to analyze the boundaries between the criminal participation and non-punishable conducts, with the intention of addressing the question of the so-called neutral or daily actions, from the standpoint of the unjust of the criminal participation. To this effect, the work begins by exposing the numerous theories that explain the unjust of the criminal participation. The study is then limited to the one that best fits the Brazilian law regarding concerted actions, which will then be used as grounds to the authors point of view to address the issue of the punishment of the actions that a priori are daily or neutral. The theory of objective imputation was considered essential to the analysis of the criminal participation, thus allowing the study of the social disapproval of the conduct of the accessory as the object of criminal imputation. The social disapproval of the conduct of the accessory, on the other hand, was seen as a breach in the obligation of solidarity, which resulted in objective human solidarity being considered a fundamental element to a cohesive social existence, as stated by Durkheim and Giddens. Finally, according to the assumption that not everyone is responsible for other peoples behavior, relevant criminal omission was studied as a criteria to restrict criminal liability in concerted actions, when debating its minimal limit.

A presente dissertação de Mestrado visa a discutir os limites da imputação penal de delitos de lavagem de dinheiro a funcionários de instituições financeiras que, ordenada ou casualmente, sejam envolvidos em ações praticadas por terceiros, clientes ou não destas instituições, e que possam configurar a realização do tipo objetivo do crime de lavagem de ativos. Com este propósito, são discutidos aspectos como a evolução da ideia de imputação penal vis-a-vis o desenvolvimento do pensamento chamado pós-contemporâneo e suas implicações na dogmática do concurso de pessoas. Ademais, são também descritos detalhadamente os momentos relativos à lavagem de dinheiro que podem ser propícios à participação de agentes financeiros, debatendo-se, em cada caso, a possibilidade ou não de imputação do crime de lavagem a estes agentes. / The following dissertation aims to discuss the limits of criminal imputation of money laundering on financial institutions employees that, casually or not, become involved in actions perpetrated by third parties, clients or not, of those institutions, which may configure the money laundering criminal fattie species. With this purpose, aspects such as the development of criminal imputation idea vis-a-vis the post-contemporary thinking and its implications to criminal participation theory are discussed. In addition, we focus specifically on the probable moment of the money laundering scheme in which the financial agent might be involved, debating, case by case, the possibility of incrimination.

A presente tese se propõe a analisar os limites entre a participação criminal e a conduta impune, com o objetivo de enfrentar a problemática das chamadas ações neutras, a partir do fundamento do injusto da participação criminal. Para tanto, são expostas as diversas teorias que explicam o injusto do partícipe, entre as quais é feita opção pela mais adequada à sistemática brasileira do concurso de pessoas, a qual servirá de base para a apresentação do próprio ponto de vista para resolver a questão da punibilidade das condutas a priori neutras. A teoria da imputação objetiva foi considerada como um instituto essencial na análise da participação criminal, o que permitiu a abordagem sobre o desvalor da conduta do partícipe como objeto de imputação. O desvalor da conduta do partícipe, por sua vez, foi entendido como uma violação do dever de solidariedade, o que implicou no tratamento da solidariedade humana objetiva como elemento imprescindível para a existência social coesa, a partir do pensamento de Durkheim e Giddens. Por fim, aceitando o pressuposto de que nem todos são responsáveis pelo comportamento alheio, a omissão penalmente relevante foi estudada como critério capaz de limitar a responsabilidade penal no caso em que há concurso de pessoas para a prática de crime, na discussão do seu limite mínimo. / The present work aims to analyze the boundaries between the criminal participation and non-punishable conducts, with the intention of addressing the question of the so-called neutral or daily actions, from the standpoint of the unjust of the criminal participation. To this effect, the work begins by exposing the numerous theories that explain the unjust of the criminal participation. The study is then limited to the one that best fits the Brazilian law regarding concerted actions, which will then be used as grounds to the authors point of view to address the issue of the punishment of the actions that a priori are daily or neutral. The theory of objective imputation was considered essential to the analysis of the criminal participation, thus allowing the study of the social disapproval of the conduct of the accessory as the object of criminal imputation. The social disapproval of the conduct of the accessory, on the other hand, was seen as a breach in the obligation of solidarity, which resulted in objective human solidarity being considered a fundamental element to a cohesive social existence, as stated by Durkheim and Giddens. Finally, according to the assumption that not everyone is responsible for other peoples behavior, relevant criminal omission was studied as a criteria to restrict criminal liability in concerted actions, when debating its minimal limit.

No description available.

Les sciences criminelles ont mis en lumière le développement contemporain des infractions commises en groupe. Leur domaine recouvre des activités criminelles variées, du trafic de stupéfiants à la traite des êtres humains, en passant par la piraterie ou le terrorisme. La complexité et la gravité des crimes commis par ces groupes, ainsi que la capacité d'organisation qu'ils révèlent, constituent aujourd'hui une menace pour l'État de droit et pour la démocratie. Les groupes criminels prennent des formes diverses, depuis le regroupement ponctuel d'amateurs jusqu'aux réseaux organisés de professionnels aguerris et socialement implantés (bandes, mafias, sectes, milices...). Aussi le droit pénal doit-il s'adapter à cette délinquance collective et concertée. Cela pose la question des modalités de répression en cas de division des tâches et de pluralité d'agents, quand le droit pénal est traditionnellement soumis au principe de personnalité de la responsabilité. Cette recherche se propose donc de réaliser une étude comparative des dispositions adoptées en droit français et libanais, qui permettent d'appréhender les infractions commises en groupe en mettant l'accent sur la légitimité et sur l'efficacité des différentes techniques pénales introduites ces dernières années. / Criminal sciences have highlighted the recent rise of group crime. This cover term refers to a variety of criminal activities, from drug smuggling to piracy and terrorism to human trafficking. The complexity and seriousness of the crimes committed by these groups, as well as the organizational capacity they reveal, constitute a threat for the rule of law and democracy today. Criminal groups take various forms, from informal, random petty thief bands to organized networks of hardened and socially embedded professionals (gangs, mafias, cults, militias). In response to this collective, well-planned crime, criminal law has to adapt itself. This raises the issue of how to tackle this problem in a context of division of labor and multiple agents, when criminal law traditionally applies the principle of personal liability. This piece of research therefore aims to make a comparative study of the measures taken by the French and Lebanese law to deal with group crime, focusing on the legitimacy and effectiveness of various criminal techniques introduced in recent years.

La création de juridictions internationales pour juger les responsables d'un crime international pose la question des techniques d'imputation. Il s'agit de la mise en oeuvre du principe de la responsabilité pénale individuelle (RPI) en droit international. D'une part, le DPI emprunte les techniques traditionnelles aux droits pénaux internes. Il s'agit des techniques dépendantes de la consommation du crime international : les formes différentes de « commission » et de « complicité ». Sont empruntées, aussi, d'autres techniques traditionnelles d'imputation qui sont indépendantes de la consommation du crime : la tentative et l'incrimination de quelques actes de complicité. Ces techniques correspondent aux exigences de la RPI, d'où la confirmation du principe. D'autre part, le DPI adopte des nouvelles techniques d'imputation pour faire face à la nature collective du crime international. Se fondant sur l'idée de « groupe », des techniques associatives sont mises en place : la responsabilité pour l'appartenance à une organisation criminelle ou bien de la responsabilité des actes du groupe à travers l'entreprise criminelle commune ou le contrôle conjoint sur l'action du groupe. En même temps, le fait que les crimes sont souvent commis par des « structures hiérarchiques » est pris en compte pour envisager des techniques structurelles ; à savoir la responsabilité pour commission indirecte par le contrôle d'une organisation ou de la responsabilité du supérieur hiérarchique pour les crimes commis par ses subordonnés. Chacune de ces techniques s'écarte de ce que l'on entend généralement par la RPI, d'où la métamorphose du principe. Une reconstruction de la notion est à l'ordre du jour. / The establishment of International criminal tribunals raises the question of techniques of attributing criminal liability. Having the individual as « subject », the principle of individual criminal responsibility is at issue. On the one hand, International criminal law borrows traditional techniques of imputing liability from national law. Not only those techniques that depend on the completion of an international crime; as forms of perpetration and complicity, but also those that attribute responsibility independently of the completion of international crime; as attempt and specific incrimination of some forms of complicity. Individual criminal responsibility in its traditional connotation is confirmed. On the other hand, International criminal law forges new techniques of imputing liability to accommodate the collective nature of international crimes. Based on the idea of « group » action, associative techniques are introduced. As such, the responsibility for membership in criminal organisation, or even the responsibility for group crimes through notions like « joint criminal enterprise » or « joint control » are applied. In the meanwhile, the structural aspect of entities committing international crimes is taken in consideration. Superiors who manipulate organisations under their control are considered as indirect perpetrators. Also, superiors who fail to stop or to punish crimes committed by their subordinates are held responsible. Each one of these new techniques of imputing responsibility metamorphoses one or more aspects of what is generally intended by the principle of individual criminal responsibility. Reconstructing the notion seems due.