Este trabalho tem como objetivo analisar a viabilidade de aplicação do instrumento de Mandado de Detenção Europeu (que foi criado em decorrência da quebra de fronteiras gerada com integração regional europeia, União Europeia) no bloco de integração regional latino-americano, MERCOSUL, tendo em vista ser um instrumento substitutivo do Instituto extradicional aplicado no âmbito criminal. Em um primeiro momento é tratado o fenômeno da globalização, da integração regional e sua repercussão no universo criminal, observando-se o surgimento de uma nova modalidade criminal, qual seja a criminalidade transnacional. Em decorrência dessa criminalidade transnacional, que abrange mais de um território nacional é estudado o desenvolvimento de uma cooperação jurídica internacional em matéria penal entre os países, com a finalidade de combater a impunidade. Assim, faz-se um paralelo sobre cooperação jurídica internacional em matéria penal nos blocos de integração regional: União Europeia e MERCOSUL. Adiante, analisa-se o mandado de detenção europeu, seu surgimento na União Europeia e o papel do principio do reconhecimento mutuo na aplicação desse instituto. Por fim, examina-se a possibilidade, enfim, de aplicação desse instituto no bloco do MERCOSUL. / This study aims to examine the application of the instrument of the European Arrest Warrant (which was created as a result of the breach of boundaries generated with European regional integration, European Union) in the block of regional integration in Latin America, MERCOSUR considering it as a substitute for the extraditional institute instrument, which is applied in international criminal justice as a cooperation instrument. At first the phenomenon of globalization, regional integration and their impact on the criminal universe is analyzed. From this the emergence of a new criminal mode, transnational criminality has been observed. Because of this transnational criminality, which covers more than one country, the development of international legal cooperation in criminal matters is studied between the countries, with the aim of combating impunity. With this, a parallel on international legal cooperation in criminal matters in the blocks for regional integration is made: the European Union and MERCOSUR. Before this, it analyzes the European Arrest Warrant, the appearance and development in the European Union and the function of the principle of mutual recognition in the implementation of this institute. Finally, it examines the possibility of implementation of this institute in the MERCOSUR bloc.

Este trabalho tem como objetivo analisar a viabilidade de aplicação do instrumento de Mandado de Detenção Europeu (que foi criado em decorrência da quebra de fronteiras gerada com integração regional europeia, União Europeia) no bloco de integração regional latino-americano, MERCOSUL, tendo em vista ser um instrumento substitutivo do Instituto extradicional aplicado no âmbito criminal. Em um primeiro momento é tratado o fenômeno da globalização, da integração regional e sua repercussão no universo criminal, observando-se o surgimento de uma nova modalidade criminal, qual seja a criminalidade transnacional. Em decorrência dessa criminalidade transnacional, que abrange mais de um território nacional é estudado o desenvolvimento de uma cooperação jurídica internacional em matéria penal entre os países, com a finalidade de combater a impunidade. Assim, faz-se um paralelo sobre cooperação jurídica internacional em matéria penal nos blocos de integração regional: União Europeia e MERCOSUL. Adiante, analisa-se o mandado de detenção europeu, seu surgimento na União Europeia e o papel do principio do reconhecimento mutuo na aplicação desse instituto. Por fim, examina-se a possibilidade, enfim, de aplicação desse instituto no bloco do MERCOSUL. / This study aims to examine the application of the instrument of the European Arrest Warrant (which was created as a result of the breach of boundaries generated with European regional integration, European Union) in the block of regional integration in Latin America, MERCOSUR considering it as a substitute for the extraditional institute instrument, which is applied in international criminal justice as a cooperation instrument. At first the phenomenon of globalization, regional integration and their impact on the criminal universe is analyzed. From this the emergence of a new criminal mode, transnational criminality has been observed. Because of this transnational criminality, which covers more than one country, the development of international legal cooperation in criminal matters is studied between the countries, with the aim of combating impunity. With this, a parallel on international legal cooperation in criminal matters in the blocks for regional integration is made: the European Union and MERCOSUR. Before this, it analyzes the European Arrest Warrant, the appearance and development in the European Union and the function of the principle of mutual recognition in the implementation of this institute. Finally, it examines the possibility of implementation of this institute in the MERCOSUR bloc.

O objetivo desta tese é demonstrar como se pode alcançar, na cooperação jurídica internacional, o respeito ao devido processo legal, ao mesmo tempo em que sejam respeitados os ordenamentos jurídicos envolvidos. Pluralidade de ordenamentos, confiança mútua, respeito aos direitos fundamentais e o dever/necessidade de cooperar conduzem a aparentes dicotomias na apreciação da matéria, como aquela que contrapõe eficiência e garantismo. Contextualizada a cooperação e analisadas suas principais caraterísticas, afirmamos que cooperação eficaz, reconhecimento da diversidade de sistemas jurídicos e direitos dos concernidos constituem os principais vetores do instituto, cujo equilíbrio é essencial a sua correta aplicação. Partindo desta premissa, a cooperação não pode ser entendida como instrumento dedicado primordialmente ao uso da acusação, como mais uma ferramenta de combate ao crime, mas como procedimento que tem por finalidade a consecução de um processo justo. Para problematizar a forma com a qual seria garantido este processo justo, parte-se do estudo da relação bilateral entre Brasil e Estados Unidos, que congrega os principais desafios a uma cooperação embasada no respeito aos direitos fundamentais, que deve permear todos os ramos do direito e, em especial, no respeito aos direitos da defesa, que são os mais atingidos na prática deste instituto. Analisa-se também o sistema estadunidense de cooperação jurídica internacional, com ênfase em sua legislação e jurisprudência sobre o tema. Esta análise é oportuna, pois a atuação dos Estados Unidos na área é bastante intensa e sua disciplina exaustiva, constituindo o estudo do direito comparado vantajoso à tentativa de propositura de soluções a questões não resolvidas no ordenamento brasileiro, cuja carência de regulamentação conduz a incertezas. Estas incidem principalmente na salvaguarda dos direitos da defesa, alijada do processo de desenvolvimento do instituto e excluída da utilização do MLAT (Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty) e da possibilidade de interferir no deslinde da execução de um pedido de assistência. Uma vez identificados pontualmente os principais problemas, prosseguimos com a apresentação de soluções gerais, consubstanciadas em propostas de interpretação de nossa legislação. Em síntese, estas propostas são direcionadas à proteção da ampla defesa, demonstrando-se a necessidade de disponibilizar meios adequados de atuação à defesa que, em homenagem ao corolário da paridade de armas, devem ser proporcionais aos meios que possui a acusação. Além disso, a defesa deve ter a oportunidade de se manifestar em todos os momentos do cumprimento do pedido de cooperação, não devendo se constituir em regra o contraditório diferido. Por fim, as sugestões voltar-se-ão ao papel que as tradicionais causas de restrição à assistência podem desempenhar na salvaguarda dos direitos aqui estudados. / The goal of this thesis is to demonstrate how the respect to the due process of law can be achieved at the same time that the legal systems involved are respected on an international legal cooperation. The plurality of jurisdictions, mutual confidence, respect for fundamental rights and duty/need to cooperate lead to apparent dichotomies when evaluating the matter, such as the one that contrasts efficiency and guaranteeism. However, when contextualizing the cooperation and analyzing its main features, we affirm that the effective cooperation, recognition of the diversity of legal systems and the rights of those concerned are the main vectors of the institute, whose balance is essential to its correct application. Starting from this premise, cooperation cannot be understood as an instrument dedicated primarily to the use of the prosecution as another crime-fighting tool, but rather as a procedure whose purpose is to achieve a fair trial. To discuss the way in which this fair trial would be guaranteed, we start by studying the bilateral relations between Brazil and United States, which brings together the main challenges to a cooperation based on the respect for fundamental rights, which must permeate all branches of law, and, in particular, the respect to the rights of the defense, which are the ones hit the hardest in the practice of this institute. Then, the American system of international legal cooperation will be also analyzed with an emphasis on its legislation and jurisprudence on the subject. This analysis is timely, as the performance of the United States in the area is quite intense and its discipline is exhaustive, which makes the study of the comparative law beneficial to the attempt at propositioning solutions to unresolved issues in the Brazilian system, whose lack of regulation leads to uncertainty. These mainly focus on safeguarding the rights of the defense, jettisoned from the development process of the institute and excluded from the use of MLAT (Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty) and from the possibility of interfering in the outcome of the execution of a request for assistance. After promptly identifying the main problems, we proceed with the presentation of general solutions embodied in proposals for interpretation and amendment of our legislation. In summary, these proposals are directed to the protection of being heard, which demonstrate the need of making available appropriate means of action to the defense that should be proportional to the means that the prosecution has in honor of the corollary of parity of weapons. In addition, the defense should have the opportunity to manifest itself at all times of the execution of the request for cooperation and the deferred adversary proceeding should not become the rule. Finally, the suggestions will return to the role that the traditional causes of restriction to the assistance can play when safeguarding the rights studied herein.

Este trabalho tem como objetivo analisar a viabilidade de aplicação do instrumento de Mandado de Detenção Europeu (que foi criado em decorrência da quebra de fronteiras gerada com integração regional europeia, União Europeia) no bloco de integração regional latino-americano, MERCOSUL, tendo em vista ser um instrumento substitutivo do Instituto extradicional aplicado no âmbito criminal. Em um primeiro momento é tratado o fenômeno da globalização, da integração regional e sua repercussão no universo criminal, observando-se o surgimento de uma nova modalidade criminal, qual seja a criminalidade transnacional. Em decorrência dessa criminalidade transnacional, que abrange mais de um território nacional é estudado o desenvolvimento de uma cooperação jurídica internacional em matéria penal entre os países, com a finalidade de combater a impunidade. Assim, faz-se um paralelo sobre cooperação jurídica internacional em matéria penal nos blocos de integração regional: União Europeia e MERCOSUL. Adiante, analisa-se o mandado de detenção europeu, seu surgimento na União Europeia e o papel do principio do reconhecimento mutuo na aplicação desse instituto. Por fim, examina-se a possibilidade, enfim, de aplicação desse instituto no bloco do MERCOSUL. / This study aims to examine the application of the instrument of the European Arrest Warrant (which was created as a result of the breach of boundaries generated with European regional integration, European Union) in the block of regional integration in Latin America, MERCOSUR considering it as a substitute for the extraditional institute instrument, which is applied in international criminal justice as a cooperation instrument. At first the phenomenon of globalization, regional integration and their impact on the criminal universe is analyzed. From this the emergence of a new criminal mode, transnational criminality has been observed. Because of this transnational criminality, which covers more than one country, the development of international legal cooperation in criminal matters is studied between the countries, with the aim of combating impunity. With this, a parallel on international legal cooperation in criminal matters in the blocks for regional integration is made: the European Union and MERCOSUR. Before this, it analyzes the European Arrest Warrant, the appearance and development in the European Union and the function of the principle of mutual recognition in the implementation of this institute. Finally, it examines the possibility of implementation of this institute in the MERCOSUR bloc.

Depuis la fin du XXème siècle, le nombre d'enquêtes et de procédures judiciaires civiles et criminelles internationales a considérablement augmenté à cause de la mondialisation de l'économie et de la facilité de transport de personnes et de biens. Toutefois, les normes de coopération juridique internationale, y compris celles existantes entre la France et le Brésil, n'ont pas accompagné cette évolution. En réalité, l'assistance juridique internationale a toujours faiblement fonctionné à cause, notamment, de la défense rigoureuse de la souveraineté étatique, de l'absence de confiance mutuelle et de coordination entre les pays. La distribution de pouvoirs dans la communauté internationale est faite horizontalement, de sorte que les normes d'assistance entre les États sont marquées par la décentralisation et le particularisme. Dans la plupart des régions du monde, l'accomplissement des demandes d'entraide judiciaire est lent et bureaucratisé, en dépit de la signature de nombreux traités bilatéraux et de conventions régionales et mondiales. L'extradition est encore réalisée presque selon la même formule inventée par les égyptiens et les hittites en 1280 av. J.-C .. La commission rogatoire, dont les racines se retrouvent dans les systèmes de la litterœ publicœ romaine et de la lettre de pareatis française, est encore le principal outil d'entraide civile et pénale. Quelques normes qui peuvent être classées comme de première génération prévoient encore l'utilisation de la voie diplomatique indirecte. Les règles de deuxième génération, créées, notamment, à partir de la fin du XXème siècle, ont amélioré la transmission de demandes, à travers les autorités centrales, mais ne résolvent pas tous les problèmes. En fait, seules les normes de l'Union européenne sont véritablement de troisième génération, parce qu'elles privilégient l'envoi direct de demandes d'entraide civile et pénale, la rapide exécution du mandat d'arrêt européen et l'accomplissement d'une grande quantité de jugements civils sans exequatur ou autre procédure intermédiaire. Les normes de coopération juridique franco-brésiliennes, qui découlent des conventions signées en 1996, sont aujourd'hui dépassées et anachroniques. Les règles de droit interne des deux pays qui visent l'assistance internationale sont franchement plus généreuses et plus efficaces que les règles d'origine conventionnelle. L'élaboration de nouvelles conventions surgit ainsi comme une solution envisageable, malgré les énormes défis politiques et juridiques. Évidemment, les conventions éventuellement parrainées par les Nations Unies ou par la Conférence de La Haye qui traitent de la coopération juridique directe semblent plus appropriées à une résolution plus ample des principales questions. Mais rien n'empêche la conclusion de textes régionaux, inter-régionaux ou même bilatéraux, mais leur étendue serait plus restreinte. / Since the end of the twentieth century, the number of international investigations and legal proceedings in civil and criminal matters has grown considerably due to the globalization of the economy and the ease of transportation of people and goods. Nevertheless, the international legal cooperation rules and regulations, including those between France and Brazil, have not kept up with this evolution. In fact, the international legal cooperation has always been flawed, mostly as a result of the rigorous defense of state sovereignty and the lack of mutual trust and coordination among countries. The authority distribution in the international community is made horizontally, thus the norms of assistance among States are marked by decentralization and particularism. In most regions of the world, the enforcement of legal cooperation claims is slow and bureaucratized, despite numerous treaties and bilateral, regional or international conventions. Extradition is still carried out in accordance with practically the same formula invented by the Egyptians and Hittites in 1280 B.C .. The letter of request, which springs from the Roman litterœ publicœ and the French lettre de pareatis, is still the major tool of civil and criminal legal cooperation. Some standards, regarded as first-generation, stipulate the use of indirect diplomatic ways. The second-generation norms established mostly at the end of the twentieth century have improved the transmission of demands through central authorit1es but have not solved all the problems. In fact, only the European Union norms are truly third-generation, since they favor the straight submission of civil and criminal legal cooperation claims, the swift execution of the European arrest warrant and the execution of a large number of civil judgments, with no exequatur or any other intermediate procedure. The French-Brazilian legal cooperation rules, which stem from conventions signed in 1996, are outdated and anachronistic. The rules of internal law of the countries that pursue international cooperation are utterly more generous and effective than those of conventional origin. The elaboration of new conventions thus arises as a significant solution, despite the enormous political and juridical challenges. Naturally, prospective conventions sponsored by the United Nations or by The Hague Convention concerning: direct legal cooperation seem more suitable to a comprehensive solution of the main issues. However, nothing precludes the conclusion of regional, interregional and bilateral texts, even though these will have a smaller reach.

No description available.

La faillite internationale est une matière complexe qui a donné lieu à un long et vif débat doctrinal entre les tenants des systèmes de la territorialité et de l'universalité. Une faillite est internationale lorsqu'elle met en présence un débiteur possédant des biens ou des créanciers dans plus d'un pays. Puisque la matière de faillite est souvent très différente d'un pays à l'autre, l'application du système de la pluralité, retenue dans la plupart des pays, soulève plusieurs problèmes particulièrement en ce qui concerne la coordination entre les diverses faillites et le manque de protection des créanciers, notamment parce qu'elle accorde des effets limités à la reconnaissance des procédures de faillite étrangères. En effet, en présence de procédures de faillite concurrentes il s'agit de répondre aux questions suivantes: quelle est la juridiction compétente pour ouvrir et organiser la faillite? Quelle est la loi applicable? Dans quels États cette faillite va-t-elle produire des effets? Dans le présent mémoire, il s'agit d'établir une comparaison entre le système canadien et le système européen en matière de faillite internationale. Le législateur canadien a récemment envisagé de modifier sa législation sur la faillite pour permettre une meilleure coopération internationale en matière de faillite internationale. Le projet canadien C-55 reprend pour l'essentiel les dispositions contenues dans la loi-type de la commission des Nations-Unis pour le droit commercial international (CNUDCI) sur «l'insolvabilité internationale». Ainsi, il permet de faciliter réellement la reconnaissance des décisions de faillite étrangères, il accorde une plus grande portée aux effets de cette reconnaissance et il prévoit une coordination des procédures multiples en établissant une «hiérarchisation» des procédures de faillite relativement semblable au système européen. Cependant, le projet canadien atteint moins bien l'objectif d'universalité que le Règlement européen 1346/2000 au niveau du traitement égalitaire entre les créanciers locaux et les créanciers étrangers. Si la loi-type offre à tous les États une utilité pratique considérable pour les nombreux cas de coopération internationale, l'harmonisation de la faillite internationale dépendra de son adoption dans les différentes législations. Bien que plusieurs pays aient inséré ce modèle dans leur législation sur la faillite, il n'est pas encore possible, à l'heure actuelle, de parler d'un droit international de la faillite. / International insolvency is a complex subject that has given rise to a long and sharp doctrinal debate between supporters of systems of territorialism and of universality. An insolvency is international where a debtor possesses goods or creditors in more than one country. Since the matter of bankruptcy is often very different from one country to another, the application of the system of plurality, which is retained in the majority of countries, raises several problems, particularly with regard to the coordination between several bankruptcies and the lack of protection of creditors, largely because plurality grants effects that are limited to the recognition of the foreign bankruptcy procedures. Indeed, in the presence of concurrent procedures of bankruptcy, the following questions must be addressed: Which is the court having jurisdiction to open and organize the bankruptcy? Which law is applicable? In which States will this bankruptcy produce effects? This thesis will establish a comparison between the Canadian system and the European system with respect to international bankruptcy. The Canadian legislator recently planned to modify its legislation on bankruptcy in order to better foster international co-operation in the realm of international bankruptcy. The Canadian Bill C-55 largely reiterates the provisions contained in the Model Law on cross border insolvency (UNCITRAL). Bill C-55 thus facilitates the recognition of foreign decisions of bankruptcy, it grants a greater scope to the effects of this recognition and it aims to coordinate multiple bankruptcy procedures by establishing a "hierarchisation" there of that is relatively similar to the European system. However, the Canadian project does not achieve the goal of universality as well as does the European regulation 1346/2000 with respect to equal treatment between local creditors and foreign creditors. If the Model Law offers all States the considerable practical utility for many incidences of international co-operation, the harmonization of international bankruptcy will depend on the adoption of the Model Law in various domestic legislations. Although several countries have inserted this model in their legislation on bankruptcy, it is not yet possible, at the present time, to speak of an international law of bankruptcy.

La faillite internationale est une matière complexe qui a donné lieu à un long et vif débat doctrinal entre les tenants des systèmes de la territorialité et de l'universalité. Une faillite est internationale lorsqu'elle met en présence un débiteur possédant des biens ou des créanciers dans plus d'un pays. Puisque la matière de faillite est souvent très différente d'un pays à l'autre, l'application du système de la pluralité, retenue dans la plupart des pays, soulève plusieurs problèmes particulièrement en ce qui concerne la coordination entre les diverses faillites et le manque de protection des créanciers, notamment parce qu'elle accorde des effets limités à la reconnaissance des procédures de faillite étrangères. En effet, en présence de procédures de faillite concurrentes il s'agit de répondre aux questions suivantes: quelle est la juridiction compétente pour ouvrir et organiser la faillite? Quelle est la loi applicable? Dans quels États cette faillite va-t-elle produire des effets? Dans le présent mémoire, il s'agit d'établir une comparaison entre le système canadien et le système européen en matière de faillite internationale. Le législateur canadien a récemment envisagé de modifier sa législation sur la faillite pour permettre une meilleure coopération internationale en matière de faillite internationale. Le projet canadien C-55 reprend pour l'essentiel les dispositions contenues dans la loi-type de la commission des Nations-Unis pour le droit commercial international (CNUDCI) sur «l'insolvabilité internationale». Ainsi, il permet de faciliter réellement la reconnaissance des décisions de faillite étrangères, il accorde une plus grande portée aux effets de cette reconnaissance et il prévoit une coordination des procédures multiples en établissant une «hiérarchisation» des procédures de faillite relativement semblable au système européen. Cependant, le projet canadien atteint moins bien l'objectif d'universalité que le Règlement européen 1346/2000 au niveau du traitement égalitaire entre les créanciers locaux et les créanciers étrangers. Si la loi-type offre à tous les États une utilité pratique considérable pour les nombreux cas de coopération internationale, l'harmonisation de la faillite internationale dépendra de son adoption dans les différentes législations. Bien que plusieurs pays aient inséré ce modèle dans leur législation sur la faillite, il n'est pas encore possible, à l'heure actuelle, de parler d'un droit international de la faillite. / International insolvency is a complex subject that has given rise to a long and sharp doctrinal debate between supporters of systems of territorialism and of universality. An insolvency is international where a debtor possesses goods or creditors in more than one country. Since the matter of bankruptcy is often very different from one country to another, the application of the system of plurality, which is retained in the majority of countries, raises several problems, particularly with regard to the coordination between several bankruptcies and the lack of protection of creditors, largely because plurality grants effects that are limited to the recognition of the foreign bankruptcy procedures. Indeed, in the presence of concurrent procedures of bankruptcy, the following questions must be addressed: Which is the court having jurisdiction to open and organize the bankruptcy? Which law is applicable? In which States will this bankruptcy produce effects? This thesis will establish a comparison between the Canadian system and the European system with respect to international bankruptcy. The Canadian legislator recently planned to modify its legislation on bankruptcy in order to better foster international co-operation in the realm of international bankruptcy. The Canadian Bill C-55 largely reiterates the provisions contained in the Model Law on cross border insolvency (UNCITRAL). Bill C-55 thus facilitates the recognition of foreign decisions of bankruptcy, it grants a greater scope to the effects of this recognition and it aims to coordinate multiple bankruptcy procedures by establishing a "hierarchisation" there of that is relatively similar to the European system. However, the Canadian project does not achieve the goal of universality as well as does the European regulation 1346/2000 with respect to equal treatment between local creditors and foreign creditors. If the Model Law offers all States the considerable practical utility for many incidences of international co-operation, the harmonization of international bankruptcy will depend on the adoption of the Model Law in various domestic legislations. Although several countries have inserted this model in their legislation on bankruptcy, it is not yet possible, at the present time, to speak of an international law of bankruptcy.