A rebours de la croyance populaire qui veut que le temps efface les blessures, le constat s'impose de l'omniprésence de la mémoire comme matrice des orientations décidées par nos gouvernants. Soixante-dix ans après la fin de la Seconde Guerre mondiale, elle occupe l'espace public dans toutes ses composantes et pousse à l'adoption de lois de reconnaissance des victimes et de sanction des discours de négation. Parallèlement, le législateur doit répondre à ses engagements conventionnels et satisfaire aux exigences de la justice pénale internationale. Mais ici encore, les contingences politiques sont fortes, qui sclérosent la réflexion juridique et conduisent à l'élaboration de dispositions controversées. Ce phénomène, ostensible en France, l'est moins chez notre voisin allemand, pourtant tributaire d'un lourd héritage mémoriel. Cette observation peut surprendre celui qui ne tient pas compte des évolutions conjointes mais divergentes des deux Etats depuis 1945, quant à la « gestion » des crimes internationaux par nature et de leurs suites ; d'où l'utilité d'une approche transversale, historique et comparative de ces questions. / Contrary to the popular belief that the time clears injuries, the finding must be made of the omnipresence of the memory as a matrix of guidelines decided by our leaders. Seventy years after the World War II ended, it occupies public space in all its components and drives the adoption of laws recognizing victims and punishing speech of negation. Meanwhile, the legislature must meet its conventional obligations and the requirements of international criminal justice. But again, the political contingencies are strong, which block legal thinking and lead to the creation of controversial provisions. This phenomenon, striking in France, is less at our german neighbor, yet reliant on a heavy legacy memorial. This observation may surprise those who do not consider the joint but divergent evolutions of the two states since 1945, on the « treatment » of international crimes by nature and their consequences ; hence the usefulness of a transverse, historical and comparative approach to these issues.

Made available in DSpace on 2016-04-26T20:21:14Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Francisca Matias Ferreira Dantas.pdf: 7170434 bytes, checksum: 5d4923a1fc25ca3f52c550a1c182a5b4 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2012-10-17 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior / The current study has two goals. The first one analyses the juridical treatment against the Tax Order according to the Brazilian legislation , mainly the Law number 8.137/1990, in which the corpus of analyses , of the types of tributary crime it is , specifically tax evasion written on the 1º and 2º of the Law number 8.137/1990 , studying the beginning and the development of the tax offence and its ontological aspects , due to penal punishment , the significance principle act and its extinctive cause of punishment , focusing on the penalty under legal prevision of the article 34 of the Law 9.249/1995 , that revaluated referred form , before repealed from the texts of the Law which issued the matter. The second goal aims to study the divergence on the moment the payment should be done under doctrinaire view, Judicature and the position of the Federal Supreme Court, the Justice and their divergent points. To make this research, an evaluation of the efficacy of the Civil Law was made, its influence to work on the tributary obligation public safe reimbursement and taxpayer owed after dilation. As a result, it was considered the existence of a weak punitive system in relation to the crimes mentioned , thus it goes against the constitutional scope; the reform requirement that allows real implementation of the Democratic Law State and thus prevent tax evasion growth in the country / O presente estudo tem dois objetivos, tendo como primeiro objetivo uma análise ao tratamento jurídico dado aos Crimes Contra a Ordem Tributária segundo a legislação brasileira, em especial a Lei nº. 8.137/1990, em que o corpus de análise, dos tipos de Crimes Tributários, é, especificamente, os Crimes de Sonegação Fiscal previstos nos artigos 1º e 2º da Lei nº. 8.137/1990, estudando o nascimento e a evolução desta espécie de delito tributário e os seus aspectos ontológicos, especialmente ligados à punibilidade penal, o emprego do Princípio da insignificância e as causas de extinção da punibilidade dos mesmos, destacando o pagamento sob a previsão legal do artigo 34 da Lei nº. 9.249/1995 que revalidou referida forma anteriormente revogada dos textos de lei que tratavam da matéria. Já o segundo objetivo, visa analisar a divergência quanto ao momento em que o pagamento deverá ocorrer sob a ótica doutrinária, jurisprudencial e o posicionamento do Supremo Tribunal Federal e do Superior Tribunal de Justiça em seus pontos divergentes. Para consecução deste trabalho, fez-se um levantamento acerca da atuação eficaz do Direito Penal, sua influência para o cumprimento da obrigação tributário e o ressarcimento dos cofres públicos pelo contribuinte devedor após a denúncia. O que resultou nas considerações da existência deficiente do sistema punitivo no tocante aos crimes estudados, pois contraria o escopo constitucional; e da necessidade de reforma para permitir a real implementação do Estado Democrático de Direito e assim evitar o crescimento da Sonegação Fiscal no País