This dissertation concerns an empirical research focused on observing the case law of the Appellate Court of Justice of Minas Gerais, Brazil, about sanctioning young offenders. I identify socially available ideas, senses, and thoughts that become incorporated as standard-settings to the discourse of State Appellate judges. The online empirical data (www.tjmg.jus.br). covers a period from 03.08.2010 until 01.12.2016, composed of approximately one thousand decisions. Keywords connected to the juridical language routinely employed in young offenders' records guided the further process of gathering seventy-seven sampling dossiers. The decisions herein studied typically contain summaries of main reasons and judicially assessed evidence to prove the accusation; and also rationales, reasoning patterns, beliefs, and other motives the judges consider to ruling the concrete case. Therefore, the research places particular emphasis on describing, characterizing, and understanding the influences of many idea systems and, in addition, of the current way of thinking the Adult Criminal Law Justice in the Juvenile Criminal Justice decisions. So, the research question is: "How have Appellate judges mobilized socio-legal semantics and idea systems to make sense of criminal sanctions imposed on young offenders?" This research adopted the theory of Modern Penal Rationality to characterize one of the idea systems identified in this investigation and construct some elements of its knowledge problem that address the epistemological obstacles to the evolution of the juvenile criminal justice subsystem in criminal matters. Due to my professional background and empirical observations of some dossiers, I contend that at least three idea systems influence the Appellate judges' decisions, in the social context of the Juvenile Criminal Law subsystem, as follows: 1) "Modern Penal Rationality" (as described by Pires and conceived for adults in the criminal justice system); 2) "Doctrine of Irregular Situation" (as provided by the revoked Brazilian "Code of Minors"); and 3) "Doctrine of Integral Protection" (as established in the 1988 Brazilian Constitution and in the 1990 Child and Adolescent Statute). Thus, the analysis shows how the decision-making process by the Court of Appeal - trying to proceed with an accommodation account of presumably conflicting values - selects idea systems linked to old theories of punishment to shape the logical structure of juvenile sanctions. I demonstrate that "common legal sense" and "taken for granted" statements apply to induce "severe" sanctions imposed without considering the specificity of the case by the rules of Juvenile Criminal Justice. As a result, I reveal that punitive reasoning prevails in juvenile delinquency judgments rather than child and youth protection, and I also describe the social-legal practice of the language of Juvenile Criminal Law in the Court of Appeal's environment.

Cette thèse doctorale a pour toile de fond la relation paradoxale entre les droits de la personne et la punition qui s’établie quand différents mouvements, dans le cadre de la lutte pour l’égalité, la reconnaissance et une plus grande justice sociale mobilisent la sémantique des droits de la personne pour revendiquer l’intervention punitive de l’État. En proposant des modèles punitifs rigides afin de garantir et de concrétiser les droits, les secteurs progressistes de la société finissent par consolider, par des voies transversales, la logique de la peine, rendant difficile, voire impossible, l’apparition d’innovations « humanistes » dans le système de droit criminel. La recherche se développe au moyen d’une étude de cas complexe qui implique les stratégies de contrôle de la violence contre la conjointe et ses conséquences sur le fonctionnement des commissariats pour les femmes au Brésil après la loi n. 11.340/2006 connue sous le nom de « lei Maria da Penha ». Cette législation a été soutenue par des segments représentatifs du mouvement féministe au Brésil en écho aux recommandations internationales des droits de de la personne et a interdit ,dans les cas de violence contre la conjointe, l’utilisation de mécanismes de déjudiciarisation, employés comme alternatives aux processus criminels conventionnels et qui était déjà en cours que se soit dans les tribunaux criminels que dans les commissariats pour femmes. La présente étude examine l’option et les justificatifs pour l’utilisation prépondérante de stratégies punitives dans la défense des droits de la personne des femmes et plus spécifiquement, les problèmes relatifs à l’action pénale ; à l’obligation de punir et à la difficulté rencontrée par le système de droit criminel à permettre que les innovations humanistes soient couronnées de succès, en rendant problématique la question de la reconnaissance d’autonomie et du désir des femmes. La réflexion théorique aborde, entre autres choses, les obstacles que la « lei Maria da Penha » représente pour le développement innovateur de structures opérationnelles dans le système de droit criminel et discute les anciens et les nouveaux problèmes créés dans ce qui se réfère à un contrôle effectif de la violence contre la conjointe. / This doctorial thesis has as its background the paradoxical relationship between human rights and punishment, that is established when different groups, in the struggle for social justice, equality and recognition, begin to mobilize the semantics of human rights, to claim more punitive laws. As relentless punitive models are proposed to ensure and fulfill civil rights, progressive sectors of our society end up, collaterally, reinforcing punishment, hindering and even precluding the occurrence of 'humanistic' innovations in the criminal law system. The research develops through a complex case study, involving the strategies to control domestic violence against women and its consequences on the functioning of the Women Police Station in Brazil after the enactment of Law nº 11.340/2006, known as the "Maria da Penha Law". This legislation was supported by representative segments of the feminist movement in Brazil and it is in accord with international human rights standards and recommendations. The enactment of the law prohibited the use of petrial diversion in cases of domestic violence against women, which could be applied as an alternative to the conventional criminal prosecution. The reffered study investigates the option for the predominant use of punitive strategies on women’s human rights and its justifications, but more specifically: (I) the problems generated by non drop policies and mandatory arrest; (II) the moral obligation to punish; (III) the struggle that the criminal law system faces to allow humanistic innovations to be successful; (IV) the matter of women’s autonomy and desire. The theoretical reflection addresses, among other themes, the obstacles that the “Maria da Penha Law” represents for the innovative development of operating structures in the criminal law system and discusses the old and new problems created in the search to an effective control of domestic violence against women. / Esta tese doutoral tem como pano de fundo a paradoxal relação entre direitos humanos e punição que se estabelece quando diferentes movimentos, no marco da luta por maior justiça social, igualdade e reconhecimento passam a mobilizar a semântica dos direitos humanos para reivindicar a intervenção punitiva do Estado. Ao propor rígidos modelos punitivos para garantir e concretizar direitos, setores progressistas da sociedade acabam reforçando, por via transversa, a lógica da pena, dificultando e mesmo impedindo a ocorrência de inovações ‘humanistas’ no sistema de direito criminal. A pesquisa se desenvolve por meio de um estudo de caso complexo que envolve as estratégias de controle da violência doméstica contra as mulheres e suas conseqüências sobre o funcionamento das Delegacias da Mulher no Brasil após a aprovação da Lei n º 11.340/2006, conhecida pelo nome de " Lei Maria da Penha". Esta legislação foi apoiada por segmentos representativos do movimento feminista no Brasil em consonância com as recomendações internacionais de direitos humanos e proibiu, nos casos de violência doméstica contra as mulheres, a utlização de mecanismos de dejudicialização, compreendidos como alternativos ao processo criminal convencional e que já estavam em curso tanto nos Juizados Especiais Criminais como nas Delegacias das Mulheres. O presente estudo investiga a opção e as justificativas para a utilização preponderante de estratégias punitivas na defesa dos direitos humanos das mulheres e, mais especificamente, os problemas relativos ao processamento automático da ação penal; à obrigação de punir e à dificuldade encontrada pelo sistema de direito criminal em permitir que inovações humanistas sejam bem sucedidas, problematizando, ao mesmo tempo, a questão do reconhecimento da autonomia e do desejo das mulheres. A reflexão teórica aborda, entre outras coisas, os obstáculos que a ‘Lei Maria da Penha’ representa para o desenvolvimento inovador de estruturas operativas no sistema de direito criminal e discute os antigos e novos problemas criados no que se refere a um controle efetivo da violência doméstica contra as mulheres.

Cette recherche vise à ressortir et à étudier les idées innovatrices (innovation cognitive) au niveau des peines et de leurs justifications (normes de sanction) que le système de droit criminel moderne possède déjà et qu’il a développé lui-même, dans l’une de ses organisations. Sur le plan théorique, cette thèse mobilise la théorie de la Rationalité pénale moderne d’Alvaro P. Pires. Cette dernière problématise l’immobilisme du système de droit criminel et la cristallisation des normes de sanction. Pour comprendre cette non évolution qui touche le système social qu’est le système de droit criminel, cette recherche mobilise également certains éléments de la théorie des systèmes de Niklas Luhmann. Au niveau méthodologique, elle a recours à l’analyse qualitative de rapports et de documents de travail de la Commission de réforme du droit du Canada. Ces derniers agissent en tant que champ d’« observation » pour permettre la revalorisation et la mise au jour des idées innovatrices développées par le système de droit criminel dans le but de stimuler la créativité institutionnelle en matière de normes de sanction.