O princípio da não autoincriminação (ou princípio nemo tenetur se detegere) constitui não só um dos mais importantes princípios aplicáveis no contexto da produção probatória, mas também um dos princípios fundamentais do processo penal. O seu estudo está diretamente relacionado à tensão existente entre o interesse público na persecução penal e o interesse do indivíduo, no que diz respeito à observância das garantias fundamentais. A evolução, estrutura, alcance e as restrições ao referido princípio serão analisadas sob o enfoque do direito comparado, exercício este que nos propomos a ensaiar privilegiando uma referência abreviada à experiência americana. Após uma breve incursão sobre os sistemas processuais penais, a busca da verdade e os poderes do juiz temas intimamente relacionados ao assunto principal trataremos, sem a pretensão de esgotar o assunto, da dimensão assumida pelo privilege against self-incrimination no direito processual penal estadunidense e, posteriormente, do alcance do princípio da não autoincriminação no ordenamento brasileiro. Tendo em vista a matriz costumeira do Direito norte-americano, as linhas sobre o privilege serão traçadas, sobretudo, por meio da análise dos julgados da Suprema Corte. No ordenamento pátrio, o direito de não produzir prova contra si mesmo será tratado à luz dos entendimentos doutrinários distintos. O enfoque, em ambos os ordenamentos, dar-se-á também sob o prisma do direito ao silêncio, interrogatório, provas que dependem da colaboração do acusado, princípio da proporcionalidade e consequências advindas da violação ao princípio. / The privilege against self-incrimination (also known as nemo tenetur se detegere) is not only one of the most important rights in the context of evidence, but also a fundamental principle of criminal procedure. The study is intimately related to the tension between publics interest in punishment, in one side, and the preservation of a persons rights, on the other. The evolution, structure, scope and restrictions to this principle will be analyzed from the standpoint of comparative law, which we intend to accomplish by making a brief reference to the American experience. After a short foray concerning to the systems of criminal procedure, search for the truth and the powers of the judge topics that are closely related to the main subject we will discourse, without pretending to exhaust the theme, about the extent assumed by the privilege against self-incrimination in USAs criminal procedure and, subsequently, the dimension of the privilege against self-incrimination in brazilians criminal process. Given the peculiarities of the American Legal system, based on the concept of precedence, the lines on the privilege will be drawn, especially, through the analysis of U. S. Supreme Court cases. When it comes to brazilians procedure, the right against self-incrimination will be treated throughout the different doctrinal understandings. The focus in both jurisdictions will also be developed through the perspective of the right to remain silent, cross-examination, evidences that depends on the defendants cooperation, the principle of proportionality and the consequences resulting from the violation of the privilege.

This thesis deals with the topic of privilege against self-incrimination of legal entity in administrative proceedings and in offence proceedings. The following reasons led me to the choice of this topic. First of all, it is a multidisciplinary topic involving criminal law, criminal administrative law, constitutional law, and private law, especially the regulation of legal entities. Furthermore, with the exemption of decision-making praxis of courts, and a few academic essays, attention hasn't been paid to this topic in its complexity. For this reason, this topic has offered novelty and the possibility of observing the progressive development of judicature, especially the decision-making praxis of the Supreme Court of the Czech Republic, the Supreme Administrative Court of the Czech Republic as well as the Constitutional Court of the Czech Republic and the European Court of Human Rights. The first part deals with the historical origins of privilege against self-incrimination and development of the criminal proceedings over the centuries. Special attention is paid to the fact, that privilege against self-incrimination was originally part of criminal proceedings until the 12th century, when this privilege was removed from the canon law and replaced with the inquisitional process which was linked with the...

我國所得稅係採年度申報自繳制度，具有大量、反覆之特性，因此稅捐稽徵機關在所得稅申報期間之前，即已進行各種課稅資訊之蒐集活動，除藉此定出各類所得、費用標準，以作為核課依據外，嗣人民申報其年度所得稅後，即將蒐集之課稅資料與申報資料互相勾稽，作為選定事後審查對象及釐正申報資料與核定所得額之依據；當年度之所得稅申報資料及核定情形復又成為次一年度之課稅基本資料來源及比較對象，二者環環相扣，互為因果關係，形成一個獨立體系，而得以單獨作為研究之對象。次為掌握稅務調查制度之全貌，必須對其作全面性之審視及檢討，故本文採用源自日本之行政法學研究方法「行政過程論」從實現稅務行政目的之過程，歸納、整理所得稅事前課稅資訊蒐集活動及事後審查階段之調查手段、程序、屬性、相關人之法律關係、調查效果及其救濟途徑，以宏觀角度檢視現行法制下之稅務調查制度，藉以發現問題並試圖提出解決方法或修法建議。 / Taiwan adopts an annual self-reporting system for income tax return. Such reporting system involves massive and recurrent information. Hence tax authorities would collect all kinds of tax information before the annual income tax reporting period and use such information to set out the norms for different types of income and expenses as basis for taxation. Upon receiving the annual income tax returns filed by taxpayers, tax officers would check the filed data against the collected tax information, and based on the results, determine the taxpayers to be audited and the assessed income tax. The information contained in an annual income tax return and the results of assessment become the source of basic tax information and comparison for following year’s return. Hence income tax returns of two successive years are interrelated and can form discrete units for research purpose. In order to grasp the full view of the tax investigation system, comprehensive examination of the system is necessary. Thus this study employs the methodology of the “theory of administrative process” originated in Japan to examine the tax investigation system under the prevailing law in a macroscopic manner, from the process of tax administration, pre-filing tax information collection, the means, procedure and attributes of post-filing investigation, legal relationship of the parties concerned, to the effect of investigation and remedies available. This study attempts to discover problems, and based on which, propose solutions or suggestions for regulatory amendment.

[pt] O princípio nemo tenetur se detegere, em seu duplo aspecto vedação à autoincriminação e direito ao silêncio, é uma conquista civilizatória das sociedades democráticas. A importância do princípio, muitas vezes não explicitada nas discussões sobre a constitucionalidade dos institutos e leis, é de tamanha monta que, conjuntamente com o princípio da presunção de inocência, forma a base axiológica de todo o sistema processual penal democrático. Contudo, o poder Estatal, diante do apelo popular e em resposta aos altos índices de criminalidade e episódios notórios de corrupção no Brasil tem, nos últimos tempos, a partir de uma continuidade cronológica de legislações, relativizado ou erodido os sustentáculos do princípio nemo tenetur se detegere. Tal postura Estatal consubstancia o que na criminologia se denomina de direito penal do inimigo, que servirá de substrato teórico para explicar o porquê do fenômeno de hipercriminalização e recrudescimento Estatal. A pesquisa visa, portanto, reafirmar o valor do nemo tenetur se detegere, acentuando os casos em que está a sofrer ataques e oferecer, a partir de pesquisa doutrinária e da análise jurisprudencial nacional e estrangeira, possíveis salvaguardas ao princípio com vistas a garantir que o processo penal brasileiro continue a respeitar os direitos individuais inerentes a uma ordem constitucional de fato e não meramente de direito. / [en] The principle nemo tenetur se detegere, in its double aspect privilege against self-incrimination and right to silence, is a civilizational conquest of democratic societies. The importance of this principle, which is often not made explicit in the discussions on the constitutionality of institutes and laws, is so significant that, together with the principle of presumption of innocence, forms the axiological basis of the entire democratic criminal procedural system. However, the State power, in the face of popular appeal and in response to high crime rates and notorious episodes of corruption in Brazil, has recently, from a chronological continuity of legislation, relativized or eroded the pillars of the nemo tenetur se detegere principle. This state posture consubstantiates what in criminology is called the criminal law of the enemy, which will serve as a theoretical substrate to explain the phenomenon of hypercriminalization and State recrudescence. The aim of the research is to reaffirm the value of the nemo tenetur, to highlight the cases in which it is under attack and to offer possible safeguards to the principle, based on jurisprudencial research and national and foreign case analysis, with a view to ensuring that the Brazilian criminal proceeding continues to respect the individual rights inherent in a constitutional order of fact and not merely law.