Talk:Brazilian criminal justice

Hybrid legal system

Note that Brazilian criminal justice has elements of both the adversarial system and the inquisitorial system. It is mostly based on the adversarial model, but it's kind of a hybrid. In criminal proceedings, the adversarial system is followed, with the prosecution and defense presenting their cases and arguments before an impartial judge who acts as a neutral arbiter, so that's adversarial. As in any adversarial system, the judge's role is to ensure a fair trial, rule on evidentiary matters, and deliver a verdict based on the presented evidence and legal principles (as in the U.S., for example, which follows the adversarial system). But there are also certain inquisitorial elements as well: during the investigative phase, judges have an active role in overseeing the gathering of evidence, conducting interrogations, and issuing search and arrest warrants, as in the French system. Also, judges can initiate investigations in specific circumstances. Mathglot (talk) 08:19, 24 June 2023 (UTC)

Rule of law

"In December 1963, Arnon de Mello — father of former president Fernando Collor de Mello — murdered a colleague on the floor of the Brazilian Senate."

He was acquitted.

References

Elinruby (talk) 23:08, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

Scope problem

Based on a recent re-perusal of Corruption in Brazil, in matters of corruption it seems the offense is criminal if committed by an individual but if the same action is committed by a corporation or political party the matter is dealt with through administrative sanctions Elinruby (talk) 23:16, 25 June 2023 (UTC)

I'm less familiar with the Brazilian law than French law because of my recent work, but in French criminal law there are similarities. Think of it this way: you can throw a human offender in jail, but you can't throw Petrobras in jail. Not sure if that's so much a scoping problem, as a basic difference in the sentencing/punishment for crimes is handled; either humans or companies can be fined, but only humans can be imprisoned (or wear an electronic bracelet, etc.). Does this help any? The Brazil glossary might have something on this, and if it doesn't, it should. Mathglot (talk) 08:49, 27 June 2023 (UTC)

Well, by analogy: this came up with PG&E, right? But it was a really big deal that they were found criminally responsible. What I was mumbling about was whether if Petrobras is getting fined and sanctioned, is this going through the criminal law system? I can figure that out eventually probably based on the court system it's going through...Elinruby (talk) 22:39, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

not asking you to figure that out this second, though; the answer is probably to be found in the Clean Companies Act. Elinruby (talk) 22:41, 28 June 2023 (UTC)

Really good question; made me think. I think it's more likely to be found in the penal code, if there's a section that defines who can be criminally liable, but I'm really not sure, especially wrt Brazilian criminal law. In France, penal code §121-2 says that a personne morale can have criminally responsibility, but then §121-3 says that there's no crime without an intention to commit it (i.e., without the moral element) and how can a corporation (which is a moral person) have an "intention" to do anything? So, even in French criminal law, I'm not clear on this point. But it's a really basic question, and I should figure it out and add something to French criminal law about it. Maybe the answer there will help with the answer to your question, but I'd start with whatever the most basic part of Brazilian penal code, and see what it says about physical persons and moral persons, and then check if there's a section on "criminal responsibility", because that's something any penal code has to address. Mathglot (talk) 03:12, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

It looks like there's been serious attention paid to this very question in French criminal law, and it hits up exactly the two CP sections I raised above. I asked Google, "une personne morale, peut-elle avoir l'intention de commetre un delit?" and got this really good response from Dalloz. Another response to this is here, and both articles underline that this is a recent development (1994) and that there's been lots of discussion and legal opinions about it. Still doesn't answer your question about Brazil, and I wonder how that will turn out. Mathglot (talk) 03:19, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

I will attempt to edge into this from the clean hands law just because i have seen sources on this in English. Hopefully they will specify what section of the penal code is.amended (?) But yeah this is currently.an open question in my mind Elinruby (talk) 03:22, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

References

République française; Secrétariat général du gouvernement (19 October 2022). "Légifrance Le service public de la diffusion du droit" [The public service for dissemination of the law]. Légifrance. Direction de l'information légale et administrative. ISSN 2270-8987. OCLC 867599055.

Excerpting

I've been using the handy and powerful {{Excerpt}} template to selectively transclude some content (generally the lead, or portions of it) of other articles into this draft. This is a way to get some readable content into the article quickly so we can see what it might look like as we start to flesh it out. The downside of {{Excerpt}} is that you either get a chunk of content from the other article, or you don't; you can't just tweak the wording a bit to your liking, or add a sentence or cut one out, so it's a bit of a blunt tool. (You can, however, include/exclude at the level of paragraphs, tables, and images, but not at a more fine-grained level.)

Later, once the article is more developed, we can refine the results by actually copying the content of an excerpted section into the article instead of excerpting it, and then it can be modified as desired, as with any content. On the other hand, excerpting is an established way of growing articles, and if the advantages outweigh the disadvantages for any particular excerpted section, then we can just leave it in. Mathglot (talk) 20:17, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

Sometimes, in trying to include an excerpt, I find an article that is in such bad case, there aren't any really good, clean sections or even paragraphs to include in this draft, which is a red flag for the article in question. This was the case for National Council of Justice ('CNJ'), which I restructured and expanded, rewriting the lead in the process. Now I've got a basic description of the CNJ that I can excerpt here (which isn't to say that the article couldn't still be improved) but at least we have something to say about the CNJ in this draft. Mathglot (talk) 23:53, 29 June 2023 (UTC)

I am assuming that this is why the Politics of Brazil navbar is in here multiple times? I am not up for this right now but I will take a look at the parametersElinruby (talk) 12:53, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

@Elinruby: yes, that's exactly why. The default excerpt function is to bring in "everything", by which they mean, paragraphs of text, tables, images, files (they consider Infoboxes in that group), and lists. You can include/exclude any of them with params, but if I'm lazy, I just say "Excerpt" with no params, and then if the section happens to have an image or infobox, they get brought in. I've fixed this by adding the param |only=paragraphs to a few of the sections near the top where the Politics of Brazil navbar was getting included, and this param keeps the text, and excludes everything else. This has fixed the multiple navbar issue. We should probably use |only=paragraphs by default in all of our excerpts, unless we're positive we want images, navbars, tables, or whatever else the other page section may have. So basically, it was due to laziness when I first used {{Excerpt}}. Mathglot (talk) 23:00, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks much for saving me the lookup. Cold water is calling. Elinruby (talk) 23:04, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

In general, excerpts have both advantages and disadvantages which are good to be aware of. I consider them a good way to "jump-start" this draft, and when it looks full of content and not too many empty sections left, we can do a walk-through of all the excerpted sections and decide case-by-case if they're good enough, or if we need different wording or entirely different content, and then just copy it from the child article where needed and then adjust, or entirely rewrite the section. One other thing: the default for {{Excerpt}} is to include hatnote with an [edit] link, so you can just hit 'edit' to edit the section, even though it's only in the other article. I find these confusing, so I've suppressed them with |hat=no, but we can revisit that as needed. Mathglot (talk) 23:33, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Yep not complaining or I would say so directly. If anything I am overly direct. Just was getting lost in the templates yesterday (hey wouldn't that be a great title?). Am semi-back with fan on. If forecast is to be believed it gets cooler from here. Elinruby (talk) 00:01, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Just to square the circle: there are no more duplicate navbars. {{Excerpt}} has lots of options and one of them is suppressing incoming templates by name, so that's all you have have to do to fix that. Mathglot (talk) 16:50, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Good source with index of themes

This page from the STF has a long Table of Contents listing themes of Brazilian criminal justice, with every list item linking to a brief summary of the topic of about a paragraph or so down the long page:

https://portal.stf.jus.br/publicacaotematica/vertema.asp?lei=1324&1332

A lot of these would be good sources for this article, and if not already covered in the glossary, for that, too. Mathglot (talk) 20:07, 7 July 2023 (UTC)

Fixed the link above. Mathglot (talk) 22:11, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

TCU?

Can't find it and it matters for financial crimes. [1] Elinruby (talk) 12:55, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

@Elinruby: Tribunal de Contas da União. Mathglot (talk) 22:07, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes I (sorta) know what it is, but I didn't see a section on it. It's also possible I missed it, see above. Work conditions poor just now (although heat warning supposed to go away tomorrow). On an unrelated note, I just found the reference desk really helpful, and if they were willing to guess what the word was I couldn't remember, I am betting that somebody would be delighted to research ship nomenclature. It's a thought. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elinruby (talk • contribs) 22:23, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Abstract

probably a cut and paste error. There's a heat dome and it's deliriously hot right now. Probably quote needs trimming, will revisit later today. Need cold bath right now. Elinruby (talk) 20:48, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

Need cold bath again, am out of article for a bit. I think I got the pretrial detention section somewhat under control, and referenced; some of that should probably move to another section tho, plus i need to do some actual writing. Side note - the stuff about Amazon needs a section about "environmental crimes" -- or not -- not sure if Bolsonaro changed laws or just ignored them. Elinruby (talk) 22:57, 9 July 2023 (UTC)

As Environmental Crimes Destroy the Amazon, Brazil Fails to Act, 26 July 2022I, by INCI SAYKI, OCCRP (Above source may not be familiar but was involved in the South American end of the Panama Papers investigation, which among other tbings brought us Operation Car Wash) Another timg I am unsure of is whetber "crime" is used here in the narrow sense that would put it in the article scope, ie falls under the criminal justice not the administrative law system.Elinruby (talk) 03:53, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

I see I am still making a lot of typos and not closing tags... maybe too soon. Going to go drink some more water, definitely dehydrated. Maybe call doctor in AM in case they want to bump the surgery up. (Nothing serious in and of itself but I wound up in the hospital on antibiotics for four days the last time I ignored this. The theory is that the surgery will go better if the inflammation and infection are cleared up...color me unimpressed with hospitals here) Anyway, thank you for your patience, and I think I will confine myself to these rough drafts for tonight. Elinruby (talk) 04:07, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

I wouldn't call my source on this reliable but apparently Lula said on his most recent campaign that it would come under the Federal Police. Note that Bolsonaro shut down IBAMA, the previous environmental agency. Also, ick: Environmental governance in Brazil Elinruby (talk) 05:00, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

Correction: The source I was looking at only says IBAMA was shut down in an Amazon town near the tri-border area I have discussed in a couple of places. Not in all of Brazil. Elinruby (talk) 14:05, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Prison gangs not just for prison any more

There's a complex history about classism, in the prisons especially, and of the military dictatorship's incarceration of its political opponents In the same prison, leading to the organization of these gangs, but they have now morphed into full-fledged cartels that threaten the rule of law, particularly in the Amazon.

The two largest gangs, the Primeiro Comando da Capital (PCC) and Comando Vermelho (CV), have their own articles on en-wikipedia, but it still feels like an undertold story. I certainly had no idea, and while I don't claim expertise on Brazil, I'm paying more attention to the place than most English speakers on here. I think the murder of the Guardian reporter may have focused attention on what was under Bolsonaro essentially a lawless territory. Elinruby (talk) 06:40, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

references
References

When you raise these issues, I'm interested, but can you make it easier on me (and others?) by adding some links so I don't have to repeat the searches you've already done? And if you're talking about something you've added to the article, just link the section (try {{slink}}). Mathglot (talk) 08:59, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Ok working on it Elinruby (talk) 06:30, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

see above. My point is that I am not sure where this goes in the current structure. Maybe we need a section for environmental law? Or lawlessness? Or state capture? Since the draft is way far from done, I will just keep plugging away at the fragments of this that are in the article Elinruby (talk) 15:21, 15 July 2023 (UTC)

1979 Amnesty Law, Pacifying Police Unit Elinruby (talk) 00:41, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

@Elinruby: Well, since this article is about the Judiciary, and not about crime per se (except in the most general sense, in that the organization of the judiciary is there to investigate crime, and repress it), I'm not sure it goes anywhere. If you want to include it, maybe if there is a particular part of the judiciary for gangs, mafias, terrorists, etc., it could go in there as an example. But I think we have to be careful about introducing too much about actual crime; that should go to Crime in Brazil. If there's *one* crime investigation that should go in here, it's OCW, because it was influenced by creation of the 1988 constitution and some of the follow-up legislation, and OCW showed that those reforms worked. So the best thing might be not to include it at all, at least here, because it might be out of scope for the topic. The judiciary is a big enough chunk to cover, without starting to add crime to it as well. If you mention it at all, then probably in § Special criminal laws. Mathglot (talk) 00:57, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Good point, even if it will probably result in me doing a bunch of side work. But you're right, this was s a passing butterfly. But am I right to see these connections?OS, I took a look at the STF page, and you're right, it's a great sounrce for almost the entire article. I generally consider many citations to the same source a red flag, with the wxception of the likes of Légifrance and Mérimée, but this may be another one, what do you think? My thought is to go ahead and source whatever it sources, especially since we're saying that that article may well get split. As another consultative question, for the section in notable cases, what are our criteria? Marriage equality would qualify, but we have a separate section for that. (And incidentally, the source or two I looked at above trans law said that Brazil is much more progressive in this area than most countries; is this just happy talk? Don't remember the source. I intend to crank up the laptop soon, which will make doing all the stuff that requires online translation a lot easier. This article is currently at the top of my priorities following some happy time with the Holocaust in Transnitria so you may hear some mire questions along these lunes in the next few days. None of it will be urgent. Elinruby (talk) 01:40, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

The "side work" absolutely rang a bell, because I had to stop several times and fix some atrocious stuff in related articles, many of which are named in "{{Main}}" or "{{Further}}" links here. There needs to be section-top links like that here, but so often, the actual article you would end up on to get "further" information about the subtopic here, was rubbish. So, I ended up detouring for a while. I forget how many of them I changed, but have a look, for example, at "Judiciary of Brazil" in these two versions, BEFORE I got there, and then AFTER; just looking at the two Table of Contents should give you an idea; a deeper dive will reveal more.

Wasn't sure what you meant by the STF page being a great source, didn't follow you.

Questions are great; I'll be here. Might even be able to help some more, if I can crawl out from a couple of talk disputes going on. Mathglot (talk) 03:56, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

I feel you on *that* Elinruby (talk) 13:24, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Oh, now I see what you meant (I think) by the STF page, you meant the link I sent you up the page in this section, right? yeah, that is a good source. Mathglot (talk) 17:01, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Releasable?

Elinruby Can you have a quick look at this to see if it is releasable or what needs to be done? I’m still away (back soon) and have limited phone editing capability and got a draft-deletion warning. I’ll try an alert that Brazilian IP and if you know Paulo S’s username maybe him too. Thanks. Mathglot (talk) 06:59, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

I found Paulo. His user page says he is deceased.

...

...

...

...

...

He was invaluable in the scandal articles

I debated whether to tell you since you already sounded stressed. I know I am Talk later? I will miss him

I debated whether to tell you since you already sounded stressed. I know I am Talk later? Elinruby (talk) 08:16, 13 April 2024 (UTC)

I've started to pick this article up again. There's more to do than I thought, but it doesn't have to be perfect, so trying to get it ready for release even if some shortcuts are taken. Mathglot (talk) 03:23, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Yeah I can do something today.Elinruby (talk) 17:45, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Expansion of Historical background section

The § Historical background section could be considerably expanded. Suggesting the following structure, or similar, following the breakdown at Campilongo (2016):

• == Historical background ==
• === Colonial times ===
  • Further information: State of Brazil
    (1549–1815)
  • Further information: Governorate General of Brazil
    (1549–1572, and early 17th c.)
• === Monarchy ===
  • {{Further|United Kingdom of Portugal, Brazil and the Algarves (1815–1825)
  • Further information: Empire of Brazil
    (1822–1889)
• === Republican origins ===
  • Further information: First Brazilian Republic
    (1889–1930)
• === Vargas era ===
  • Further information: Second Brazilian Republic
  • Further information: Estado Novo (Brazil)
    (1937–1946)
• === Initial democracy ===
  • Further information: Fourth Brazilian Republic
    (1945-1964)
• === Military dictatorship ===
  • Further information: Military dictatorship in Brazil
    (1965-1984)
• === New republic (1985-) ===

The Deffenti-Barral-2016 book in which Campilongo's chapter appears is an excellent resource for this entire article, and should be looked at further for additional support. Mathglot (talk) 03:40, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Code reform update request

Elinruby, do you remember this edit requesting update of § Code reform? Could you either add a |reason= parameter to the {{update}} template, or just update whatever you think is needed, as I'm not sure what needs updating here. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 05:25, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

Lists of major STF decisions

Here are some sources with lists of top STF decisions, that could be used to expand the list:

• Publicação reúne decisões emblemáticas do Supremo sobre direitos da mulher
• Publicação reúne decisões emblemáticas do Supremo sobre direitos da mulher
• 12 decisões históricas do STF, segundo Luis Roberto Barroso

Mathglot (talk) 07:58, 15 April 2024 (UTC)

References

Expanding empty or short sections

Prior to the latest revision, 45 empty or short sections contained an {{expand section}} template, each one with its own, indivdualized "find sources" query in Portuguese, each of which will likely yield reliable sources to expand the section in question. That many templates cluttered the Draft and made it look unreleaseable, so I removed them. However, the queries are still useful, so they have been preserved in the context of the article section they originally belonged to, but with all the body text stripped out; that is, a copy of the article with *just* the section headers and the {{expand section}} templates in their original section. This can be found at Draft talk:Brazilian criminal justice/Expand sections. Mathglot (talk) 03:44, 17 April 2024 (UTC)

notes on sources

• Decision‐making in an inquisitorial system: Lessons from Brazil. By: Ribeiro, Ludmila, A. Diniz, Alexandre M., Bastos Lages, Lívia, Law & Society Review, 00239216, Mar2022, Vol. 56, Issue 1

The defender's requests do not interfere with the odds of the judge imposing pretrial detention, even when controlling for the variables that ought to explain the behavior of law. Thus, despite the recent reforms introduced in Brazil's Criminal Procedure Code designed to promote a shift toward a model with accusatorial characteristics (Ballesteros et al., 2019), our results indicate that the decision‐making process at Custody Hearings remains essentially inquisitorial. Elinruby (talk) 22:01, 20 April 2024 (UTC)

• Conscription Versus Penal Servitude: Army Reform's Influence on the Brazilian State's Management of Social Control, 1870-1930. By: Beattie, Peter M., Journal of Social History, 00224529, Summer99, Vol. 32, Issue 4

Database: SocINDEX with Full Text

Thanks. I've seen a lot of argument about whether they have an inquisitorial, adversarial, or mixed system. One source argues strongly that it is adversarial, not inquisitorial, and not even mixed. It might already be in the article, but I'll add it here if not. Might need more sources on both sides to sort it out, as it sounds like a disagreement among reliable sources. Mathglot (talk) 17:36, 23 April 2024 (UTC)