Intersecções entre o Eficientismo Processual Penal e o Neoliberalismo

IF 0.4 Q3 LAW
Marcos Eugênio Vieira Melo, André Rocha Sampaio
{"title":"Intersecções entre o Eficientismo Processual Penal e o Neoliberalismo","authors":"Marcos Eugênio Vieira Melo, André Rocha Sampaio","doi":"10.22197/rbdpp.v10i1.873","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article aims to address the meta-legal relations between the management of the speed of the criminal process and the social constraints arising from neoliberal reason. To this end, it is based on the premise established by Foucault and deepened by Dardot and Laval that neoliberalism has become socially rooted to the point of transmuting from a simple economic model to a rationality that spreads to the most diverse social fields. The work is guided by the question: are there harmful effects beyond the loss of quality in the motivation of decisions with the adoption of efficiency logic by the criminal judge? The objective is to verify whether the management principles of this reason may be harmful to the proper functioning of the criminal process. This is an exploratory, interdisciplinary research, based exclusively on bibliographical references. The conclusion is that there are no conditions for intensifying the pace of the criminal process without a loss of quality that is not only technical, but also democratic, since acceleration without other measures ends up catalyzing authoritarian clots that have never been completely expunged from the Brazilian system of criminal procedure.","PeriodicalId":41933,"journal":{"name":"Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Brasileira de Direito Processual Penal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v10i1.873","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article aims to address the meta-legal relations between the management of the speed of the criminal process and the social constraints arising from neoliberal reason. To this end, it is based on the premise established by Foucault and deepened by Dardot and Laval that neoliberalism has become socially rooted to the point of transmuting from a simple economic model to a rationality that spreads to the most diverse social fields. The work is guided by the question: are there harmful effects beyond the loss of quality in the motivation of decisions with the adoption of efficiency logic by the criminal judge? The objective is to verify whether the management principles of this reason may be harmful to the proper functioning of the criminal process. This is an exploratory, interdisciplinary research, based exclusively on bibliographical references. The conclusion is that there are no conditions for intensifying the pace of the criminal process without a loss of quality that is not only technical, but also democratic, since acceleration without other measures ends up catalyzing authoritarian clots that have never been completely expunged from the Brazilian system of criminal procedure.
刑事诉讼效率与新自由主义之间的交集
本文旨在探讨刑事诉讼速度管理与新自由主义理性所产生的社会制约之间的元法律关系。为此,文章以福柯(Foucault)提出、达尔多(Dardot)和拉瓦尔(Laval)进一步深化的前提为基础,即新自由主义已扎根于社会,从一种简单的经济模式转变为一种理性,并扩展到最多样化的社会领域。这项工作的出发点是:刑事法官采用效率逻辑后,是否会在判决动机方面产生质量损失之外的有害影响?其目的是验证这一理由的管理原则是否会对刑事诉讼的正常运作造成损害。这是一项探索性的跨学科研究,完全以参考书目为基础。结论是,没有条件在不降低质量的情况下加快刑事诉讼的步伐,而这种质量不仅是技术性的,也是民主性的,因为在没有采取其他措施的情况下加快刑事诉讼的步伐最终会催化巴西刑事诉讼制度中从未完全清除的专制血块。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
66.70%
发文量
45
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信