Reação jurídica à danosidade ambiental: contribuição para o delineamento de um microssistema de responsabilidade

• Ano de defesa: 2016
• Autor(a) principal: Milaré, Edis
• Orientador(a): Yoshida, Consuelo Yatsuda Moromizato
• Tipo de documento: Tese
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
• Programa de Pós-Graduação: Programa de Estudos Pós-Graduados em Direito
• Departamento: Faculdade de Direito
• País: Brasil
• Palavras-chave em Português: Direito ambiental; Dano ambiental; Reação jurídica à danosidade
• Palavras-chave em Inglês: Environmental law; Environmental damage; Legal reaction
• Área do conhecimento CNPq: CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO
• Link de acesso: https://tede2.pucsp.br/handle/handle/18874

Following universal trend, the Constitution of Brazil erected the environment category of one of those to the ideal values of social order, devoting a separate chapter that definitely institutionalized the right to a healthy environment as one of the fundamental rights of the human person. Indeed, in Chapter VI of Title VIII, headed the Social Order, the Constitution defines the ecologically balanced environment as a right for all, giving you the nature and of common use and essential to a healthy quality of life, and imposing the responsibility of citizens and the Government for its defense and preservation (section 225). Among the mechanisms to avert the environmental damage, proclaimed in section 225, 3rd paragraph , that “the conduct and activities considered harmful to the environment shall subject the offenders, individuals or legal entities, criminal and administrative sanctions, without the obligation to repair the damage”. Accordingly, it is clear that environmental infraction has triple legal repercussions, certain that the degradation, by the same act can be held responsible, alternatively or cumulatively, in criminal , administrative and civil spheres. In the civil sphere, repudiation of the legal system to environmental infraction was already a reality even before the entry into force of the 1988, for the reparation obligation of damage, according to the rule of strict liability, was disciplined, since 1981, by the National Environmental Policy (section 14, 1st paragraph ). The space for proper treatment of criminal and administrative responsibilities just filled with the incorporation into Law 9,605/1998, which provides for criminal and administrative sanctions derived from conduct and activities harmful to the environment. Given this scenario, we sought, in relation to environmental management responsibility, maintaining that its legal status is informed by the theory of presumed guilt, according to which, configured an argument behavior subsumed under a ban on environmental standard, there to presumption, rebuttable, the responsibility of the alleged infringer, which can, by reversing the burden of proof to demonstrate their not guilty. Not discharging this burden, the presumption becomes a certainty, allowing for application of abstractly considered sanctions . With regard to environmental liability, aware of the engendered system by our legislature, which considers obligation to indemnify as emerging from the mere occurrence of an adverse result to the man and his environment, without any subjective assessment of the polluter of conduct for the production of the damage (Section 14, 1st paragraph of Law 6.938/1981) - so according to the rules of objectivity - there was clear option of working for electing the theory of integral risk as the informant that responsibility mode. Finally, with respect to environmental criminal liability, it was emphasized that, with the strengthening of the principle of subsidiarity of criminal action, this branch of law must (can) focus on the case only when the other accountability bodies - administrative and civil , which are less restrictive - have already proved insufficient to restrain the conduct infraction, or potentially harmful to the protected legal right. Faced with this order of considerations, this work intends - at vacillations of doctrine and jurisprudence as to the exact characterization and scope of each of these spheres of activity of environmental law - to present some contributions able to outline a higher responsibility microsystem of challenges to increasing attacks on fundamental values of society, not reaching the point of unbearable