Um viés constitucional da confissão no acordo de não persecução penal

• Ano de defesa: 2026
• Autor(a) principal: Pedrassi, Vitória Regina Faria
• Orientador(a): Silva, Marco Antonio Marques da
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Pontifícia Universidade Católica de São Paulo
• Programa de Pós-Graduação: Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito
• Departamento: Faculdade de Direito
• País: Brasil
• Palavras-chave em Português: Acordo de não persecução penal; Justiça consensual; Confissão; Princípios constitucionais; Presunção de inocência; Não autoincriminação
• Palavras-chave em Inglês: Non-prosecution agreement; Consensual justice; Confession; Constitutional principles; presumption of innocence; Privilege against self-incrimination
• Área do conhecimento CNPq: CNPQ::CIENCIAS SOCIAIS APLICADAS::DIREITO
• Link de acesso: https://repositorio.pucsp.br/jspui/handle/handle/46763

The dissertation examines, from a constitutional and criminal procedural perspective, the requirement of confession as a prerequisite for entering into a non-prosecution agreement (ANPP), established by Law No. 13,964/2019, assessing its compatibility with constitutional principles, especially the presumption of innocence and the privilege against selfincrimination. The study begins by recognizing the structural crisis of the Brazilian criminal justice system, characterized by procedural delays, case backlog, insufficient infrastructure, mass incarceration, and the inefficiency of criminal adjudication. In this context, the adoption of consensual justice mechanisms emerges as an alternative to reduce judicial overload and promote faster and more efficient solutions, inspired by the constitutional principle of the peaceful settlement of disputes, originally intended for international relations but incorporated into domestic law, including the criminal sphere. Drawing on the experience of the Special Criminal Courts, created by Law No. 9,099/1995, which introduced plea bargaining and the conditional suspension of proceedings, the ANPP was designed for minor and medium-severity offenses, innovating by conditioning its application on the defendant’s formal and detailed confession. This qualitative research employs a deductive method and a descriptiveargumentative approach, supported by a comprehensive review of legislative, normative, doctrinal, and case law sources. Initially, it examines the constitutional principles that guide criminal and criminal procedural law—such as human dignity, due process of law and its corollaries (adversarial proceedings and full defense), presumption of innocence, privilege against self-incrimination and the right to remain silent, legality, proportionality, minimal intervention, reasonable duration of proceedings, and procedural economy—all of which are relevant to assessing the validity and limits of the confession requirement in the agreement. The study then analyzes consensual criminal justice in its historical development and theoretical foundations, presenting the interaction between the principles of legality, prosecutorial duty, and prosecutorial discretion, and addressing criticisms of consensual mechanisms, such as the risk of selectivity, inequality, and the weakening of procedural safeguards. It also examines foreign models, such as U.S. plea bargaining, and domestic applications such as plea bargaining, conditional suspension of proceedings, and plea agreements under the Organized Crime Act. At the core of the research, the dissertation describes in detail the non-prosecution agreement: its legislative background, concept, legal nature as a bilateral agreement between the Public Prosecutor’s Office and the accused, its positive and negative requirements, the possible conditions that may be agreed upon, as well as the procedure for proposal, negotiation, judicial approval, execution, and the effects of compliance or breach. It then delves into the analysis of confession in the context of the agreement, addressing its concept, nature, elements, and specific characteristics, the appropriate time for its requirement, the possibility of using it as evidence in case of breach, its purpose as proof of materiality and authorship, and its impact on the defendant’s autonomy of will, particularly in light of the risk of indirect coercion. Finally, the dissertation confronts the confession requirement with constitutional principles, weighing the limits of state power against individual guarantees, and concludes that, although confession may enhance the effectiveness and speed of criminal justice, its requirement must fully respect voluntariness, the presumption of innocence, and the privilege against self-incrimination, preventing abusive practices and ensuring a balance between procedural efficiency and the protection of fundamental liberties