[ad_1]
Homicide
thieves, corrupt, crooks, scoundrels of women, forgers, fencing, pimps. The people who committed these crimes – and many others, more or less hairy – could or could benefit from the forgiveness of Christmas, this affection that happens
each end of the year with French toast and raisin rice. Simply put, a country that has a 4% crime resolution rate in its richest and most populous state, picks up the very few criminals it managed to imprison and decides each year as a gift for the citizen, to be part of it street.
Despite the
furious controversy involving the judgment in the STF forgiveness of 2017, the institute of apology pardon was not invented by President Michel Temer. From Antiquity. In Brazil, he already had a whole series of blushing Supreme Ministers: in the Constitution
from 1824, the longest we had, the emperor could forgive or moderate the sentences imposed by sentence. Thus, dry, without details, exceptions and exceptions.
The Constitution
In 1988, the President of the Republic has the power "to grant pardon and commute sentences". For 30 years, the Christmas decree has never failed. More or less wide, encompbading more serious crimes at times, tightening the screw in others, usually in the spring
in December of the presidential pen – but carries, for me, that air of absolutist monarchy that combines better with lace cuffs and powdered wigs. An addendum: the indult has nothing to do with the progression of the scheme (closed to semi-open, for example) or
the benefits already provided for in the law on the enforcement of sentences, with the periodic home visit. Forgiveness is a forgiveness. End of the sentence Street C is finished.
I am not
here to badyze the legal aspects of rehabilitations (I leave to the jurists the task) and the philosophical component of the measure (the mission belongs to the philosophers). My astonishment is more fundamental: sorry for what? Why?
Looking for
Decree 9,246, the controversial Christmas pardon of last year, why a convicted prisoner deserves the grace of his sentence if he has done "one-third of the sentence, if it is repeat offender , and half of the sentence, if he is a repeat offender, for crimes committed with serious threat
or violence, when the custodial sentence does not exceed four years? "Did you find that bad for 2007, Decree 6,294, signed by President Lula at the time, after a pardon
sentenced to deprivation of liberty for a maximum of eight years, not replaced by restrictive rights or a fine and not benefiting from the conditional suspension of the sentence, who, on 25 December 2007, had carried out a third of the sentence, if not recidivist,
or half, if it recurs. "
Eight years old.
Do you know what's in this presidential hug? A large part of the penal code and so-called extravagant legislation (that which does not fall under the code). Serious injury. Abduction and private prison. Flight Flight Homicide simple. Trafficking of people. To receive. Extortion
It is interesting to note that in 2007, there was the scream that is happening now. Maybe because the times are different. And the president too.
Back
to the question: why should an inmate who has served part of his sentence for a particular crime deserve to be forgiven? What did he do for that? He planted a tree in prison, saved a kitten stuck on the roof of the gallery, painted a reproduction of the "Holy Supper" in the prison chapel?
Nothing of that. The forgiveness of Christmas is not personal, it is individualized. If the pen and the crime of the detainee fall within the framework determined by the decree, luck smiles, can celebrate.
Several of the
Christmas pardons always provided benefits for older prisoners. Once again, the question is: a squatter, when he gets older, what? An old crook. Reaching old age does not make people better, but more ruffled.
There are weights.
on the power of forgiveness to empty the chains. First, if these annual decrees were effective, we would not have overcrowded prisons across the country. Secondly, and I have already written about it, we are confusing here a legal problem with another, the administrative problem. Lack of places
in the penitentiary system does not mean excess of prisoners, but lack of prisons. Brazil is far from being a champion of incarceration. Building more chains is important so that each prisoner can execute his sentence with a minimum of decency. And even
the end.
[ad_2]
Source link
