A carregar...
Publicação
Making criminal trials work for transitional settings:
| Nome: | Descrição: | Tamanho: | Formato: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 714.33 KB | Adobe PDF |
Autores
Orientador(es)
Resumo(s)
A justiça de transição, incumbida de assistir os processos de transição encetados
em sociedades marcadas pela violação em massa ou sistemática de direitos
humanos, tem a árdua tarefa de assegurar que é feita justiça em face dos crimes
cometidos e, simultaneamente, alcançada uma paz duradoura. Porém, o sucesso
dos processos de transição em cumprir com esta incumbência tem sido limitado
pelos obstáculos que, na prática, a aplicação do direito penal em contextos de
transição acarreta, e bem assim pelo insuficiente, e muitas vezes nocivo, papel que
os tribunais penais, presos a uma conceção convencional e retributiva de justiça,
têm desempenhado, em última instância, comprometendo a paz.
Consequentemente, as sociedades em transição têm sido sistematicamente
confrontadas com a impossível escolha entre sacrificar as hipóteses de paz, de
forma a cumprir os desígnios da justiça penal internacional, ou conformar-se com
a impunidade, em nome dessa mesma paz, vivenciando o que é comummente
referido como o dilema “justiça versus paz”. Com vista a ultrapassar este dilema,
a justiça restaurativa, proposta como uma abordagem de justiça em que os
objetivos da justiça e da paz andam de mãos dadas, tem sido
crescentemente preconizada e alegadamente implementada no âmbito da justiça
de transição, mormente, tendo sido reconhecida e teoricamente incorporada pelo
Tribunal Penal Internacional, com vista a poder assegurar, para além da justiça,
a paz. Não obstante o mérito que cumpre reconhecer a estes esforços, na prática,
a forma como esta nova abordagem perante o crime tem sido entendida em
contextos de transição vem limitada por uma sobreposição conceptual que a
constringe a uma mera forma alternativa e parcial de justiça, assim justaposta à
justiça retributiva, impedindo o aproveitamento do seu verdadeiro potencial para
ultrapassar tal dilema. A Jurisdição Especial para a Paz da Colômbia, porém,
veio demonstrar como a justiça restaurativa, quando devidamente concebida
como uma forma de complementar e enriquecer a justiça retributiva no âmbito da
justiça penal internacional, pode munir os tribunais penais com os meios para
genuinamente contribuírem para o sucesso dos processos de transição. Inspirada
por este modelo, esta Dissertação vem propor a adoção de uma abordagem mista
de justiça penal internacional em contextos de transição, conjugando processos e
sanções tanto retributivos, como restaurativos, para assegurar a justiça e,
simultaneamente, contribuir para a paz.
Transitional justice, aimed at assisting societies in responding to legacies of systematic or mass human rights violations, is tasked with the arduous endeavor of simultaneously delivering justice for the crimes committed and achieving longlasting peace. The success of transitional processes in accomplishing this task, however, has been constrained by the practical difficulties of delivering criminal justice within transitional settings, paired with the insufficient and often harmful role that criminal trials, rooted in a conventional, retributive conception of justice, have played in transitions, hindering the chances of peace. Consequently, transitional societies have systematically been faced with the impossible choice between sacrificing peace to comply with the mandates of international criminal justice or settling for impunity to ensue in the name of peace. This makes up what is commonly referred to as the justice versus peace dilemma. With the intent of overcoming this dilemma, restorative justice, as an approach to justice in which the goals of justice and peace go hand in hand, has been growingly proposed and allegedly applied within the field of transitional justice. Ultimately, this novel approach was acknowledged and supposedly incorporated in the International Criminal Court, with the aim of enabling the Court to both ensure justice and contribute to peace in transitions. Notwithstanding the merit of such efforts, the way in which restorative justice has been understood within transitional settings insofar is limited by a conceptual overlap that, reducing it to a mere alternative and partial form of justice, juxtaposed against retributive justice, has hindered the harness of its true potential to contribute to overcoming the justice versus peace dilemma of transitional justice. Colombia’s Special Jurisdiction for Peace, however, has come to shed light on how restorative justice, when duly acknowledged beyond this constricting understanding, and instead viewed as means to complement and enrichen retributive justice within international criminal justice, can equip trials with the means to take part in successful transitions. Inspired by this model, this dissertation makes a case for a mixed approach to international criminal justice in transitional settings, combining both retributive and restorative criminal proceedings and sanctions to deliver justice for the atrocities committed, all the while contributing to the chances of peace.
Transitional justice, aimed at assisting societies in responding to legacies of systematic or mass human rights violations, is tasked with the arduous endeavor of simultaneously delivering justice for the crimes committed and achieving longlasting peace. The success of transitional processes in accomplishing this task, however, has been constrained by the practical difficulties of delivering criminal justice within transitional settings, paired with the insufficient and often harmful role that criminal trials, rooted in a conventional, retributive conception of justice, have played in transitions, hindering the chances of peace. Consequently, transitional societies have systematically been faced with the impossible choice between sacrificing peace to comply with the mandates of international criminal justice or settling for impunity to ensue in the name of peace. This makes up what is commonly referred to as the justice versus peace dilemma. With the intent of overcoming this dilemma, restorative justice, as an approach to justice in which the goals of justice and peace go hand in hand, has been growingly proposed and allegedly applied within the field of transitional justice. Ultimately, this novel approach was acknowledged and supposedly incorporated in the International Criminal Court, with the aim of enabling the Court to both ensure justice and contribute to peace in transitions. Notwithstanding the merit of such efforts, the way in which restorative justice has been understood within transitional settings insofar is limited by a conceptual overlap that, reducing it to a mere alternative and partial form of justice, juxtaposed against retributive justice, has hindered the harness of its true potential to contribute to overcoming the justice versus peace dilemma of transitional justice. Colombia’s Special Jurisdiction for Peace, however, has come to shed light on how restorative justice, when duly acknowledged beyond this constricting understanding, and instead viewed as means to complement and enrichen retributive justice within international criminal justice, can equip trials with the means to take part in successful transitions. Inspired by this model, this dissertation makes a case for a mixed approach to international criminal justice in transitional settings, combining both retributive and restorative criminal proceedings and sanctions to deliver justice for the atrocities committed, all the while contributing to the chances of peace.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Restorative justice Retributive justice Transitional justice International Criminal Court Special jurisdiction for peace Justiça restaurativa Justiça retributiva Justiça de transição Tribunal Penal Internacional Jurisdição especial para a paz