PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE AND THE SOVEREIGNTY

AN ANALYSIS FOR OVERCOMING THE DISCOURSE OF IMMEDIATE IMPRISONMENT IN THE JURY.

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to verify whether the constitutional principle of the sovereignty of jury authorizes the anticipated execution of the sentence in the Jury Court, despite the also constitutional principle of the presumption of innocence. This is the constitutional issue that will be debated by the STF in Theme 1068. For this objective, a bibliographical review is carried out regarding both principles, through the criminal proceduralist and constitutionalist doctrines. In the end, it is demonstrated that there is no incompatibility between the principles, because there is no normative contradiction that opposes them. The sovereignty of the verdicts deals with matters of constitutional competence, translating that the jury’s decision about the merit cannot be replaced by one of the same nature provided by the Superior Courts. However, it does not authorizes the anticipation of the punishment, because, in this context, the presumption of innocence, a founding principle of the Brazilian criminal procedure, establishes the definitive milestone for the end of the state of innocence of the accused: the res judicata of the condemnatory sentence. Through this conclusion, the aim is to implement the presumption of innocence and the right to personal freedom of the Brazilian citizen subjected to criminal persecution.