Do pensamento dos jurados às potencialidades do Tribunal do Júri

Abstract

Esta dissertação versa sobre a problemática dos Tribunais do Júri. Enquanto instituto democrático algo negligenciado, o Júri renasce na sua importância em períodos de crise das democracias. Em tempos como os atuais, portanto, entendemos como relevante um aprofundamento do estudo do regime e das incertezas levantadas pela intervenção leiga nos tribunais. Num estudo dividido em três tempos, refletir-se-á acerca das críticas que lhe são opostas, mas também das vantagens assinaladas, passando por uma averiguação regimental que se pretende esclarecedora dos atuais contornos desta participação dos juízes leigos. Principiamos por uma incursão histórica, onde se buscam as origens deste julgamento pelos pares, numa curta investigação que percorre a Grécia Antiga, Roma, Inglaterra Medieval, Estados Unidos da América, França Revolucionária, Espanha e Portugal. De seguida, e tendo em consideração os mesmos ordenamentos, busca-se uma compreensão dos regimes jurídicos nos seus contornos atuais, permitindo um confronto com aquele por nós experienciado. Maior desenvolvimento assume, naturalmente, a análise do regime nacional do Tribunal do Júri, moldado não só por normas decorrentes da Constituição da República Portuguesa e do Código de Processo Penal, mas também do Decreto-Lei n.º 387-A/87, de 29 de dezembro. A terceira paragem consiste num tratamento metodológico do tema, com recurso a Autores como WHITE, CASTANHEIRA NEVES, HART, LINHARES e POSNER, onde se averigua a coadunação da metodologia jurídica atualmente proposta com o tradicional instituto do Tribunal do Júri. Finaliza-se este percurso com uma tímida proposta de revitalização do Júri, assente na sua capacidade de colaboração na tarefa da realização da justiça enquanto assessores e já não decisores.

This dissertation runs about the Jury’s problematic. As a democratic institute somewhat neglected, the Jury is reborn in its importance in periods of democratic crises. Therefore, in current times, we understand as relevant a deepening of the regimental study, as well as of the uncertainties raised by the lay participation in courts. On a study divided into three periods, we will reflect on the critics opposed, but also the assigned advantages, going throw a regimental verification that intends to enlighten the present contours of this lay judge’s participation. We start by an historical incursion where we seek the origins of this trial by peers, in a short investigation that goes through Ancient Greece, Rome, Medieval England, United States of America, Revolutionary France, Spain and Portugal. Subsequently, and taking into consideration the same legal systems, we seek to understand the legal regimes on their present contours, allowing a confrontation with the one we experience. Naturally, the analysis of the national Jury system acquires greater developments, this being shaped not only by rules arising from the Constituição da República Portuguesa and from the Código de Processo Penal, but also from the Decreto-Lei n. º 387-A/87, December 29. The third stop consists in a methodological approach of the issue, relying on Authors like WHITE, CASTANHEIRA NEVES, HART, LINHARES and POSNER, where we question the consistency between the legal methodology presently proposed and the traditional institute of the Jury. We finish this path with a shy proposal of Jury revitalization, built on its capacity to cooperate with the realization of justice as advisers, and no longer decision-makers.This dissertation runs about the Jury’s problematic. As a democratic institute somewhat neglected, the Jury is reborn in its importance in periods of democratic crises. Therefore, in current times, we understand as relevant a deepening of the regimental study, as well as of the uncertainties raised by the lay participation in courts. On a study divided into three periods, we will reflect on the critics opposed, but also the assigned advantages, going throw a regimental verification that intends to enlighten the present contours of this lay judge’s participation. We start by an historical incursion where we seek the origins of this trial by peers, in a short investigation that goes through Ancient Greece, Rome, Medieval England, United States of America, Revolutionary France, Spain and Portugal. Subsequently, and taking into consideration the same legal systems, we seek to understand the legal regimes on their present contours, allowing a confrontation with the one we experience. Naturally, the analysis of the national Jury system acquires greater developments, this being shaped not only by rules arising from the Constituição da República Portuguesa and from the Código de Processo Penal, but also from the Decreto-Lei n. º 387-A/87, December 29. The third stop consists in a methodological approach of the issue, relying on Authors like WHITE, CASTANHEIRA NEVES, HART, LINHARES and POSNER, where we question the consistency between the legal methodology presently proposed and the traditional institute of the Jury. We finish this path with a shy proposal of Jury revitalization, built on its capacity to cooperate with the realization of justice as advisers, and no longer decision-makers.