A (in)constitucionalidade da aplicação do in dubio pro societate nas decisões de pronúncia no rito do tribunal do júri

Abstract

This paper aims to critically analyze the application and constitutionality of the principle in dubio pro societate, applied in the 1st phase of the two-step procedure of the jury. It will be shown that this aphorism is widely used by Brazilian jurisprudence, by individual judges and courts (on appeal) as well. Occurs that, after study of the Constitution and many laws, there isn't any legal support for the use of predicted principle. Will be observed that in dubio pro societate is a rancid of pre-1988 constitution period, which actually ensured many diametrically opposed aphorisms to in dubio pro societate, as the wide defense and the contradictory, in dubio pro reo, due legal process etc. Thus, it will prove that in dubio pro societate, unlike defending by the majority jurisprudence, deathly injures constitutional rights that are important to any country that considers itself as a democratic state based on the rule of law, and, therefore, its application is extremely wrong and harmful. Finally, supporting the defended in this work, will be highlighted the rise of a jurisprudence (still a minority) that rejects the use of in dubio pro societate, for also understand that this principle is not appropriate in current Brazilian democratic state that obeys the rule of law.