A luta pelas garantias processuais e a mudança de paradigma em matéria de prova: do liberalismo à mass surveillance no processo penal europeu

Lorena Bachmaier Winter

doi:10.22197/rbdpp.v11i1.1164

Autores

Lorena Bachmaier Winter Universidade Complutense de Madrid https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9212-3336

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22197/rbdpp.v11i1.1164

Palavras-chave:

processo penal; prova; devido processo; algoritmos; investigação transnacional; prova eletrônica; interceptação de comunicações; buscas digitais; vigilância em massa; justa causa; Tribunal de Justiça da União Europeia

Resumo

As informações de fontes abertas disponíveis de cada um de nós permitem, por meio do processamento adequado, criar um perfil detalhado de praticamente todos os aspectos de nossa vida privada. De acordo com o algoritmo utilizado, isso pode levar a identificar um indivíduo como uma "pessoa de interesse" e, no logo em seguida, esses mesmos dados podem ser usados para caracterizar a justa causa e iniciar um processo criminal. Se o caso for a julgamento, esses dados podem ser apresentados como prova. Este artigo discute como o acesso a plataformas de mensagens criptografadas (como no caso Encrochat) e o processamento massivo de dados por meio de algoritmos e inteligência artificial exigem repensar toda a estrutura do processo penal. Defende-se que é necessário revisar as garantias processuais desenvolvidas nos últimos dois séculos para poder enfrentar os riscos da era digital. Conclui-se que há uma nova mudança na obtenção de provas, o que exige o fortalecimento das garantias do devido processo na fase de investigação.

Downloads

Os dados de download ainda não estão disponíveis.

Biografia do Autor

Lorena Bachmaier Winter, Universidade Complutense de Madrid

Professora Catedrática de Direito Processual da Universidade Complutense de Madrid, Madri, Espanha. Doutora em Direito.

Referências

AGUILERA MORALES, Marien. Proceso penal y causa general: La inquisitio generalis en el Derecho español. Madri: Aranzadi, 2008.

ALCALÁ ZAMORA, Niceto. Liberalismo y autoritarismo en el proceso. Boletin Mexicano de Derecho Comparado, v. 1, n. 2-3, pp. 559-600, 1968.

ASHWORTH, Andrew; ZEDNER, Lucia. Preventive Justice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014.

BACHMAIER WINTER, Lorena; SALIMI, Farsam. (Eds.), Admissibility of Evidence in EU Cross-Border Criminal Proceedings: Electronic Evidence, Efficiency and Fair Trial Rights. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2024.

BACHMAIER WINTER, Lorena. Countering Terrorism: Suspects without suspicion and (Pre-)Suspects under surveillance. In: SIEBER, Ulrich; MITSILEGAS, Valsamis; MYLONOPOLUS, Christos; KNUST, Nandor. (Eds.). Alternative systems of Crime Control. Berlim: Duncker & Humblot, 2018.

BACHMAIER WINTER, Lorena. Información de inteligencia y proceso penal. In: BACHMAIER WINTER, Lorena. (Coord.). Terrorismo, proceso penal y derechos fundamentales. Madri: Marcial Pons, 2012.

BACHMAIER WINTER, Lorena. Mutual recognition and cross-border interception of communications: the way ahead for the European Investigation Order. In: BRIÈRE, Chloé; WEYEMBERGH, Anne. (Ed.). The needed balances in EU Criminal Law: Past, present and future. Oxford: Hart Publising, 2017, pp. 313-336.

BACHMAIER WINTER, Lorena. Probable cause y la Cuarta Enmienda de la Constitución estadounidense: una garantía tan imprecisa como necesaria. Quaestio Facti, v. 4, n. 1, pp. 191-220, 2023.

BACHMAIER WINTER, Lorena. Proportionality, surveillance and criminal investigation: Strasbourg Court facing Big Brother. In: BILLIS, Emmanouil; KNUST, Nandor; RUI, Jon Petter. (Ed.). The Principle of Proportionality in Crime Control and Criminal Justice. Oxford: Hart Publising, 2021.

BILCHITZ, David. The Right to Privacy, Surveillance and the Global Obligations of Corporations. In: COLE, David D.; FABBRINI, Federico; SCHULHOFER, Stephen. (Eds.) Surveillance, Privacy and Trans-Atlantic Relations: Hart Studies in Security and Justice. Dublin: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2017.

BRAYNE, Sarah. Algorithmic Suspicion and Big Data Searches: The Inadequacy of Law in the Digital Age. In: BRAYNE, Sarah. Predict and Surveil: Data Discretion and the Future of Policing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020.

BRAYNE, Sarah. Predict and Surveil: Data Discretion and the Future of Policing. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2020.

CAMERON, Iain. National Security and the European Convention on Human Rights. Haia: Kluwer Law, 2000.

DERENCINOVIC, Devor, GETOS, Anna-Maria. Cooperation of law enforcement and intelligence agencies in prevention and suppression of terrorism. European perspective. Revue internationale de droit pénal, v. 78, pp. 79-112, 2007.

GALISON, Peter; MINOW, Martha. Our Privacy, Ourselves in the Age of Technological Intrusions. In: ASHBY WILSON, Richard. (Ed.). Human Rights in the 'War on Terror'. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

GALLI, Francesca. The freezing of terrorists’ assets: preventive purpose with a punitive effect. In: GALLI, Francesca; WEYEMBERGH, Anne. (Ed.). Do labels still matter? Blurring boundaries between administrative and criminal law. The influence of the EU. Bruxelas: Editions de l'Université de Bruxelles, 2014.

GLESS, Sabine; RICHTER, Thomas. (Eds.), Do exclusionary Rules Ensure a Fair Trial? A Comparative Perspective on Evidentiary Rules. Londres: Springer, 2019.

HIRSCH, Marianne F. H. Terrorism Causing a Shifting Responsibility in Criminal Pre-Trial Investigation: from Repression to Prevention. In: HIRSCH, Marianne F. H. et al. (Ed.). Shifting Responsibilities in Criminal Justice. Haia: Eleven International Publishing, 2012.

LASAGNI, Giulia. Admisibilidad de pruebas en el procedimiento penal: Lecciones de la jurisprudencia del TJUE en materia de conservación de datos. In: BACHMAIER WINTER, Lorena. (Coord.). Prueba penal y derecho de defensa en la era digital: Nuevos paradigmas y nuevos retos. Madri: Aranzadi, 2024.

LINDEMAN, Joep; LUCHTMAN, Michiel; VAN TOOR, Dave. Admissibility of Evidence in EU Cross-Border Criminal Proceedings: Electronic Evidence, Efficiency and Fair-Trial Rights in the Netherlands. In: BACHMAIER WINTER, Lorena; SALIMI, Farsam. (Ed.) Admissibility of Evidence in EU Cross-Border Criminal Proceedings: Electronic Evidence, Efficiency and Fair Trial Rights. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2024.

MARTÍN MORALES, Ricardo. El principio constitucional de intervención indiciaria. Revista de la Facultad de Derecho de la Universidad de Granada, n. 2, pp. 341-506, 1999.

MARTÍNEZ SANTOS, Antonio Martínez. Conservación, cesión y utilización con fines probatorios de los metadatos derivados de las comunicaciones electrónicas y digitales en el proceso penal. In: BACHMAIER WINTER, Lorena. (Coord.). Prueba penal y derecho de defensa en la era digital: Nuevos paradigmas y nuevos retos. Madri: Aranzadi, 2024.

MITSILEGAS, Valsamis. The Security Union as a paradigm of preventive justice: Challenges for citizenship, fundamental rights and the rule of law. In: CARRERA, Sergio; MITSILEGAS, Valsamis. (Ed.). Constitutionalising the Security Union. Effectiveness, Rule of Law and Rights in Countering Terrorism. Bruxelas: CEPS, 2017.

MURRAY, Daragh; FUSSEY, Pete. Bulk Surveillance in the Digital Age: Rethinking the Human Rights Law Approach to Bulk Monitoring of Communications Data. Israel Law Review, v. 52, n. 1, pp. 31-60, 2019.

OERLEMANN Jan-Jaap; VAN TOOR, Dave. Legal Aspects of the EncroChat Operation: A Human Rights Perspective. European Journal of Crime, Criminal Law and Criminal Justice, v. 30, n. 3-4, pp. 309-328, 2022.

OJANEN, Tuomas. Administrative counter-terrorism measures – a strategy to circumvent human rights in the fight against terrorism?. In: COLE, David; FABBRINI, Federico; VEDASCHI, Arianna. (Ed.). Secrecy, National Security and the Vindication of Constitutional Law. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2013.

OJANEN, Tuomas. Rights-based Review of Electronic Surveillance after Digital Rights Ireland and Schrems in the European Union. In: COLE, David D.; FABBRINI, Federico; SCHULHOFER, Stephen. (Ed.). Surveillance, Privacy and Transatlantic Relations. Oxford: Hart Publishing, 2017

RADEMACHER, Timo. Predictive Policing im deutschen Polizeirecht. Archiv des öffentlichen Rechts, v. 142, n. 3, pp. 366–416, 2017.

RATNER, Steven R. Corporations and Human Rights: A Theory of Legal Responsibility. Yale Law Journal, v. 111, n. 3, pp. 443-545, 2001.

RICH, Michael. Machine learning, automated suspicion, algorithms and the Fourth Amendment. University of Pennsylvania Law Review, v. 164, pp. 870-929, 2016.

SIEBER, Ulrich. Legitimation und Grenzen von Gefährdungsdelikten im Vorfeld von terroristischer Gewalt: eine Analyse der Vorfeldtatbestände im "Entwurf eines Gesetzes zur Verfolgung der Vorbereitung von schweren staatsgefährdenden Gewalttaten". Neue Zeitschrift für Strafrecht, v. 29, n. 7, pp. 353-364, 2009.

SIEBER, Ulrich. Risk prevention by means of criminal law – On the legitimacy of anticipatory offenses in Germany’s recently enacted counter-terrorism law. In: GALLI, Francesca; WEYEMBERGH, Anne. (Eds.), EU counter-terrorism offences: What impact on national legislation and case-law?. Bruxelas: Editions de l’Université de Bruxelles, Bruselas, 2012.

THAMAN, Stephen C. Balancing Truth Against Human Rights: A Theory of Modern Exclusionary Rules. In: THAMAN, Stephen C. (Ed.). Exclusionary Rules in Comparative Law. Londres: Springer, 2013.

WAHL, Thomas. Verwertung von im Ausland überwachter Chatnachrichten im Strafverfahren. Zeitschrift für Internationale Strafrechtsdogmatik, v. 7–8, pp. 452-461, 2021.

WESTIN, Alan. Privacy and Freedom. Nova Iorque: Atheneum, 1967.