Instead of bridges, walls: rediscovering Pontes de Miranda's relevant ideas in the field of criminal procedure

Abstract

This research is justified to make Pontes de Miranda's contributions to criminal procedure accessible, as they are often obscured by technological and editorial barriers. The central problem is formulated as follows: why do Pontes de Miranda's ideas on criminal procedure, despite being current and relevant, remain little known among criminal proceduralists? The hypothesis is that this invisibility stems not from theoretical obsolescence, but from a lack of digital accessibility and the predominance of foreign references in doctrine. The objective is to critically analyze Pontes de Miranda's main concepts on criminal procedure, such as the nature of criminal action, the distinction between inquisitorial and accusatory systems, the defense of habeas corpus and equality of arms, relating them to democratic values and contemporary debates. The method of approach adopted is hypothetical-deductive, using a bibliographic review, with a rereading of Pontes de Miranda's central works, in addition to a comparison with authors such as Carnelutti, Liebman, Aury Lopes Jr., and Jacinto Coutinho. It is concluded that Pontes de Miranda anticipates discussions, revealing commitment to fundamental guarantees and the containment of punitive power, so that his rediscovery is essential to strengthen a democratic criminal process.