PERSECUÇÃO PENAL SOB O PRISMA DO EVENTUAL DESESTÍMULO A SUA ADESÃO

Abstract

The present article aims to develop reflections on the requirement of confession in the Non-Prosecution Agreement (ANPP) and to examine how this requirement may act as a discouraging factor for adherence. This is a relevant issue within the context of negotiated justice, as the ANPP is presented as a mechanism aimed at reducing bureaucracy and decreasing litigation in the Brazilian criminal justice system. By conditioning the agreement on the formal confession of the investigated party, it becomes necessary to analyze to what extent this requirement compromises adherence to the instrument, especially considering the potential use of the confession against the defendant if the agreement is not fulfilled. Regarding methodology, the research is conducted through the deductive method, using a qualitative approach to explore the effects of confession in the ANPP. It is applied research, aimed at understanding the practical implications of confession as a fundamental element for the agreement. The study is descriptive and based on a literature review of books and scientific articles that address different perspectives on the role of confession. By analyzing various positions on confession and its possible use against the defendant outside the agreement's context, this work highlights that the confession obtained within the scope of the ANPP should be restricted to the agreement and cannot be used as evidence against the defendant in other procedural stages. Thus, it is argued that the confession should be preserved within the specific context of the ANPP, ensuring greater legal certainty and encouraging adherence.