O tribunal do júri como uma instituição constitucional e a relativização da soberania dos veredictos

Abstract

The present monograph has the objective to study the Court of Jury as an Constitutional Institution and about which legal unfolds are caused by the relativization of the sovereignty of its verdicts in front of the Constitutional Institution and Criminal Procedure. Initially, it will be realized a brief historical effort, leaving the origin of the Popular Court at the foreign law until reachs Brazil and consolidate as a guarantee and fundamental law at 1988 Federal Constitution, specifically at the article 5º, paragraph XXXVIII. The Court of Jury is a special organization, integral of the Judicial Power of first instance, which belongs the common justice, that constitute instrument of exaltation of the Democratic State of Law, making possible the exercise of the popular citizenship at the context of the Jurisditional Power of the State. In front of the procedural changes that comes with the promulgation of the law number 11.689/2008, the Jury currently presents the staggered rite, composed by two different phases which are: : I) judicium accusationis ; II) judicium causae. Besides, it is governed by a group of constitutional principles, inserted at the article 5º, paragraph XXXVIII,CF/88, among which the focus was given to the Verdicts Sovereignty Principle, which impose that the decisions expressed by the Popular Court can not be replaced for another decision written by a different Jurisdictional Organization. However, the work concluded that, prioritizing the harmonious coexistence with the others constitutional and procedural principles and guiding of the Jury and components of the legal system, the sovereignty of the verdicts, at specifically circumstances, it will should suffer relativization process. It is discussed the resource of appeal as a legal instrument of mitigation of its sovereignty, mainly at the occurrence of decisions manifestly opposite to the evidences of the court. At the end, is realized a proposition of other legal solutions, with the pretension of conferring greater effectiveness to the second degree decisions of the Jury, without the adhesion of such mechanisms results in affront to the Sovereignty of the Verdicts.