Resumo O artigo trata da preclusão na atividade probatória das partes no processo penal, pretendendo responder ao seguinte problema de pesquisa: de que maneira a preclusão pode atingir a atividade probatória das partes no processo penal? Como hipótese, estabeleceu que o princípio da presunção de inocência e o direito à ampla defesa podem afastar as regras de preclusão aplicáveis à atividade probatória desenvolvida pelo acusado no processo penal. A pesquisa foi realizada em três etapas, partindo das normas constitucionais e infraconstitucionais aplicáveis à atividade probatória das partes no processo penal. Primeiramente, o estudo tratou da preclusão em relação ao direito à prova. No segundo momento, descreveu as possíveis hipóteses de preclusão relacionadas à atividade probatória das partes no processo penal. Por último, buscou verificar a possibilidade de ocorrência de preclusão no processo penal e em relação à atividade probatória da pessoa acusada. Adotando as diretrizes do método hipotético-dedutivo e da abordagem explicativa, e a partir do conhecimento teórico já publicado sobre o tema, a pesquisa permitiu concluir que o princípio da presunção de inocência e o direito à ampla defesa apontam para a inaplicabilidade da preclusão em relação à atividade probatória desenvolvida pelo acusado no processo penal. hipótese etapas Primeiramente prova momento último acusada hipotéticodedutivo hipotético dedutivo explicativa tema

Abstract The article deals with the preclusion on the parties’ evidentiary activity in criminal proceedings, in order to answer the following research problem: how can preclusion affect the parties’ evidentiary activity in criminal proceedings? As a hypothesis, it was established that the principle of the presumption of innocence and the right to a broad defense can rule out the rules of preclusion applicable to the evidentiary activity carried out by the accused in criminal proceedings. The research was carried out in three stages, based on the constitutional and infra-constitutional rules applicable to the parties’ evidentiary activity in criminal proceedings. Firstly, the study dealt with the preclusion in relation to the right to evidence. Secondly, it described the possible hypotheses of preclusion related to the parties’ evidentiary activity in criminal proceedings. Finally, it sought to verify the possibility of preclusion occurring in criminal proceedings and in relation to the probative activity of the accused. Adopting the guidelines of the hypothetical-deductive method and explanatory approach, and based on the theoretical knowledge already published about the subject, the research led to the conclusion that the principle of the presumption of innocence and the right to a broad defense point to the inapplicability of preclusion in relation to the evidential activity carried out by the accused in criminal proceedings. parties problem hypothesis stages infraconstitutional infra Firstly evidence Secondly Finally hypotheticaldeductive hypothetical deductive approach subject

ABSTRACT The paper proposes to analyze the principle of opportunity and the criminal procedural principles of innocence and non-self-incrimination in Resolution 327-2014 of the Council of the Judiciary in cases of traffic violations, to examine the judicial means through the which justice operators apply the principle as an alternative within the criminal procedure system. Its objective is to encourage reflection and debate on how legal figures can affect justice and the rights of individuals and how work can be done to guarantee a fair and equitable application of the law. Through bibliographic research, it seeks to analyze the possible impacts of these legal figures in the guarantee of procedural rights. It is concluded that the applied principle is efficient for procedural economy and an alternative means of resolving conflicts between the parties involved and that its incorrect application violates the rights of the accused, in addition to academically training law students, in such a way that they allow us to understand the importance of these principles in guaranteeing the rights of citizens in the criminal process.

RESUMEN En el trabajo se propone analizar el principio de oportunidad y los principios procesales penales de inocencia y no autoincriminación en la Resolución 327-2014 del Consejo de la Judicatura en casos de infracciones de tránsito, con el fin de examinar los medios judiciales a través de los cuales los operadores de justicia aplican el mencionado principio como una alternativa dentro del sistema procesal penal. Tiene como objetivo fomentar la reflexión y el debate sobre cómo las figuras jurídicas pueden afectar la justicia y los derechos de las personas y cómo se puede trabajar para garantizar una aplicación justa y equitativa de la ley. A través de la investigación bibliográfica, se busca analizar los posibles impactos de estas figuras jurídicas en la garantía de los derechos procesales. Se concluye que el principio aplicado es eficiente para la economía procesal y un medio alternativo de solucionar los conflictos entre las partes implicadas y que su incorrecta aplicación vulnera los derechos del procesado, además de formar académicamente a los estudiantes de Derecho, de tal forma que les permite comprender la importancia de estos principios en la garantía de los derechos de los ciudadanos en el proceso penal.

Resumen El presente artículo expone los argumentos que edificó la Corte Constitucional a la hora de revisar la acción pública de inconstitucionalidad que se presentó en contra del parágrafo 1 del artículo 8 de la Ley 1843 de 2017.La importancia de identificar la estructura argumentativa de la Corte Constitucional, permite entender de qué manera los presupuestos rectores del derecho fundamental al debido proceso son vinculantes, al momento de impedir que la extensión de la solidaridad en el pago de una sanción pecuniaria derivada del uso de las cámaras de fotodetección, ponga en riesgo la aplicación del principio de responsabilidad individual, la imputación, la tipicidad y la debida defensa.

Abstract This article sets out the arguments built by the Constitutional Court when reviewing the public action of unconstitutionality filed against paragraph 1 of Article 8 of Law 1843 of 2017. The importance of identifying the argumentative structure of the Constitutional Court, allows understanding how the guiding assumptions of the fundamental right to due process are binding, when preventing the extension of solidarity in the payment of a pecuniary sanction derived from the use of photodetection cameras, jeopardizing the application of the principle of individual responsibility, imputation, typicality and due defense.

Resumo Este artigo apresenta os argumentos construídos pelo Tribunal Constitucional ao rever a ação pública de inconstitucionalidade apresentada contra o parágrafo 1 do artigo 8 da Lei 1843 de 2017. A importância de identificar a estrutura argumentativa do Tribunal Constitucional, nos permite compreender como são vinculativas as premissas norteadoras do direito fundamental ao devido processo, ao impedir a extensão da solidariedade no pagamento de uma penalidade financeira derivada do uso de câmeras foto detetoras, colocando em risco a aplicação do princípio da responsabilidade individual, imputação, criminalidade e devida defesa.

Resumo Em razão da centralidade do princípio da presunção de inocência nos sistemas constitucionais democráticos, diversos tribunais constitucionais têm buscado, nos mais diversos quadrantes e a partir do recurso a diferentes metodologias, desenvolver parâmetros que tornem eficaz a dimensão do princípio ligada à exigência de que a condenação criminal esteja fundada em certo nível de certeza probatória. Para que o princípio da presunção de inocência desempenhe sua função de garantia, alguns tribunais constitucionais desenvolveram o standard da prova “para além da dúvida razoável”. A jurisprudência constitucional estrangeira deu passos significativos na superação do uso meramente retórico da categoria da prova “para além da dúvida razoável”, atribuindo-lhe significado normativo mais denso e operativo. Alguns tribunais constitucionais – e.g. Tribunal Constitucional da Espanha e Corte Constitucional da Colômbia – têm procurado tutelar essa dimensão do princípio da presunção de inocência por meio da exigência, por um lado, de comprovação da culpa para além de qualquer dúvida razoável e, por outro, da obrigatoriedade de valoração integral do conjunto probatório e de motivação lógica e racional acerca desses elementos probatórios.

Abstract Because the presumption of innocence is a fundamental principle for democratic-constitutional systems, several constitutional courts have sought, in the most diverse ways and using various methodologies, to develop parameters to ensure that criminal convictions are grounded on a certain level of evidentiary certainty. To perform the protective function of the principle of presumption of innocence, some constitutional courts have developed the “beyond a reasonable doubt” standard of proof. Constitutional courts in different countries have taken significant steps in overcoming the merely rhetorical use of “beyond a reasonable doubt”, assigning a more dense and operative normative meaning to this standard. Some constitutional courts – e.g. Constitutional Court of Spain and Constitutional Court of Colombia – seek to protect the presumption of innocence by demanding not only the burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but also requiring full assessment of the evidence and logical and rational motivation regarding the evidence.

Abstract Lo scritto propone una riflessione che prende le mosse dalla funzione tradizionalmente assegnata alle misure cautelari, di prevenzione di specifici rischi endoprocedimentali. Se, infatti, la libertà dell’accusato è la regola, prima dell’accertamento definitivo della sua colpevolezza, la custodia cautelare – come strumento estremo di limitazione della libertà personale – non può che essere l’assoluta eccezione, in costante tensione con la presunzione di innocenza. Pertanto, il difficile bilanciamento tra contrapposti interessi – presunzione di innocenza e svolgimento del processo – sfocia, a tutte le latitudini, nella necessità di fornire ampia e convincente motivazione alle decisioni cautelari. Quali gli strumenti per raggiungere tale obiettivo? Il lavoro pone in relazione la tradizionale soluzione delle presunzioni legali (di pericolosità) e i più recenti strumenti di risk assessment digitale per la valutazione del rischio di recidivanza e comportamento violento, in un parallelo che mette in relazione l’ordinamento italiano e quello statunitense.

Abstract The paper focuses on the traditional purpose of pre-trial detention (and other precautionary measures) to prevent specific risks. While liberty is the rule, before conviction, pre-trial detention is an absolute exception, competing with the opposite principle of the presumption of innocence: providing valuable and accurate justification for balancing the interest to prevent risk with the presumption of innocence is an overarching difficulty for judges, in the whole western world. Which the solutions? The paper reflects and compares the traditional solution of legal presumptions with the newer trend of actuarial assessment tools, based on psycho-criminological theories, based on the Italian and the US federal systems.

ABSTRACT This research is based on the idea of preparing university law students on the correct use of the principle of innocence in traffic crimes with injuries. In order to deal with the subject, it is supported by a set of methodological actions that are an ideal vehicle to increase the theoretical and methodological knowledge of the students. The following methods were used: inductive - deductive, analytical - synthetic, systemic at the theoretical level, within the empirical ones are the survey, scientific observation, in addition descriptive and inferential statistics were used. The objective is to design a set of methodological actions for the preparation of university law students on the application of the principle of innocence in traffic crimes with injuries. From the results obtained in the present investigation, the effectiveness of the proposal was confirmed with a significance level of p 000.

RESUMEN En la presente investigación se parte de la idea de preparar a los estudiantes universitarios de la carrera de derecho sobre el correcto empleo del principio de inocencia en los delitos de tránsito con lesiones. Para tratar el tema, se apoya en un conjunto de acciones metodológicas que son un vehículo idóneo para elevar el conocimiento teórico y metodológico de los estudiantes. Se utilizaron los siguientes métodos: del nivel teórico el inductivo - deductivo, analítico -sintético, sistémico, dentro de los empíricos se encuentran la encuesta, observación científica, además se empleó la estadística descriptiva e inferencial. Se expone como objetivo diseñar un conjunto de acciones metodológicas para la preparación de estudiantes universitarios de la carrera de derecho sobre la aplicación del principio de inocencia en los delitos de tránsito con lesiones. A partir de los resultados obtenidos en la presente investigación, se pudo constatar la efectividad de la propuesta con un nivel de significación p 000.

Resumen El presente artículo analiza la preocupación de la Unión Europea por armonizar los ordenamientos procesales de los Estados miembros en torno al derecho a la presunción de inocencia en el ámbito del debido proceso de ley. El artículo realiza una breve comparación entre el estado de la cuestión en el proceso penal español y el contenido de la Directiva 2016/343/UE.

Abstract This article analyzes the European Union concern to harmonize the procedural regulations of the member states regarding the right to the presumption of innocence in the field of due process of law. The article makes a brief comparison between the state of the matter in the Spanish criminal process and the content of Directive 2016/343/ EU.

ABSTRACT The paper presents a rational reconstruction of the regulation of so called “revision action”, established in the Chilean Penal Procedural Code, that rests upon a characterization of the criminal trial as a context of impure and imperfect procedural justice. Upon this basis, it is explained how that regulation is indicative of a commitment to a “principle of asymmetrical valuation” of the risk of a substantively unjust decision. After offering a systematization of the five legally acknowledged revision grounds, the paper closes with a double disambiguation of the procedurally relevant notion of innocence.

RESUMEN El trabajo presenta una reconstrucción racional de la regulación de la acción de revisión, plasmada en el Código Procesal Penal, que se sustenta en una caracterización del proceso penal como un contexto de justicia procedimental impura e imperfecta. Sobre esta base se explica cómo la regulación de la revisión es indicativa de un compromiso con un “principio de valoración asimétrica” del riesgo de una decisión sustantivamente injusta. Después de ofrecer una sistematización de las cinco causales de revisión legalmente previstas, el artículo se cierra con una doble desambiguación de la noción procesalmente relevante de inocencia.

Settler innocence is the primary organising principle of Israel's space production. To construct themselves as innocent political actors, oppressors disavow, justify, and deny their responsibility for oppression. The rhetoric of settler innocence allows Israel, a settler colonial state responsible for the dispossession and military occupation of Palestine, to present itself as the "only democracy in the Middle East". In this article, I perform a visual analysis of the Zoological Center Tel Aviv-Ramat Gan and the Jerusalem Biblical Zoo to examine how zoos, inherently violent colonial institutions, reproduce settler innocence. Entrenched in Israel's national projects of linking modernity and Biblical antiquity, zoos naturalise settlers, normalise indigenous displacement, and obscure colonial violence.

ABSTRACT With the objective of analyzing the vulnerability of the principle of due process in the Ecuadorian abbreviated criminal procedure, a descriptive research of a bibliographical review type was developed with a qualitative approach, based on the methods: historical-logical, documentary, exegetical and analytical-synthetic. Among the main findings found are: limitation of the faculty of the defendant to accept said procedure until the evaluation and preparatory hearing of the trial; non-observance of the right to non-self-incrimination, violation of the presumption of innocence that imposes the burden of proving guilt to the accused and ignores the guarantees of mandatory prosecution and criminal action. In addition, the principle of procedural immediacy is breached.

RESUMEN Con el objetivo de analizar la vulnerabilidad del principio del debido proceso en el procedimiento penal abreviado ecuatoriano se desarrolló una investigación descriptiva de tipo revisión bibliográfica con enfoque cualitativo, sustentada en los métodos: histórico-lógico, revisión documental, exegético y analítico-sintético. Entre los principales hallazgos encontrados se significan: limitación de la facultad del acusado de acoger dicho procedimiento hasta la audiencia de evaluación y preparatoria del juicio; inobservancia del derecho a la no autoincriminación, violación de la presunción de inocencia que impone la carga de probar la culpabilidad a quien acusa e ignora las garantías de obligatoriedad de juicio y de la acción penal; además, se incumple el principio de inmediación procesal.

In terms of the prosecuting policy of the National Prosecuting Authority reasons for the exercise of prosecutorial discretions should be furnished on request of persons with a legitimate interest in the decisions. In general only the broad reasons should be provided and not the specific particulars of the decision. This approach is based on two important policy considerations. The first is that the decisions of the prosecuting authority should be transparent since it is a requirement for upholding the legality principle. The second is that the furnishing of specific particulars could result in a violation of the rights of individuals, for example it could create doubt about the innocence of a person without him or her ever having been subjected to a criminal trial. This contribution investigates issues such as the nature of the duty to provide reasons for prosecutorial decisions, the identification of the parties that are entitled to the reasons for a particular prosecutorial decision, and the furnishing of reasons in order to enhance the judicial review of prosecutorial decisions.