00. Aula de Conceitos, Objeto, Teorias e Evolução (Direito Penal) - Parte 1

Summary

This video discusses the legal aspects of environmental crimes in Brazil, focusing on the roles of natural persons and legal entities in such crimes. It explains that legal entities can be convicted even if an individual is not, as the theory of double imputation does not apply. The session further delves into the classification of crimes based on the active subject—common crimes, specific crimes, and self-inflicted crimes. It highlights the importance of understanding the requirements for each type of crime, with practical examples like homicide, embezzlement, and false testimony to illustrate the distinctions.

Takeaways

• 😀 Legal entities (like companies) can be convicted for environmental crimes even if the individuals responsible are not personally held accountable.
• 😀 In Brazil, the theory of double imputation does not apply in environmental crime cases, meaning a legal entity can be convicted independently of the individual's responsibility.
• 😀 Both natural persons (individuals over 18) and legal entities can be the active subjects of a criminal act in environmental crimes.
• 😀 Article 21 of the Environmental Crimes Law outlines the penalties that can be applied to legal entities found guilty of environmental crimes.
• 😀 Common crimes do not require any specific qualities or attributes from the person committing the crime, meaning anyone can commit them (e.g., homicide).
• 😀 Specific crimes require the person committing the act to have a particular quality or status, such as a public servant in the case of embezzlement.
• 😀 A self-inflicted crime can only be committed by someone who possesses a specific quality necessary for that crime (e.g., false testimony can only be committed by a witness).
• 😀 Self-inflicted crimes differ from specific crimes in that they cannot involve co-authorship (multiple people committing the crime together), but they can involve participation.
• 😀 Co-authorship refers to multiple individuals collaborating to commit a crime, while participation involves contributing to the crime in another capacity.
• 😀 The crime of false testimony can only be committed by a witness, making it an example of a self-inflicted crime that requires a specific role for the perpetrator.

Q & A

What is the theory of double imputation in environmental law, and why is it not adopted in Brazil?

The theory of double imputation suggests that both the legal entity and the individual responsible can be held accountable for an environmental crime. However, Brazil does not adopt this theory, meaning a legal entity can be convicted even if the individual responsible is not directly penalized. This is in line with the Brazilian doctrine and jurisprudence, especially as supported by the STJ (Superior Court of Justice).

What is the significance of Article 21 in Brazil's environmental crimes law?

Article 21 of the Environmental Crimes Law outlines the penalties that can be applied to legal entities involved in environmental crimes. This article plays a crucial role in determining the consequences for corporations and other entities found guilty of environmental violations.

Can both natural persons and legal entities be the active subject of an environmental crime in Brazil?

Yes, both natural persons (individuals) and legal entities (such as companies) can be considered the active subjects of an environmental crime. Natural persons must be over 18 years old to be criminally responsible, while legal entities can also be held accountable under specific conditions defined by environmental law.

What is the difference between common crimes and specific crimes?

Common crimes do not require any specific quality or characteristics from the person committing the crime. For example, anyone can commit a homicide. Specific crimes, on the other hand, require the individual to possess certain qualifications or characteristics. For instance, embezzlement requires the perpetrator to be a public servant.

What defines a self-inflicted crime, and how does it differ from a specific crime?

A self-inflicted crime is a crime that can only be committed by someone who possesses a specific quality or status. This differs from a specific crime, which may require a specific characteristic, but does not necessarily exclude others from committing it. An example of a self-inflicted crime is false testimony, which can only be committed by a witness.

Can co-authorship or participation occur in self-inflicted crimes?

No, co-authorship is not possible in self-inflicted crimes because they can only be committed by the specific person with the required quality. However, participation is still possible in such crimes.

What is the active subject in a crime, and how does it relate to criminal responsibility?

The active subject of a crime is the individual or entity that commits the criminal act. In the context of environmental law, both individuals and legal entities can be considered active subjects, though different types of crimes may require different characteristics or qualifications from the perpetrator.

What is an example of a common crime discussed in the lecture?

An example of a common crime mentioned in the lecture is homicide, which can be committed by anyone, as it does not require any specific quality or prerogative from the perpetrator.

How does the lecture differentiate between the crimes of embezzlement and false testimony?

Embezzlement is classified as a specific crime because it requires the perpetrator to be a public servant. False testimony, however, is a self-inflicted crime, as it can only be committed by a witness, making it more restrictive in terms of who can commit it.

Why is the distinction between common, specific, and self-inflicted crimes important in legal classification?

The distinction helps in determining the nature of the crime, who can commit it, and the legal consequences for the perpetrator. Common crimes are open to anyone, specific crimes require specific qualifications, and self-inflicted crimes are restrictive, only allowing individuals with a certain status to commit them. This classification ensures that the right individuals are held accountable based on the nature of the crime.