PRESUMPTION OF INNOCENCE IN HABEAS CORPUS N. 126.292 JUDGED BY STF: DECISION-MAKING STANDARDS AND THE ADVENT OF MANDATORY PRECAUTIONARY PRISON

Abstract

This article intends to discuss the impact caused by the recent interpretation turn from STF about the limits, meaning and reach of the beyond reasonable doubt clause. Starting with the comprehension that the beyond reasonable doubt clause is a principle, from which can be extracted three normative kind (judicial, evidentiary and treatment subprinciples), it was analyzed the “treatment subprinciple”, identifying in the STF decision, a set of arguments that indicates a repressive attitude of the court. Besides, it was verified that those arguments used by judges, are, majoritarily, epistemologically untenable, especially from a democratic criminal procedure view.