O direito à não auto-incriminação e as pessoas colectivas empresariais
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30899/dfj.v3i8.484Palavras-chave:
Não auto-incriminação, Pessoas coletivas, Atividade econômica reguladaResumo
O artigo tem a finalidade de oferecer notas sobre a doutrina e jurisprudência com relação ao direito à não auto-incriminação. O foco é a aplicação desse direito em
relações envolvendo pessoas coletivas, especialmente aquelas dedicadas à atividade econômica regulada.
Referências
G. Ray Kolb, Jr. AND William L. Pfeifer, Jr, “Assertion of the Fifth Amendment Privilege Against Self-Incrimination in Civil Proceedings”, 67, The Alabama Lawyer, 2006, 40 ss.
John Fabian Witt, “Making the Fifth: The Constitutionalization of American Self-Incrimination Doctrine, 1791-1903”, 77 Texas Law Review, 1999, 825 ss
Mary Shein, “The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination Under Siege: Asherman v. Meachum”, 59, Brooklyn Law Review, 1993, 503.
Vincent Martin Bonventre, “An Alternative to the Constitutional Privilege Against Self-Incrimination”, 49, Brooklyn Law Review, 1982, 31 ss.
Marc Berger, “Europeanizing Self-Incrimination: The Right to Remain Silent in the European Court of Human Rights”, Columbia Journal of European Law, 12, 2006, p. 339 ss.
Vera Lúcia Raposo, “O Direito a um Processo Equitativo na Jurisprudência do Tribunal Europeu dos Direitos do Homem”, Jurisprudência Constitucional, n.º 11, Julho-Setembro 2006, p. 3 ss.
Constantine Theophilopoulos, “The Anglo-American Privilege Against Self-Incrimination and the Fear of Foreign Prosecution”, Sydney Law Review, 14, 2003
Antônio Magalhães Gomes Filho, Direito à Prova no Processo Penal, RT, item 7, 1997, p.111.
Lochower v. Board of Higher Education of New York City, 350 U.S. 551 (1956).
Pedro Luis de Amaral Marino, “O Dever de Informar e o Direito ao Silêncio”, Direito penal tributário contemporâneo: estudos de especialistas, Cord. Antônio Cláudio Mariz de Oliveira, Dejalma de Campos, São Paulo, 1995
Heloisa Estellita Salomão, “O Direito Humano de Não Cooperar na Própria Incriminação, a Protecção ao Domicílio e a Fiscalização Tributária”, Revista Brasileira de Ciências Criminais, 7, 26, 1999, p. 131
Stephen A. Saltzburg The Required Records Doctrine: Its Lessons for the Privilege Against Self-Incrimination, 53,University of Chicago Law Review, 1986, 6 ss. e 24 ss.
Charles Gardner Geyh, The Testemonial Component of the Right Against Self-Incrimination”, 36, Catholic University Law Review, 1987, 611 ss
Samuel A. Alito, Jr, “Documents and the Privilege Against Self-Incrimination”, 48 University of Pittsburgh Law Review, 1986, 27 ss
Jonathan M. Rund, “McKune V. Lile: Evisceration of the Right Against Self-incrimination Through The Revival of Boyd V. United States”, 12 George Mason Law Review, 2003, 409 ss.
Lucien J. Dhooge, “Human Rights for Transnational Corporations”, Journal of Transnational Law & Policy, 16, Spring 2007, p. 197.
Stephen Bottomley, “From Contractualism to Constitutionalism: A Framework for Corporate Governance”, Sidney Law Review, 17, 1997.
T. Donaldson & T. W. Dunfee, Ties That Bind: A Social Contracts Approach to Business Ethics, 1999
Patricia Nassif Fetzer, “The Corporate Defamation Plaintiff as First Amendment "Public Figure": Nailing the Jellyfish”, Iowa Law Review, 68, 1982, p. 35, 85.
Richard Smith, “Stealing the Good Name of the Company: The Fourth Circuit Strengthens Constitutional Barriers for Corporate Defamation Plaintiffs”, Iowa Journal of Corporation Law, 24, 1999, p. 727 ss
Carl J. Mayer, “Personalizing the Impersonal: Corporations and the Bill of Rights”, Hastings Law Journal, 41, 1990, p. 577, 580 ss.;
Lisa Magee Arent, “A Matter of ""Governing Importance'": Providing Business Defamation and Product Disparagement Defendants Full First Amendment Protection”, Indiana Law Journal, 67, 1992, p. 441
George Ellard, “Making the Silent Speak and the Informed Wary, American Criminal Law Review, 42, 2005, p. 985/991
John F. Lauro, “Protecting Corporate Employees: The Need for a New Bill of Rights”, New York Law Journal, 17, April, 2006, p. 4,
Scott A. Trainor, “ A Comparative Analysis of a Corporation’s Right Against Self-Incrimination”, 18, Fordham International Law Journal, 1995, 2139 ss
Tara J. Radin, “700 Families to Feed: The Challenge of Corporate Citizenship”, Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law, 36, 2003, p. 619 ss.
Peter J. Henning, “Finding What Was Lost: Sorting Out the Custodian's Privilege Against Self-Incrimination from the Compelled Production of Records”, 77, Nebraska Law Review, 1998, 34
Scott Harshbarger, Goutam U. Jois, “Looking Back and Looking Forward: Sarbanes-Oxley and the Future of Corporate Governance”, Akron Law Review, 40, 2007, p. 1
Robert Monks, Nell Minow, Corporate Governance, (3th edition), Malden, 2004
A. Wray, Robert K. Hur, “The State Of Federal Prosecution: Article: Corporate Criminal Prosecution In A Post-Enron World: The Thompson Memo In Theory And Practice”, American Criminal Law Review, 45, 2006, p. 1095
Bharara, Preet, “Corporations Cry Uncle And Their Employees Cry Foul: Rethinking Prosecutorial Pressure On Corporate Defendants”, American Criminal Law Review, 44, 2007, p. 70 ss
Richard A. Bierschbach & Alex Stein, “Overenforcement”, Georgetown Law Journal, 93, 2005, p. 1743.
Philip Joseph, "Self-Incrimination and Retrospectivity", Law Quarterly Review, vol. 120, July 2004, p. 378/382
Lynn Loschin, “A Comparative Law Approach to Corporations and the Privilege Against Self-Incrimination”,30,U.C. Davis Law Review, 1996, 260
New Zealand Law Commission, “The Privilege Against Self-Incrimination”, September Wellington, New Zealand, 1996, p. 60 ss.
New Zealand Apple & Pear Marketing Board v Master & Sons Ltd. [1986] 1 N. Z. L. R. 191, 196.
Trade Practices Commission v Arnotts Ltd (1990) ATPR 41–010; Eccles & Co v Louisville & Nashville Railroad Co [1912] 1 KB 135
Pyneboard [Pyneboard Pty. Ltd. v. Trade Practices Commission (1983) 45 A.L.R. 609] Sorby v. Commonwealth of Australia (1983) 46 A.L.R. 237
Caltex Refining Co Pty Ltd v. SPCC (1991) 25 NSWLR 118, 127.
Norman M. Garland, “The Unavailability to Corporations of the Privilege Against Self-Incrimination: A Comparative Examination Based on EPA v. Caltex, High Court of Australia”, 16 New York Law School Journal of International & Comparative Law, 1996, 55 ss.
Tim Ward, Piers Gardner, “The Privilege against Self-Incrimination: In Search of Legal Certainty”, European Human Rights, Issue 4, 2003, p. 391
Guy Stessens, “The obligation to produce documents versus the privilege against self-incrimination: human rights protection extended too far?”, Human Rights Survey,1997, p. 45/62
Caso Orkem v. Comissão (Case 374/87 [1989] ECR 3283)
GL Carbon AG v Commission, a Decisão do Tribunal de Primeira Instância, de 15 de Junho de 2005, e do TJCE, 2ª secção, Decisão de 29 de Junho de 2006.
Case T-112/98 Mannesmannröhren-Werke v Commission [2001] ECR II-729, paragraphs 66 and 67.
University of Oxford Centre for Competition Law and Policy, The Privilege against Self-Incrimination in Competition Investigations, 27 de Janeiro de 2006
J.J. Gomes Canotilho, Direito Constitucional e Teoria da Constituição, Coimbra, 2003, p. 416 ss.
Pedro Luis de Amaral Marino, “O Dever de Informar e o Direito ao Silêncio”, Direito Penal Tributário Contemporâneo: Estudos de Especialistas, Cord. Antônio Cláudio Mariz de Oliveira, Dejalma de Campos, São Paulo, 1995, p. 11
Frederico da Costa Pinto, “Tendências da Jurisprudência sobre Contraordenações no Âmbito do Mercado de Valores Mobiliário”, Cadernos do Mercado de Valores Mobiliários, 8, Agosto 2000, p. 22-23
Öztürk v. Federal Republic of Germany, App No. 8544/79, ECHR, (1984)
Earl J. Silbert and Demme Doufekias Joannou, “Under Pressure to Catch the Crooks: The Impact of Corporate Privilege Waivers on the Adversarial System”, 43 American Criminal Law Review, 2006, pp. 1225 ss.
Downloads
Publicado
Como Citar
Edição
Seção
Licença
Para acesso ao conteúdo do periódico, favor entrar em contato com:
Editora Fórum
0800 704 3737
vendas@editoraforum.com.br
