ENTRE A PERICULOSIDADE E A AMEAÇA À ORDEM PÚBLICA: análises de decisões do TJPB desfavoráveis a mulheres acusadas de tráfico de drogas

Abstract

In the last two decades, the number of incarcerated women in Brazil has increased by approximately 412%. In addition, 55% of the women currently imprisoned in Brazil are accused of having committed crimes under the Brazilian Drug Act (BRASIL, 2022a), revealing that these criminal types are primarily responsible for female incarceration and, concomitantly, demonstrating the effects of the "War on Drugs" on women. In this context, the present work had as a general objective to analyze the arguments of the Court of Justice of Paraíba in decisions unfavorable to women accused of drug trafficking. In order to achieve this, the method adopted consisted of bibliographic and documental research. In the first moment a search was made in databases such as Scielo, Periódicos CAPES and Google Scholar, in which materials on female incarceration, women and drug trafficking and other relevant subjects to this monograph were selected. In the second moment, we proceeded with the documental research, in which a search was made in the database of the Court of Justice of Paraíba, and cases of women and drug trafficking were selected alongside the decisions, delivered between 01/01/2022 to 31/12/2022, that were unfavorable to them. As a result, 11 decisions pertinent to the object of this work were found, which were read and analyzed thoroughly. It was found that most of the women were mothers, primary defendants, arrested at home. The drug most seized with them was marijuana and, with the exception of one of these women, all of them were only facing drug trafficking charges. Moreover, of the 11 women who were parties in these cases, 7 were in custody, 3 had already been sentenced, and one was free. The most common arguments used by the judges were: maternal neediness, habitual crime, dangerousness, public order, materiality, and trafficking at home. In other words, the most used arguments focused on the figure of the woman and the crime allegedly committed. On only two occasions did the argumentation touch on technical procedural aspects. It was noted that, as a rule, attachment to legislation only prevails when its application is not favorable to women, so that, in more than one decision the Code of Criminal Procedure was overlooked in Collective Habeas Corpus No. 143.641/SP. Analyzing this information, it was possible to conclude that, many times, there is no compatibility or proportionality between the actions supposedly practiced by the defendants and their personal conditions with the arguments presented by the judiciary and, consequently, its decisions. Thus, it is concluded that the "War on Drugs", operating in a selective manner, has no other interest than the criminalization of the already vulnerable portion of the population, especially women, as a way to manage and contain them.