A COMPETÊNCIA CRIMINAL DA JUSTIÇA ELEITORAL À LUZ DA CONTROVÉRSIA ORIGINÁRIA NOS AUTOS DO INQ. 4.435/DF DO STF.

Abstract

In Brazilian law there is still controversy about the recognition of the competence of the Electoral Justice to process and judge common crimes in connection with electoral crimes. The previous Constitutions (1934, 1946, 1967) and the Criminal Procedure Code (1941) had already forseen the vis attractiva of the specialized court in competence conflicts, as did the Supreme Federal Court, at least since 1978. However, the controversy took proportions in the legal debates after the judgment of the Fourth Regimental Appeal in Inquiry No. 4.435/DF by the Plenary of the Supreme Court. The present study employs the bibliographical methodology, through a detailed analysis of the Supreme Court's jurisprudential precedents and academic and doctrinal productions on the matter, and, notably, through the analysis of the records of INQ. 4.435/DF, the main precursor of the controversy under discussion. In this way, presents the general aspects regarding the rules of delimitation of electoral criminal jurisdiction, and also understands the concept of jurisdiction as a fundamental guarantee in accordance to the principle of the natural judge. It also provides an analysis of the precedents of the Federal Supreme Court on the matter, especially regarding the recent thesis established in Inquiry No. 4.435/DF, which, to date, has generated disagreements in legal and academic environments. Furthermore, it counter-argues the points raised by the General Attorney Office and others, contrary to the winning thesis. In this scenario, it questions the discourse on behalf of the fight against corruption and its reflexes surrounding the issue. Finally, it concludes that, in cases of conflict of competence between the Electoral and Federal Courts to process and judge common crimes in connection with electoral crimes, the first one has legal, institutional and technical legitimacy to process; and that the non-recognition in practice of electoral competence over these cases, brings serious violation of the constitutional principle of the Natural Judge.