AUDIÊNCIAS DE CUSTÓDIA E OS DESAFIOS ENFRENTADOS PARA SUA IMPLEMENTAÇÃO: EXPERIÊNCIA DA 2ª VARA DO TRIBUNAL DO JÚRI DE JOÃO PESSOA/PB

Abstract

Every arrested person has the fundamental right to be brought before a judicial authority within 24 hours of their arrest, in order to verify the occurrence of mistreatment or torture, as well as to prevent illegal detentions, through immediate control, applying less severe precautionary measures when possible. This procedure is called a custody hearing, which is the subject of this research, particularly the analysis of the difficulties faced in its implementation, through the experience of the 2nd Jury Court of João Pessoa/PB. After 23 years without regulation, this procedural institute was only implemented in Brazil in 2015, with a significant legislative delay, following the judgment of ADPF nº 347 by the Supreme Federal Court (STF), which determined compliance with the American Convention on Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, received in Brazil in 1992, after recognizing the "Unconstitutional State of Affairs," leading to the emergence of CNJ Resolution nº 213/2015, which guided judges and courts in the conduct of these hearings. Subsequently, other regulations on the subject emerged, such as Law nº. 13,964/2019 and the judgment of Constitutional Complaint nº. 29,303 by the STF, in addition to state resolutions that determine the rules for the implementation of these presentation hearings at the state level, such as Paraíba State Resolution nº. 14 of April 20, 2016, nº 14 of December 14, 2017, and nº 48 of December 19, 2022. Using the methodology employed in the research, including the study of relevant regulations and jurisprudence, it was possible to empirically analyze custody hearings that took place between April and December 2022 in the 2nd Jury Court of João Pessoa/PB, with the aim of identifying whether the implementation of these presentations was in accordance with legal requirements. By employing pre-established criteria, the profile of the judicial unit under study was assessed as positive, based on the analyzed data, although some shortcomings were detected in the conduct of these procedural acts, such as the non-presential presentation of the detainee, the failure to investigate allegations of mistreatment, and the absence of a multidisciplinary team and the production of a social report to assist the judge in making decisions regarding pretrial detention.