Descentralização da competência penal e os impactos do PLP n° 215/2019 no sistema criminal brasileiro: uma análise entre a autonomia federativa e a preservação da segurança jurídica.

Abstract

The present work aims to analyze the proposal contained in Complementary Bill No. 215/2019, authored by Federal Deputy Lucas Redecker, which seeks to expand—through decentralization—the legislative competence in criminal and criminal procedural matters to the States and the Federal District, examining its possible social and legal impacts within the context of Brazilian federalism. To begin with, the study turns to the historical and theoretical analysis of federalism, emphasizing the process of division of powers adopted in Brazil, and further highlights the centralizing form that prevails in the current model, in which the Union holds—exclusively—the competence to legislate on Criminal and Criminal Procedural Law. Moreover, the objective consists in analyzing to what extent the process of criminal decentralization can be considered viable in addressing the crisis of the Brazilian criminal system, and whether the Bill is formally supported by the Federal Constitution. In addition, the methodology adopted consists of bibliographic research in specialized legal doctrine, the analysis of academic works, as well as the examination of case law related to the subject The study concludes that Complementary Bill No. 215/2019 presents itself as an alternative in the face of the State’s inefficiency in combating crime, as well as prison overcrowding, but its approval faces relevant constitutional limitations, given that normative uniformity—especially in the sphere of criminal and criminal procedural law—is recognized as an essential condition for maintaining legal certainty and equality among citizens. Furthermore, it is highlighted that legislative decentralization in the criminal and criminal procedural spheres may lead to normative fragmentation and regional inequality in the protection of fundamental rights and guarantees, even though it may bring advantages by bringing lawmaking closer to local issues.Thus, this work concludes that, although the proposal is innovative and guided by legitimate purposes—namely, adapting norms to the specificities of each State and consequently reducing the national criminal system crisis—it proves to be more problematic than beneficial, suggesting that reforms of this nature should seek to improve the criminal system within the current federative model, thereby preserving national normative coherence, legal certainty, and preventing existing inequalities from worsening.