Ambivalências e contradições no âmbito do controle do ato infracional : uma visão panorâmica

Abstract

There have been major changes in orientation in the field of crime control and punishment since the late 70s of the twentieth century, especially in the United States of America and Britain. These are changes that do not involve a total break with the paradigms of traditional criminal policy that still exists, which are grounded in the liberal tradition of human rights and focused on rehabilitation of offenders. From that period on, however, other elements that constitute criminal policy began to manifest, guided by the following characteristics: the management of groups considered at risk; special attention to the interests of victims, a significant increase in community participation in the fight against crime; the politicization of the legislative initiatives and the upgrading of prison as a form of neutralization. Such changes can also be seen in Latin American countries like Brazil, but with intensity and force of its own. The persistence of traditional features of criminal policy in a social space where there is also the manifestation of other elements constitutes an ambivalent and contradictory overview in the field of crime control and punishment, marked by discourses and practices that have humanitarian and liberal characteristics as well as by the criminal upsurge. The thesis that guides this work is that these changes in orientation have also been occurring in the context of control of the offense originated from the implementation and deepening of neoliberalism in the country. Therefore, their effects also fall on the juvenile offender. This situation is problematic because the direction of the change calls into life and action programs, projects and discourses of control of the most repressive offenses, which may cause even more pain and suffering to the young offenders who suffer from their intervention, besides contributing to the strengthening of existing inequalities and exclusion. They constitute public policy that is contrary to proposals for inclusion and socio-education brought by the Children Act and ignore the specifics of the rights of children and adolescents