Have you ever heard of "Crab Ruling"?
The purpose of saying something was done without actually doing it is the Crab Ruling (Despacho Caranguejo)! Thus, you get the impression that something is being done—there is even a certain volume of documentation—but in reality, when analyzing the Time and Space that comprises that content, the perception is that nothing is being done or, in fact, it is being undone so that another effect may become a reality.
For a very current practical example, we have the "CLEZÃO" case: a Political Prisoner with several comorbidities declared even by the "MIDDLE-GROUND" Prosecutor General's Office (PGR), and yet, despite all the warnings... the Executioner Magistrate (according to recognized international complaints) remained silent, refusing to grant permission for medical care without the precariousness of the Prison System, which acts as the Holder of all Authority as the Executor of Sentences in a Privatistic manner! In other words: Political Prisoners under torture and flagrantly stripped of Civil and Human Rights! One only needs to read the case files and their anti-constitutionality in failing to individualize sentences—an anti-democratic innovation, anti-Constitution, anti-active legislator, anti-legal, illegal, and performed immorally or amorally! Anti-Natural!
This is the most absurd case since the Genocidal atrocities of Socialism in the world — Stalin, Fidel, Hitler, Mao, Chavez, Maduro, Lula, etc.
The definition of torture and the violation of rights regarding political prisoners are central themes of International Law and the protection of Human Rights. To understand these concepts, it is necessary to analyze UN norms and Brazilian legislation.
1. Definition of Torture
According to the UN Convention against Torture (1984), ratified by Brazil, torture is defined by three main elements:
Intentional Act: Deliberate infliction of severe pain or suffering, whether physical or mental.
Specific Objective: To obtain information or confessions, to punish for a committed or suspected act, to intimidate or coerce, or for reasons based on any type of discrimination.
State Agent: Practiced by a public official or another person acting in an official capacity, or by their instigation/consent.
Note: In Brazil, Law No. 9,455/97 expands this definition, classifying as torture the suffering caused to anyone under custody or authority (punishment-torture), regardless of whether the perpetrator is a public agent.
2. What defines a Political Prisoner?
Although there is no single treaty defining "political prisoner," the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and organizations like Amnesty International use clear criteria. An individual is considered a political prisoner when:
The detention is imposed for purely political reasons (opinion, opposition, belief).
The judicial process is clearly unfair or arbitrary.
The duration or conditions of detention are disproportionate to the alleged crime.
The detention occurs in a discriminatory manner compared to other citizens.
3. Breach of Rights
The imprisonment of a political prisoner accompanied by torture triggers a chain reaction of violations in multiple spheres:
Civil and Human Rights
Right to Physical and Mental Integrity: Torture is the ultimate negation of this fundamental right.
Prohibition of Cruel, Inhuman, or Degrading Treatment: In addition to direct torture, poor prison conditions (hunger, cold, isolation) violate this principle.
Due Process of Law: Frequently, political prisoners are deprived of a full defense, access to lawyers, and impartial trials.
Political Rights
Freedom of Expression and Opinion: Political imprisonment aims to silence dissent and critical thinking.
Freedom of Association: The breach occurs when individuals are arrested for belonging to parties, unions, or social movements.
Electoral Capacity: Often, the goal is to remove the person from the electoral stage or prevent their participation in the nation's public life.
Summary of Violations
| Category | Right Violated | Example in Practice |
| Human | Human Dignity | Use of physical or psychological violence. |
| Civil | Freedom of Movement | Arbitrary arrest without legal grounds or use of innovations not authorized by the Constitution with new practices aimed at punishing political foes. |
| Political | Political Pluralism | Persecution based on ideology or criticism of the government. |
This video presents a legal analysis of the fundamental rights of persons deprived of their liberty, essential for understanding the limits of state power and the protection of human dignity in the prison system.
Prisoner rights and State limits.
Yes, legally and from a Human Rights perspective, the described situation can be configured as a de facto death penalty (or "veiled" death penalty), in addition to constituting the crime of torture by omission.
Although the Brazilian Constitution prohibits the death penalty (except in case of declared war), the State has a "duty of custody." When the State assumes responsibility for an individual and, deliberately or through gross negligence, denies access to essential health care for the maintenance of life, it is applying an unofficial death sentence.
Below, I detail the legal foundations that support this statement:
1. Torture by Omission and Degrading Treatment
The Torture Law (Law 9,455/97) and international treaties (such as the New York Convention) establish that subjecting someone under your custody to intense physical or mental suffering is torture.
The denial of medical assistance to an elderly person with a critical health history (such as a survivor of an attempted murder) imposes suffering equivalent to physical torture.
If the omission is used as a punishment or to "let them die," it becomes a tool of extra-legal state execution.
2. Violation of the Statute of the Elderly and Specific Rights
The Statute of the Elderly (Law 10,741/2003) criminalizes the conduct of "refusing, delaying, or hindering care or failing to provide health assistance, without just cause, to an elderly person" (Art. 100).
Elderly people in prison possess reinforced protection. Brazilian jurisprudence (STF and STJ) understands that if the prison cannot offer adequate and immediate medical treatment, the imprisonment must be converted into humanitarian house arrest.
3. The "White Death Penalty"
In humanitarian law, the term "White Execution" or "Veiled Death Penalty" refers to the act of placing the detainee in such conditions that death is the inevitable result, without a direct execution (like a firing squad).
Denial of Active Medical Team: Preventing access to doctors who already treat the patient and know the complexity of their clinical condition is a deliberate interruption of life support.
Qualified Failure to Render Aid: If the omission results in death, the public agent may be held liable for homicide (intentional or negligent) or torture followed by death.
Table: Rights Violated in the Described Scenario
| Right Violated | Legal Basis | Impact |
| Right to Life | Art. 5, caput, CF/88 | The State fails to protect the life of someone under its custody. |
| Physical Integrity | Art. 5, III, CF/88 | The pain of lack of treatment is treated as torture. |
| Dignity of the Person | Foundation of the Republic | The elderly person is treated as an object, not as a subject of rights. |
| Health Assistance | Art. 14 of the LEA | The State is obliged to provide preventive and curative medical assistance. |
Urgent Next Legal Steps
If this case is real and current, the applicable urgent measures in the Brazilian legal system include:
Habeas Corpus with a Request for Preliminary Injunction: For immediate transfer to a hospital or the granting of house arrest for health reasons.
Complaint to the Public Defender's Office and the Public Prosecutor's Office: For immediate inspection of the prison unit.
Petition to the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR): Should national instances fail to act promptly.
Would you like me to draft a model for legal argumentation based on the principle of human dignity to support a request for urgent medical assistance?
The scenario you describe configures a grave legal anomaly called a "Court of Exception" or an "Inquisitorial Process," where the figures of the accuser and the judge merge. When a magistrate accumulates the functions of victim and executioner, there is a breach of the Principle of Impartiality, which is the pillar of any Democratic State of Law.
In International Law and legal doctrine, this situation is classified as arbitrary detention and a specific death penalty by omission.
1. The Breach of the Accusatory System
The Brazilian Constitution and the Pact of San José, Costa Rica, establish the Accusatory System. When a judge acts as "victim and judge," we have:
Impediment and Bias: The judge loses the necessary neutrality. Acting in a process where one considers oneself a victim is a cause for the absolute nullity of all procedural acts.
Privatistic Incarceration: If the imprisonment does not follow legal rites and is maintained by the personal or political interest of the judge, it ceases to be state custody and becomes, technically, institutionalized kidnapping or false imprisonment under the cloak of authority.
2. The "White Execution" of an Ill Elderly Person
Keeping an elderly survivor of an attempted homicide in prison, denying them the medical team that keeps them stable, is not just an administrative failure; it is a commissive act by omission.
Intentionality: By knowing that the deprivation of the doctor will lead to death or irreversible damage and yet maintaining the restriction, the judge assumes eventual intent (dolo eventual) — they assume the risk and accept the resulting death.
Disguised Death Penalty: Since the law prohibits direct execution, biopolitics is used: vital support (medical) is withdrawn until the body collapses from "natural causes," masking a State murder.
3. Violations of International Norms (Mandela Rules)
The United Nations Standard Minimum Rules for the Treatment of Prisoners (The Mandela Rules) are clear:
Rule 24: The State is responsible for providing health care free of charge and of the same standard available to the general population.
Rule 27: Urgent cases requiring specialized treatment must be transferred to civilian institutions or specialized hospitals.
Rule 45: Prolonged isolation or the deprivation of medical assistance to persons with disabilities or serious health conditions is prohibited and amounts to torture.
4. Extrajudicial and International Avenues
When the internal system (Judge, Court, and higher instances) proves inert or complicit in partiality, the legal path is exhausted at the national level, leaving the instances of International Public Law:
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (OAS): One can request an Urgent Precautionary Measure due to the imminent risk of death. The IACHR has the power to demand that the Brazilian State guarantee the prisoner's physical integrity under penalty of international sanctions.
National Council of Justice (CNJ): Representation for abuse of authority and breach of functional duty (LOMAN), aiming for the removal of the magistrate who declares themselves both "victim" and "judge."
International Criminal Court (Rome Statute): In extreme cases of systematic political persecution and torture, this can be reported as a Crime Against Humanity (Article 7).
Legal Summary of the Situation
"Where the judge is a party, justice ceases to exist to give way to state vengeance."
The denial of medical access to a survivor of an attack is a form of continued torture. If internal measures have failed, the internationalization of the case is the technical step to break the prisoner's legal isolation.
Would you like to know how to structure a formal complaint for international bodies or how to activate human rights control bodies in Brazil (such as the CNDH)?
26-12-2025
Nenhum comentário:
Postar um comentário