A legítima defesa dos agentes de segurança pública: uma análise histórico-legislativa sobre as implicações do excesso de punições por policiais militares, entre os anos de 2019 e 2024

Abstract

This research addresses the complex intersection between police violence in Brazil and the concept of self-defense applied to public security agents, with a critical focus on the implications of Bills No. 882/19 and No. 733/22. The central objective is to analyze the discourse of these bills, which aim to modify the 1940 Penal Code to incorporate the concept of excusable self-defense for police officers, in addition to comparing their legal treatment compared to the civilian population. The justification for this analysis lies in the growing public debate on police lethality and the indispensable accountability for deviant behavior. To achieve this general purpose, three specific objectives were defined: first, contextualize police violence in Brazil, identifying its typologies, indices, and motivations; second, explore the conceptualization and historical evolution of self-defense, including the types of excess, with a focus on distinguishing its application for civilians and public security agents; and, finally, analyze the discourse of the bills to understand their implications for addressing punishable excess of self-defense in the national legal context. The methodology employed is a dialectical approach, predominantly using sociological, historical, and comparative methods to analyze the causes and consequences of police violence, trace the evolution of self-defense, and contrast the legal treatment of civilians and military personnel, as well as the bills in question. The research techniques included bibliographic and documentary analysis, as well as an analysis of the discourses behind the bills. The study concludes that Bills 882/19 and 733/22 are inadequate to the Brazilian reality, since, although the legislative proposals seek to improve the legal security of officers, in their current form, they could set dangerous precedents for impunity