153 Judgment on the constitutionality and conventionality of the 1979 Amnesty Law. This article analyses the Brazilian Federal Supreme Court’s (FSC) Non-compliance Action of Fundamental Principle No. Only after decades and an indefatigable effort from researchers, journalists and relatives of the missing dissidents, the Guerrilla was brought to public knowledge. From the 62 people known as victims in those conflicts, the remains of only two of them were found and identified. This struggle became known as the Guerrilha do Araguaia. In 1973, the Guerrilla repression was intensified and the official order turned to eliminate all captured. The military government decided to react, and between April of that year and January 1975 sent troops to occupy the territory and decimate the resistance. In the year 1972, the Communist Party of Brazil (PCdoB) gathered around 90 people in the region of São João do Araguaia, Pará, to fight the Brazilian military dictatorship (1964–1985). Ao final discutimos que parece ter havido o triunfo de Lewis Carrol, na metáfora de inversão de sentidos: quando proteger os direitos humanos passa a ser não proteger os direitos humanos, com criação de uma regra decisória ad hoc, em que “lembrar é esquecer”, e “esquecer é recordar”, desde que, em peculiar Regra nº 42, não se autorizem a investigação e a responsabilização pela prática de crimes de lesa-humanidade. Buscamos inspiração no pensamento de Lola Aniyar de Castro, para quem a criminologia do Século XXI é a “criminologia dos direitos humanos” e o controle penal é o termômetro dos direitos humanos. Analisamos o papel do Supremo Tribunal Federal na (re) construção do “problema criminal” e do “controle penal”, em relação a crimes contra a humanidade perpetrados nos períodos da ditadura argentina (1978-1983) e brasileira (1964-1985). No presente artigo, discutimos dois recentes julgamentos do Supremo Tribunal Federal do Brasil em relação aos crimes praticados durante a ditadura civil-militar: a Arguição de Descumprimento de Preceito Fundamental nº 153 (constitucionalidade da lei de anistia de 1979) e a Extradição nº 1362 (requerimento de extradição de cidadão argentino que foi condenado pelo cometimento de crime de lesa-humanidade durante a ditadura argentina). 42, the investigation and accountability for crimes against humanity are not allowed.
In the last part of this article, we discussed what seems to have been "the triumph of Lewis Carroll", in the metaphor of reversing meanings: when protecting human rights is not to protect human rights, by creating an ad hoc decision-making rule from which "remembering is to forget", and "forgetting is to remember", provided that, from the peculiar Rule n. We take Lola Aniyar de Castro Thought's, seeking some inspiration, for whom the criminology of the 21st Century is the "criminology of human rights", and criminal control would be the thermometer of human rights. We analyze the role of the Brazilian Supreme Court in the (re) construction of the "criminal problem" and "criminal control" in relation to crimes against humanity perpetrated during the periods of the Argentine (1978-1983) and Brazilian (1964-1985) dictatorship. 1362, that discussed the extradition of an Argentine citizen who was convicted of committing crimes against humanity during the Argentine dictatorship). 153 (constitutionality of the 1979 amnesty law), and Extradition suit n. Abstract: In this article we discuss two recent Brazilian Supreme Court judgments about crimes committed during the civil-military dictatorship: Allegation of Disobedience of Fundamental Precept suit n. “The judgment of crimes against humanity in brazil: analysis through the critical criminological lens of Lola Aniyar”, International Journal of Development Research, Vol. Citation: Airto Chaves Junior, Bruno Amaral Machado and Thiago Aguiar de Pádua, 2021.