Judicial Review of an Approved Non-Prosecution Agreement: Critical Comments on Habeas Corpus No. 969.749/RJ Rendered by the Sixth Panel of the Brazilian Superior Court of Justice
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.12957/redp.2026.92861Abstract
This article offers critical counterpoints to the decision rendered by the Sixth Panel of the Brazilian Superior Court of Justice (STJ) in Habeas Corpus No. 969.749, which held that no challenge may be brought against the judicial decision that approves a non-prosecution agreement (“acordo de não persecução penal”). Based on a literature review and in opposition to that ruling, the article asserts that: (a) although criminal agreements reinforce party autonomy, they remain criminal justice instruments and, as such, cannot be exempt from judicial oversight. Abusive clauses may be accepted by the defendant for various reasons, including coerced or uninformed consent, and empirical research underscores the need to strengthen judicial scrutiny, not limited to first-instance approval; (b) all forms of agreements within Brazilian criminal procedure admit the possibility of judicial challenge, and the lack of a specific statutory appeal against the approval of a non-prosecution agreement does not preclude its contestation through autonomous legal actions (as habeas corpus); (c) the principle of objective good faith does not, even in civil-contractual matters, constitute an abstract bar to judicial review of legal transactions. Drawing on statistical data and case law from the Paraná State Court of Appeals (TJPR) regarding appeals from the approval of “transações penais” (criminal settlements), the article further concludes that: (d) available empirical evidence in analogous cases demonstrates that the existence of judicial review mechanisms does not deter the agreements, and even if it did, discouraging agreements that contain unlawful or abusive provisions is both legitimate and advisable; (e) in practice, challenges to agreements are the exception rather than the rule; (f) even in these exceptional cases, the rate of successful challenges is significant, revealing that judicial approval does not always ensure that the agreement is free from illegality.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Bruno Augusto Vigo Milanez, Vinicius Gomes de Vasconcellos
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Todos os artigos publicados na Revista Eletrônica de Direito Processual (REDP) (Departamento de Direito Processual, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Brasil) são licenciados por meio de uma Licença Creative Commons - Atribuição 4.0 Internacional (CC BY 4.0).
Os autores retêm os direitos autorais de seu artigo e concordam em licenciar seu trabalho com a licença CC BY 4.0, aceitando assim os termos e condições específicos desta licença disponíveis no seguinte website: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/legalcode.
- Os autores concedem à REDP o direito de primeira publicação, de se identificar como publicadora original do trabalho e concedem à revista uma licença de direitos não exclusivos para utilizar o trabalho das seguintes formas: Reproduzir, vender e distribuir cópias eletrônicas ou impressas do manuscrito como um todo, de partes específicas do manuscrito e de suas traduções para qualquer idioma;
- O uso do artigo por terceiros é livre, contanto que a integridade da publicação seja mantida e seus autores originais, periódico de primeira publicação e detalhes de citação sejam identificados.
Dentro dos termos da licença, os autores podem entrar em acordos contratuais adicionais separados para a distribuição não exclusiva da versão publicada do trabalho na revista.
Copyright and Licensing
All articles published in the Procedural Law Electronic Review (REDP) (Department of Procedural Law, State University of Rio de Janeiro, Brazil) are licensed under a Creative Commons License - Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0).
- Authors retain copyright to their article and agree to license their work under the CC BY 4.0 license, thereby accepting the specific terms and conditions of this license available at the following website: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ legal code.
- Authors grant REDP the right of first publication, to identify itself as the original publisher of the work, and grant the journal a non-exclusive license to use the work in the following ways: Reproduce, sell and distribute electronic or printed copies of the manuscript as a whole, of specific parts of the manuscript and its translations into any language;
- Use of the article by third parties is free, as long as the integrity of the publication is maintained and its original authors, first publication journal, and citation details are identified.
Within the terms of the license, authors may enter into separate additional contractual agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the published version of the work in the journal.
