1
N5-v3 Supremo Tribunal Federal 9 de fevereiro de 2021
Essa pesquisa foi realizada em bases de dados bases de jurisprudecircncia e
publicaccedilotildees nacionais e internacionais conforme referecircncias indicadas
Todas as decisotildees recuperadas relacionadas ao objeto de pesquisa satildeo
aqui inseridas e natildeo refletem necessariamente a posiccedilatildeo do STF Caso natildeo
encontrado precedentes especiacuteficos acerca do tema de interesse termos
mais abrangentes satildeo utilizados Nessa pesquisa os casos foram listados
por ordem alfabeacuteticas dos paiacuteses nos quais foram encontradas decisotildees a
respeito do tema nas cortes constitucionais ou oacutergatildeos internacionais Os
principais termos de busca utilizados foram legally obtained evidence to
be admitted into evidence exceptions to the fruit-of-the-poisonous-tree doctrine (fruits doctrine) attenuation
doctrine exclusionary rule admissibility of hacked or leaked evidence piece of illegal evidence that benefits the
accused Caso natildeo encontrados precedentes especiacuteficos acerca do tema de interesse termos mais abrangentes
satildeo utilizados A breve descriccedilatildeo do entendimento resulta da anaacutelise de decisotildees em geral em idioma
estrangeiro de modo que a fidelidade agraves fontes poderaacute ser aferida no inteiro teor
ADMISSIBILIDADE DA PROVA ILIacuteCITA1
Aacutefrica do Sul
Singh e outros v S (2016) Suprema Corte de Apelaccedilatildeo da Aacutefrica do Sul Operaccedilatildeo
secreta conduzida pelo serviccedilo de poliacutecia da Aacutefrica do Sul sequestro e assalto a
caminhotildees nas rodovias exclusatildeo de provas apenas se tornarem o julgamento injusto
ou de outra forma prejudicial agrave administraccedilatildeo da justiccedila
Beacutelgica
1392011 Corte Constitucional da Beacutelgica ldquoIt is not contrary to the Convention that
illegally obtained evidence in criminal matters can withstand being deemed null and void
unless under certain circumstances eg where its use infringes the right to a fair
hearing (hellip)According to Court of Cassation case-law the fact of evidence having been
obtained illegally does not necessarily result in the evidence having to be discarded
According to this case-law there are three cases when such evidence must not be
examined 1 where the evidence has been obtained in breach of the formalities
prescribed on pain of nullity 2 where the irregularity committed has undermined the
credibility of the evidence itself and 3 where the use of such evidence is incompatible
with a fair hearing (hellip)rdquo
1 Admissibilidade de provas iliacutecitas em Cortes Constitucionais (Colocircmbia Itaacutelia Espanha Portugal Franccedila
Alemanha) Supremas Cortes (Estados Unidos Canadaacute Meacutexico Israel Iacutendia) e Tribunais Internacionais Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos Corte Europeia de Direitos Humanos Tribunal de Justiccedila da Uniatildeo Europeia Corte Internacional de Justiccedila Tribunal Africano dos Direitos do Homem
2
Canadaacute
Hogan v R [1975] 2 SCR 574 Suprema Corte do Canadaacute ldquoCriminal LawmdashMotor
VehiclesmdashBreathalizermdashRefusal of right to counselmdashAdmissibility of certificate of
analysismdashCriminal Code ss 235 236 237mdashCanadian Bill of Rights s 2(c)(ii)
The car driven by the appellant had swerved over the sidewalk and was stopped by a
constable who in conversation with the appellant noticed a strong smell of alcohol on
his breath blood shot eyes and a flushed face He then gave him a breathaliser demand
The appellant at the police station asked to speak to his lawyer before taking the test
This request was refused and the appellant was given the alternative of either providing
the breath sample forthwith or being charged with refusing to provide a breath sample
The appellant then submitted to the test which indicated a reading of 230 milligrams of
alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood At trial the certificate of analysis was admitted in
evidence and the appellant convicted of driving with a blood alcohol level greater than
008 contrary to s 236 of the Criminal Code The conviction was affirmed by the Appeal
Division
Held (Spence and Laskin JJ dissenting) The appeal should be dismissedrdquo
Colocircmbia
Auto 22707 Corte Constitucional da Colocircmbia ldquoSOLICITUD DE NULIDAD SENTENCIA
DE LA CORTE CONSTITUCIONAL [T-233 de 2007 proferida por la Sala Quinta de Revisioacuten
de Tutelas de la Corte Constitutional]-Oportunidad por presentacioacuten dentro de los tres
diacuteas siguientes a la notificacioacuten NULIDAD SENTENCIAS DE TUTELA PROFERIDAS POR
SALAS DE REVISION-Criterios de procedencia SOLICITUD DE NULIDAD SENTENCIA DE LA
CORTE CONSTITUCIONAL-Desconocimiento precedente en materia de prueba iliacutecita y
nulidad del proceso judicial PRECEDENTE JURISPRUDENCIAL-Prueba obtenida con
violacioacuten del debido proceso DERECHO COMPARADO-Prueba iliacutecita y nulidad del
proceso judicial JURISPRUDENCIA-Prueba iliacutecita no contamina el resto del material
probatoriordquo
SU 159 (2002) Corte Constitucional da Colocircmbia Acusaccedilatildeo e sentenccedila criminal processo iniciado a partir de notiacutecia divulgada via gravaccedilatildeo obtida de forma ilegal ldquoLa exclusioacuten del proceso penal de una grabacioacuten telefoacutenica iliacutecita y violatoria del derecho a la intimidad constituye una aplicacioacuten correcta del artiacuteculo 29 inciso uacuteltimo de la Constitucioacuten y la existencia y la divulgacioacuten periodiacutestica de dicha grabacioacuten no vician todo el procedimiento ni contaminan todo el acervo probatorio asiacute eacutesta haya sido elemento integral de la noticia criminis siempre que la resolucioacuten de acusacioacuten y la
3
sentencia condenatoria se hayan fundado en pruebas separadas independientes y autoacutenomas de eacutesta y suficientes para demostrar la ocurrencia de la conducta tiacutepica y la responsabilidad penal del procesadordquo Casos relevantes sobre valoraccedilatildeo da prova da Corte Constitucional da Colocircmbia SU-15902 C-59105 C-115405 T-05706 C-21007 T-23307 A227 DE 2007 T-59009
Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos
Lori Berenson Mejiacutea v Peru (2004) Detenccedilatildeo e posterior julgamento por tribunal militar
com restriccedilotildees a direito de defesa ilegalidade probatoacuteria afirmada como decorrecircncia
do reconhecimento da violaccedilatildeo das garantias do juiz natural natildeo reconhecimento da
imprestabilidade da prova prova transposta do juiacutezo militar ao juiacutezo comum
Corte Internacional de Justiccedila
Corfu Channel (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v Albania) 1949
Canal de Corfu responsabilidade estatal por danos no mar doutrina da passagem
inocente documento obtido em violaccedilatildeo do territoacuterio do oponente premissas
diplomaacuteticas regra excludente violaccedilatildeo de soberania territorial ldquoInternational Court
of Justice (ICJ) triggered debates on the existence of an lsquoexclusionary rulersquo in
international lawrdquo2 [Case Summary]
Admissibility of Hacked or Leaked Emails
Caratube International Oil Company LLP v The Republic of Kazakhstan case ldquoIn a more
recent case involving the Kazakhstan government the tribunal reached an admissibility
decision that could come to be seen as a watershed The arbitral tribunal basically stated
that documents protected by legal professional privilege cannot be admitted as
evidence but others could be Caratube International Oil Company and American-
national Devincci Salah Hourani who were suing Kazakhstan over the alleged seizure of
their oil exploration and production rights wanted leaked documents that were now
publicly available due to the WikiLeaks page to be considered by the tribunal as
evidencerdquo 3
2 Fallah Sara Mansour The Admissibility of Unlawfully Obtained Evidence before International Courts and
Tribunals In The Law amp Practice of International Courts and Tribunals Online Publication Date 26 Aug 2020 In Volume 19 Issue 2 Pages 147-176 Disponiacutevel em
httpsbrillcomviewjournalslape192article-p147_2xmlref_FN000143 3 Ortiz Ricardo Calvillo Admissibility of Hacked Emails as Evidence in Arbitration May 14 2018 Disponiacutevel em
httpsblogslawnyuedutransnational201805admissibility-of-hacked-emails-as-evidence-in-arbitration_ftn21
4
Conoco Phillips Case4 ldquoAfter issuing the award the tribunal had to deal with new
evidence presented due to information available in WikiLeaks This case concerned the
expropriation of oil and gas assets by the Venezuelan government Conoco Phillips
claimed that Venezuela illegally forced it to cede its majority holding in certain oil and
gas projects and was unwilling to negotiate fair compensation for the governmentrsquos
taking The tribunal found that Venezuela breached its obligation to negotiate in good
faith in order to reach an acceptable settlement between the parties After the award
was issued Venezuela sent a letter to the tribunal contesting this decision in which
Venezuela requested a new hearing to address the ruling on lack of good faith
Specifically the letter cited new evidence obtained via WikiLeaks including
communications between diplomatic officials in the United States Embassy in Caracas
and Conoco Phillipsrsquo executives discussing the Venezuelan governmentrsquos offer to
compensate the company for expropriation using market value standards instead of
their previous offer of book value Venezuela argued that this contradicted the tribunalrsquos
conclusion that Venezuela negotiated in bad faith Ultimately however the tribunal
addressed neither the merits nor the admissibility question raised by this evidence
instead it found that it did not have the power to reconsider its decision However one
of the arbitrators issued a dissenting opinion which relied on the revelations contained
in the WikiLeaks cables effectively opening a new window by considering leaked
information as evidence in an arbitration procedurerdquo5
Estados Unidos
Kansas v Ventris 556 US 586 (2009) ldquoWhether evidence obtained in violation of
constitution guarantees while otherwise inadmissible at trial can be admitted for
purposes of impeachment of a witnesss testimony depends upon the nature of the
constitutional guarantee that is violated When the constitutional guarantee against
compelled self-incrimination is violated it may not be admitted at trial for any purpose
including impeachment of witness testimony When the constitutional guarantee
against unreasonable searches and seizures is violated the admissibility of the evidence
thereby obtained for purposes of impeachment of witness testimony is a question to be
decided by a balancing of the competing interests rather than an automatic exclusion
Evidence obtained in violation of the constitutional right to counsel is not automatically
inadmissible for all purposes while inadmissible for purposes of affirmatively proving
guilt it may be admitted for purposes of witness impeachment because the need to
prevent perjury and to assure the integrity of the trial process outweigh the perceived
deterrent effect on police officersrdquo [Resumo]
4 Idem 5 Ortiz Ricardo Calvillo Admissibility of Hacked Emails as Evidence in Arbitration May 14 2018 Disponiacutevel em
httpsblogslawnyuedutransnational201805admissibility-of-hacked-emails-as-evidence-in-arbitration_ftn21
5
Wikileaks
Bryana Bible v United Student Aid Funds Inc (2015) Tribunal de Apelaccedilatildeo dos Estados
Unidos da Ameacuterica do Seacutetimo Circuito Documentos e evidecircncias liberados por terceiros
no WikiLeaks admissatildeo das provas informaccedilotildees em domiacutenio puacuteblico acessiacuteveis sem
dificuldades indevidas (notiacutecias)
Exceccedilotildees agrave teoria do fruit of the poisonous tree6
dissipation of taint
Murray v United States 487 US 533 480 (1988) Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos
ldquoldquoThe exclusionary rule prohibits introduction into evidence of tangible materials seized
during an unlawful search Beyond that the exclusionary rule also prohibits the
introduction of derivative evidence both tangible and testimonial that is the product of
the primary evidence or that is otherwise acquired as a result of the unlawful search up
to the point at which the connection with the unlawful search becomes acuteso attenuated
as to dissipate the taintrdquo7
Independent source
Segura v United States 468 US 796 (1984) A teoria da fonte independente ldquoremete agrave
inaplicabilidade da teoria do fruit of the poisonous tree nos casos em que a prova deriva
de uma fonte diversa da maculada pelo viacutecio da ilicitude Ela foi o fundamento da
manutenccedilatildeo de condenaccedilatildeo de indiviacuteduo que teve seu domiciacutelio ilicitamente invadido
por policiais e quando estes estavam no local outros policiais ali chegaram munidos de
competente mandado e lograram apreender drogasrdquo 8
Inevitable discovery
Nix v Williams 467 US 431 (1984) ldquoA teoria da descoberta inevitaacutevel eacute semelhante agrave
da fonte independente com a diferenccedila de a prova jaacute ter sido obtida de maneira iliacutecita
mas se chega agrave conclusatildeo que ela teria sido certamente descoberta licitamente eg
pelo segundo grupo de policiais que ao dar cumprimento agrave mandado judicial descobre
6 Para Thiago de Filippo as trecircs limitaccedilotildees agrave fruits doctrine parecem ter sido adotadas pelo Brasil por meio da Lei
116902008 que alterou a redaccedilatildeo do art 157 do Coacutedigo de Processo Penal (Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016)
7 Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016
8 Idem
6
que os objetos iliacutecitos jaacute foram apreendidos pelo primeiro grupo de policiais que invadiu
o domiciacutelio sem que tivessem obtido a competente ordemrdquo 9
Franccedila
Acoacuterdatildeo n 1119 (2020) Tribunal de Cassaccedilatildeo da Franccedila Cacircmara Social Demissatildeo de
empregado maacute conduta envio de informaccedilotildees a empresa concorrente dados contidos
no processamento de dados do empregado produccedilatildeo de provas que satildeo ilegais sob a
Lei de Proteccedilatildeo de Dados natildeo satildeo sistematicamente inadmissiacuteveis em processos
judiciais (notiacutecias)
Iacutendia
Ukha Kolhe v State of Maharashtra Supreme Court of India 1963 1963 AIR 1531 1964
SCR (1) 926 ldquoIn this case the police had fixed a tape-recording instrument to a telephone
with the consent of only one of the parties to record the conversation however the
other side contended that the tape-recorded conversation had been procured through
illegal means In this background it was held that lsquoeven if evidence is illegally obtained
it is admissiblersquordquo10
Poorna Mal v Director of Inspection of Income Tax (Investigation) Supreme Court of
India 1974 (1975 AIR 67 1975 SCR (2) 104) A Corte decidiu que ldquowhile ruling on the
question of admissibility of material seized in a search alleged to be vitiated by illegality
the Court held that lsquounless there is an express or necessary implied prohibition in the
Constitution or other law evidence obtained as a result of illegal search or seizure is not
liable to be shut outrsquordquo11
State of MP through CBI v Paltan Mallah Supreme Court of India 2005 ldquoIn India the
evidence obtained under illegal search is not completely excluded unless it has caused
serious prejudice to the accused The discretion has always been given to the court to
decide whether such evidence is to be accepted or notrdquo (hellip) lsquoThe general provisions
given in the Criminal Procedure Code are to be treated as guidelines and if at all there is
9 Idem 10 Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should lsquoendsrsquo justify the
lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-tree-doctrine-should-
the-ends-justify-the-means 11 Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should lsquoendsrsquo justify the
lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-tree-doctrine-should-
the-ends-justify-the-means
7
any minor violation still the court can accept the evidence and the courts have got
discretionary power to either accept it or reject itrsquordquo
Casos em que a Suprema Corte da Iacutendia natildeo admitiu prova ilegalmente obtida por
exercer um fator injusto ao acusado Umesh Kumar v State of AP Selvi v State of
Karnataka KS Puttaswamy v Union of India
Israel
CrimA 512198 Suprema Corte de Israel (High Court of Justice) 2006 ldquoEvidence may
be deemed inadmissible in criminal cases due to the manner in which it has been
obtained if two conditions are met simultaneously The evidence must have been
obtained illegally and admitting it in the trial must have a significant negative impact on
the accuseds rights to a fair trial Illegally obtained evidence can be excluded if admitting
it in the trial would violate the fairness of the proceedings in a substantial way for an
improper purpose and to an excessive degree This balancing formula is to be applied at
the discretion of the court in each individual case taking into account three main points
The first point is the nature and severity of the illegality involved in obtaining the
evidence The second is the influence of the illegality on the evidence ie whether it
makes the evidence less credible and whether the evidence exists independently from
the illegality Finally courts should consider the social benefit or harm that would result
from exclusion Here the primary concerns are the usefulness of the evidence and the
seriousness of the crime of which the defendant stands accusedrdquo
Meacutexico
Amparo Directo en Revisioacuten 38862013 Suprema Corte de Justiccedila da Naccedilatildeo do Meacutexico Geolocation without judicial warrant ndash ldquoIn this criminal case the First Chamber decided on the limits of the right to privacy and private communications The defendant argued that the use of geolocation of the phone of the victim should be dismissed as evidence in the trial in which he stood accused for kidnapping because on the one hand the victim had not authorized to reveal private communications and on the other hand this had been done without judicial warrant In a 3 to 2 decision the Court found that when there is a criminal investigation in which there is reasonable suspicion of a real and imminent danger for the victim the right to protect private communications is inapplicable Accordingly in cases in which the authority has reason to believe there is a real and imminent danger then it can require without judicial warrant telecommunication companies for private communications in which the victim had intervened In all other cases the Court considered a judicial authorization is required to allow the police to access private communications for criminal investigationsrdquo 12
12 Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-Clough Center 2016
Global Review of Constitutional Law (August 3 2017) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough Center 2016 Global Review of
8
Reino Unido
Wikileaks
R v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs ex parte Bancoult (No 2)
[2008] ldquoNa Inglaterra em 2017 a Suprema Corte admitiu por unanimidade a
admissibilidade de documentos sigilosos vazados publicamente no conhecido episoacutedio
Wikileakrdquo13
Repuacuteblica Checa
Judgment No III UacuteS 407117 of 31 July 2018 - Eligibility of secret recording of court
deliberation as evidence
ldquoIn a criminal matter the defendant challenged the impartiality of one of the judges
deciding his case based on an unauthorized recording of deliberation of the judicial
panel In the recording the judge made offensive remarks about the defendant and his
attorney The challenge was denied by appellate court based on the fact that the
recording was made without knowledge of the judges and was therefore inadmissible
as evidence CC recognized that there is between the right to a fair trial of the defendant
and the right to privacy of the judge and conducted the test of proportionality to balance
them It noted that the recording might have contained parts where the judicial panel
was deliberating andor voting and this type of information is confidential However
such information was not part of the evidence during the determination of impartiality
of the judge because the judgersquos comments were definitely not part of deliberations or
voting of the panel CC concluded that the recording could not be excluded from
evidence on this basis It understood the recording as a piece of valuable information
concerning the impartiality of the judge and stated that in this particular situation there
were no other possible pieces of evidence of similar information value that would
interfere in a lesser amount with the judgersquos right to privacy According to the CC
without the recording the right to a fair trial of the defendant would be almost
impossible to enforce effectively while the intensity of interference with the right to
privacy of the judge was minor because the judgersquos remarks were made during the
decision-making process Also the CC noted that the recording effectively cast doubt on
the objective element of judicial independence the public trust in independent
decision-making of that particular judge in this case was diminished For this reason
Constitutional Law ISBN 9780692925164 Published by the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy Available at SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3014378
13 Breda Juliano Admissibilidade processual das mensagens reveladas pelo The Intercept Conjur 8 de fevereiro de 2021 Disponiacutevel em httpswwwconjurcombr2021-fev-08breda-admissibilidade-processual-mensagens-interceptfbclid=IwAR1Aua12oOez-QqCARt2Kl0CyrfbgbCqmLgTNRC_t2AtqJ07cSJEP64zO58_ftnref5
9
the CC concluded that the previous decisions infringed the defendantrsquos right to a fair
trial and annulled themrdquo14
Suiacuteccedila
Decisatildeo 4A_362 (2013) Supremo Tribunal Federal Suiacuteccedilo Gravaccedilatildeo de viacutedeo obtido
ilegalmente sentenccedila natildeo violaccedilatildeo de poliacuteticas puacuteblicas Idem 4A_448 (2013)
Tribunal de Justiccedila da Uniatildeo Europeia
Persia International Bank plc v Council of the European Union (2013) Poliacutetica externa e
de seguranccedila medidas restritivas contra o Iratilde prevenir proliferaccedilatildeo nuclear
congelamento de fundos admissatildeo de documentos apresentados oriundos do
Wikileaks natureza possivelmente ilegal direitos de defesa direito agrave proteccedilatildeo judicial
eficaz
Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos
Gaumlfgen v Germany ldquoTorture or inhuman treatment or threats of the same may not be
used even in situations where there is a risk to the life of an individual Where evidence
is obtained as a result of prohibited methods of investigations such as to constitute a
breach of Article 3 ECHR Article 6 ECHR will only be infringed if the evidence is relied on
for a conviction Failure to exclude evidence obtained following a confession extracted
by means of inhuman treatment does not constitute a breach of the right to a fair trial
if that failure had no bearing on the conviction and sentence or on the overall fairness
of the trialrdquo
NN e TA v Beacutelgica (2008) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Divoacutercio correspondecircncias trocadas entre esposo e outro provas no processo natildeo enquadramento das regras de sigilo profissional documentos trazidos aos autos natildeo os torna puacuteblicos tendo em vista as restriccedilotildees de acesso aos arquivos do caso Jalloh v Alemanha (2006) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Preso por traacutefico de drogas recusa em tomar um emeacutetico para regurgitar o que havia engolido provas obtidas agrave forccedila e usadas contra o peticionaacuterio intervenccedilatildeo meacutedica forccedilada deve ser convincentemente justificada sobre os fatos de um caso especiacutefico escrutiacutenio rigoroso de todas as circunstacircncias circundantes autoridades devem demonstrar que levaram em conta meacutetodos alternativos de recuperaccedilatildeo das evidecircncias LL v Franccedila (2007) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Divoacutercio decisatildeo menciona relatoacuterio meacutedico confidencial documento meacutedico utilizado em base
14 Idem paacuteg 82
10
secundaacuteria e mesma soluccedilatildeo poderia ter sido alcanccedilada sem o referido relatoacuterio15 (nota)
15 Na decisatildeo recorrida (Tribunal de Cassaccedilatildeo francecircs) a Corte ldquoafirmou que a ilegalidade das provas sob a Lei de
Proteccedilatildeo de Dados natildeo deve levar sistematicamente a sua decisatildeo inadmissiacutevelrdquo (notiacutecias)
11
Referecircncias
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law (November 26 2020) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy U of Texas Law Public Law Research
Paper No 727 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 934 Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3736382
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law (October 18 2019) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy (2019) U of Texas Law Public Law
Research Paper No 711 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 921 Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3471638 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3471638
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law (July 19 2018) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy FSU College of Law Public Law
Research Paper No 888 U of Texas Law Public Law Research Paper Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3215613 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3215613
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law (August 3 2017) The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 9780692925164 Published by
the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3014378
Breda Juliano Admissibilidade processual das mensagens reveladas pelo The Intercept
Conjur 8 de fevereiro de 2021 Disponiacutevel em httpswwwconjurcombr2021-fev-08breda-
admissibilidade-processual-mensagens-interceptfbclid=IwAR1Aua12oOez-
QqCARt2Kl0CyrfbgbCqmLgTNRC_t2AtqJ07cSJEP64zO58_ftnref5
Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should
lsquoendsrsquo justify the lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-
tree-doctrine-should-the-ends-justify-the-means
CHAVARRIacuteA Ana Belem Garciacutea La Prueba en la Funcioacuten Jurisdiccional de la Corte
Interamericana de Derechos Humanos Corte Nacional de Direitos Humanos Meacutexico 2016
Fallah Sara Mansour The Admissibility of Unlawfully Obtained Evidence before International
Courts and Tribunals In The Law amp Practice of International Courts and Tribunals Online
Publication Date 26 Aug 2020 In Volume 19 Issue 2 Pages 147-176
12
Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees
acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos
Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016
GUTIEacuteRREZ Juan Felipe Saacutenchez e outros Flexibilizacioacuten probatoria y equidad propuestas para
la justicia del posconflicto Universidad Santo Tomaacutes Via inveniendi et iudicandi vol 14 n 1
2019
JAIN NITYA Can an Arbitral Tribunal Admit Evidence Obtained through a Cyber-Attack
Kluwer Arbitration Blog 2019
MOURA Maria Thereza Rocha de Assis e outros Provas Iliacutecitas e o Sistema Interamericano de
Proteccedilatildeo dos Direitos Humanos Relatoacuterio - Brasil 2009 Biblioteca Juriacutedica Virtual del Instituto
de Investigaciones Juriacutedicas de La Universidad Nacional Autoacutenoma de Meacutexico
PAUacuteL Aacutelvaro Admissibility of evidence before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
Revista Direito da Fundaccedilatildeo Getuacutelio Vargas vol 13 n 2 2017 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscielobrscielophpscript=sci_arttextamppid=S1808-24322017000200653
TORRES CHEDRAUI Ana Mariacutea An analysis of the exclusion of evidence obtained in violation
of human rights in light of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights Tilburg
Law Review v 15 p 205-234 2011 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwresearchgatenetpublication286237562_An_analysis_of_the_exclusion_of_evid
ence_obtained_in_violation_of_human_rights_in_light_of_the_jurisprudence_of_the_Europe
an_Court_of_Human_Rightslink601533fb45851517ef26bde9download
Bases de Dados e de Jurisprudecircncia
Base de Decisotildees do Sistema Juriacutedico da Iacutendia ndash Kanoon Disponiacutevel em httpsindiankanoonorg Base de Jurisprudecircncia da Comissatildeo de Veneza (Codices - Infobase on Constitution Case Law of the Venice Commission) Disponiacutevel em httpwwwcodicescoeintNXTgatewaydllf=templatesampfn=defaulthtm Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos Disponiacutevel em httpswwwcorteidhorcrindexcfmlang=en Tribunal Constitucional Federal da Alemanha Disponiacutevel em httpswwwbundesverfassungsgerichtdeSiteGlobalsFormsSucheENEntscheidungensuche_Formularhtmlnn=5403310ampfacettedYear=2020amplanguage_=en Suprema Corte do Canadaacute Disponiacutevel em httpsscc-csccacase-dossierinfosearch-recherche-engaspx Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos da Ameacuterica Disponiacutevel em httpswwwsupremecourtgovopinionsopinionsaspx
13
Secretaria de Altos Estudos Pesquisas e Gestatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Coordenadoria de Difusatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Jurisprudecircncia Internacional
2
Canadaacute
Hogan v R [1975] 2 SCR 574 Suprema Corte do Canadaacute ldquoCriminal LawmdashMotor
VehiclesmdashBreathalizermdashRefusal of right to counselmdashAdmissibility of certificate of
analysismdashCriminal Code ss 235 236 237mdashCanadian Bill of Rights s 2(c)(ii)
The car driven by the appellant had swerved over the sidewalk and was stopped by a
constable who in conversation with the appellant noticed a strong smell of alcohol on
his breath blood shot eyes and a flushed face He then gave him a breathaliser demand
The appellant at the police station asked to speak to his lawyer before taking the test
This request was refused and the appellant was given the alternative of either providing
the breath sample forthwith or being charged with refusing to provide a breath sample
The appellant then submitted to the test which indicated a reading of 230 milligrams of
alcohol per 100 millilitres of blood At trial the certificate of analysis was admitted in
evidence and the appellant convicted of driving with a blood alcohol level greater than
008 contrary to s 236 of the Criminal Code The conviction was affirmed by the Appeal
Division
Held (Spence and Laskin JJ dissenting) The appeal should be dismissedrdquo
Colocircmbia
Auto 22707 Corte Constitucional da Colocircmbia ldquoSOLICITUD DE NULIDAD SENTENCIA
DE LA CORTE CONSTITUCIONAL [T-233 de 2007 proferida por la Sala Quinta de Revisioacuten
de Tutelas de la Corte Constitutional]-Oportunidad por presentacioacuten dentro de los tres
diacuteas siguientes a la notificacioacuten NULIDAD SENTENCIAS DE TUTELA PROFERIDAS POR
SALAS DE REVISION-Criterios de procedencia SOLICITUD DE NULIDAD SENTENCIA DE LA
CORTE CONSTITUCIONAL-Desconocimiento precedente en materia de prueba iliacutecita y
nulidad del proceso judicial PRECEDENTE JURISPRUDENCIAL-Prueba obtenida con
violacioacuten del debido proceso DERECHO COMPARADO-Prueba iliacutecita y nulidad del
proceso judicial JURISPRUDENCIA-Prueba iliacutecita no contamina el resto del material
probatoriordquo
SU 159 (2002) Corte Constitucional da Colocircmbia Acusaccedilatildeo e sentenccedila criminal processo iniciado a partir de notiacutecia divulgada via gravaccedilatildeo obtida de forma ilegal ldquoLa exclusioacuten del proceso penal de una grabacioacuten telefoacutenica iliacutecita y violatoria del derecho a la intimidad constituye una aplicacioacuten correcta del artiacuteculo 29 inciso uacuteltimo de la Constitucioacuten y la existencia y la divulgacioacuten periodiacutestica de dicha grabacioacuten no vician todo el procedimiento ni contaminan todo el acervo probatorio asiacute eacutesta haya sido elemento integral de la noticia criminis siempre que la resolucioacuten de acusacioacuten y la
3
sentencia condenatoria se hayan fundado en pruebas separadas independientes y autoacutenomas de eacutesta y suficientes para demostrar la ocurrencia de la conducta tiacutepica y la responsabilidad penal del procesadordquo Casos relevantes sobre valoraccedilatildeo da prova da Corte Constitucional da Colocircmbia SU-15902 C-59105 C-115405 T-05706 C-21007 T-23307 A227 DE 2007 T-59009
Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos
Lori Berenson Mejiacutea v Peru (2004) Detenccedilatildeo e posterior julgamento por tribunal militar
com restriccedilotildees a direito de defesa ilegalidade probatoacuteria afirmada como decorrecircncia
do reconhecimento da violaccedilatildeo das garantias do juiz natural natildeo reconhecimento da
imprestabilidade da prova prova transposta do juiacutezo militar ao juiacutezo comum
Corte Internacional de Justiccedila
Corfu Channel (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v Albania) 1949
Canal de Corfu responsabilidade estatal por danos no mar doutrina da passagem
inocente documento obtido em violaccedilatildeo do territoacuterio do oponente premissas
diplomaacuteticas regra excludente violaccedilatildeo de soberania territorial ldquoInternational Court
of Justice (ICJ) triggered debates on the existence of an lsquoexclusionary rulersquo in
international lawrdquo2 [Case Summary]
Admissibility of Hacked or Leaked Emails
Caratube International Oil Company LLP v The Republic of Kazakhstan case ldquoIn a more
recent case involving the Kazakhstan government the tribunal reached an admissibility
decision that could come to be seen as a watershed The arbitral tribunal basically stated
that documents protected by legal professional privilege cannot be admitted as
evidence but others could be Caratube International Oil Company and American-
national Devincci Salah Hourani who were suing Kazakhstan over the alleged seizure of
their oil exploration and production rights wanted leaked documents that were now
publicly available due to the WikiLeaks page to be considered by the tribunal as
evidencerdquo 3
2 Fallah Sara Mansour The Admissibility of Unlawfully Obtained Evidence before International Courts and
Tribunals In The Law amp Practice of International Courts and Tribunals Online Publication Date 26 Aug 2020 In Volume 19 Issue 2 Pages 147-176 Disponiacutevel em
httpsbrillcomviewjournalslape192article-p147_2xmlref_FN000143 3 Ortiz Ricardo Calvillo Admissibility of Hacked Emails as Evidence in Arbitration May 14 2018 Disponiacutevel em
httpsblogslawnyuedutransnational201805admissibility-of-hacked-emails-as-evidence-in-arbitration_ftn21
4
Conoco Phillips Case4 ldquoAfter issuing the award the tribunal had to deal with new
evidence presented due to information available in WikiLeaks This case concerned the
expropriation of oil and gas assets by the Venezuelan government Conoco Phillips
claimed that Venezuela illegally forced it to cede its majority holding in certain oil and
gas projects and was unwilling to negotiate fair compensation for the governmentrsquos
taking The tribunal found that Venezuela breached its obligation to negotiate in good
faith in order to reach an acceptable settlement between the parties After the award
was issued Venezuela sent a letter to the tribunal contesting this decision in which
Venezuela requested a new hearing to address the ruling on lack of good faith
Specifically the letter cited new evidence obtained via WikiLeaks including
communications between diplomatic officials in the United States Embassy in Caracas
and Conoco Phillipsrsquo executives discussing the Venezuelan governmentrsquos offer to
compensate the company for expropriation using market value standards instead of
their previous offer of book value Venezuela argued that this contradicted the tribunalrsquos
conclusion that Venezuela negotiated in bad faith Ultimately however the tribunal
addressed neither the merits nor the admissibility question raised by this evidence
instead it found that it did not have the power to reconsider its decision However one
of the arbitrators issued a dissenting opinion which relied on the revelations contained
in the WikiLeaks cables effectively opening a new window by considering leaked
information as evidence in an arbitration procedurerdquo5
Estados Unidos
Kansas v Ventris 556 US 586 (2009) ldquoWhether evidence obtained in violation of
constitution guarantees while otherwise inadmissible at trial can be admitted for
purposes of impeachment of a witnesss testimony depends upon the nature of the
constitutional guarantee that is violated When the constitutional guarantee against
compelled self-incrimination is violated it may not be admitted at trial for any purpose
including impeachment of witness testimony When the constitutional guarantee
against unreasonable searches and seizures is violated the admissibility of the evidence
thereby obtained for purposes of impeachment of witness testimony is a question to be
decided by a balancing of the competing interests rather than an automatic exclusion
Evidence obtained in violation of the constitutional right to counsel is not automatically
inadmissible for all purposes while inadmissible for purposes of affirmatively proving
guilt it may be admitted for purposes of witness impeachment because the need to
prevent perjury and to assure the integrity of the trial process outweigh the perceived
deterrent effect on police officersrdquo [Resumo]
4 Idem 5 Ortiz Ricardo Calvillo Admissibility of Hacked Emails as Evidence in Arbitration May 14 2018 Disponiacutevel em
httpsblogslawnyuedutransnational201805admissibility-of-hacked-emails-as-evidence-in-arbitration_ftn21
5
Wikileaks
Bryana Bible v United Student Aid Funds Inc (2015) Tribunal de Apelaccedilatildeo dos Estados
Unidos da Ameacuterica do Seacutetimo Circuito Documentos e evidecircncias liberados por terceiros
no WikiLeaks admissatildeo das provas informaccedilotildees em domiacutenio puacuteblico acessiacuteveis sem
dificuldades indevidas (notiacutecias)
Exceccedilotildees agrave teoria do fruit of the poisonous tree6
dissipation of taint
Murray v United States 487 US 533 480 (1988) Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos
ldquoldquoThe exclusionary rule prohibits introduction into evidence of tangible materials seized
during an unlawful search Beyond that the exclusionary rule also prohibits the
introduction of derivative evidence both tangible and testimonial that is the product of
the primary evidence or that is otherwise acquired as a result of the unlawful search up
to the point at which the connection with the unlawful search becomes acuteso attenuated
as to dissipate the taintrdquo7
Independent source
Segura v United States 468 US 796 (1984) A teoria da fonte independente ldquoremete agrave
inaplicabilidade da teoria do fruit of the poisonous tree nos casos em que a prova deriva
de uma fonte diversa da maculada pelo viacutecio da ilicitude Ela foi o fundamento da
manutenccedilatildeo de condenaccedilatildeo de indiviacuteduo que teve seu domiciacutelio ilicitamente invadido
por policiais e quando estes estavam no local outros policiais ali chegaram munidos de
competente mandado e lograram apreender drogasrdquo 8
Inevitable discovery
Nix v Williams 467 US 431 (1984) ldquoA teoria da descoberta inevitaacutevel eacute semelhante agrave
da fonte independente com a diferenccedila de a prova jaacute ter sido obtida de maneira iliacutecita
mas se chega agrave conclusatildeo que ela teria sido certamente descoberta licitamente eg
pelo segundo grupo de policiais que ao dar cumprimento agrave mandado judicial descobre
6 Para Thiago de Filippo as trecircs limitaccedilotildees agrave fruits doctrine parecem ter sido adotadas pelo Brasil por meio da Lei
116902008 que alterou a redaccedilatildeo do art 157 do Coacutedigo de Processo Penal (Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016)
7 Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016
8 Idem
6
que os objetos iliacutecitos jaacute foram apreendidos pelo primeiro grupo de policiais que invadiu
o domiciacutelio sem que tivessem obtido a competente ordemrdquo 9
Franccedila
Acoacuterdatildeo n 1119 (2020) Tribunal de Cassaccedilatildeo da Franccedila Cacircmara Social Demissatildeo de
empregado maacute conduta envio de informaccedilotildees a empresa concorrente dados contidos
no processamento de dados do empregado produccedilatildeo de provas que satildeo ilegais sob a
Lei de Proteccedilatildeo de Dados natildeo satildeo sistematicamente inadmissiacuteveis em processos
judiciais (notiacutecias)
Iacutendia
Ukha Kolhe v State of Maharashtra Supreme Court of India 1963 1963 AIR 1531 1964
SCR (1) 926 ldquoIn this case the police had fixed a tape-recording instrument to a telephone
with the consent of only one of the parties to record the conversation however the
other side contended that the tape-recorded conversation had been procured through
illegal means In this background it was held that lsquoeven if evidence is illegally obtained
it is admissiblersquordquo10
Poorna Mal v Director of Inspection of Income Tax (Investigation) Supreme Court of
India 1974 (1975 AIR 67 1975 SCR (2) 104) A Corte decidiu que ldquowhile ruling on the
question of admissibility of material seized in a search alleged to be vitiated by illegality
the Court held that lsquounless there is an express or necessary implied prohibition in the
Constitution or other law evidence obtained as a result of illegal search or seizure is not
liable to be shut outrsquordquo11
State of MP through CBI v Paltan Mallah Supreme Court of India 2005 ldquoIn India the
evidence obtained under illegal search is not completely excluded unless it has caused
serious prejudice to the accused The discretion has always been given to the court to
decide whether such evidence is to be accepted or notrdquo (hellip) lsquoThe general provisions
given in the Criminal Procedure Code are to be treated as guidelines and if at all there is
9 Idem 10 Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should lsquoendsrsquo justify the
lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-tree-doctrine-should-
the-ends-justify-the-means 11 Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should lsquoendsrsquo justify the
lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-tree-doctrine-should-
the-ends-justify-the-means
7
any minor violation still the court can accept the evidence and the courts have got
discretionary power to either accept it or reject itrsquordquo
Casos em que a Suprema Corte da Iacutendia natildeo admitiu prova ilegalmente obtida por
exercer um fator injusto ao acusado Umesh Kumar v State of AP Selvi v State of
Karnataka KS Puttaswamy v Union of India
Israel
CrimA 512198 Suprema Corte de Israel (High Court of Justice) 2006 ldquoEvidence may
be deemed inadmissible in criminal cases due to the manner in which it has been
obtained if two conditions are met simultaneously The evidence must have been
obtained illegally and admitting it in the trial must have a significant negative impact on
the accuseds rights to a fair trial Illegally obtained evidence can be excluded if admitting
it in the trial would violate the fairness of the proceedings in a substantial way for an
improper purpose and to an excessive degree This balancing formula is to be applied at
the discretion of the court in each individual case taking into account three main points
The first point is the nature and severity of the illegality involved in obtaining the
evidence The second is the influence of the illegality on the evidence ie whether it
makes the evidence less credible and whether the evidence exists independently from
the illegality Finally courts should consider the social benefit or harm that would result
from exclusion Here the primary concerns are the usefulness of the evidence and the
seriousness of the crime of which the defendant stands accusedrdquo
Meacutexico
Amparo Directo en Revisioacuten 38862013 Suprema Corte de Justiccedila da Naccedilatildeo do Meacutexico Geolocation without judicial warrant ndash ldquoIn this criminal case the First Chamber decided on the limits of the right to privacy and private communications The defendant argued that the use of geolocation of the phone of the victim should be dismissed as evidence in the trial in which he stood accused for kidnapping because on the one hand the victim had not authorized to reveal private communications and on the other hand this had been done without judicial warrant In a 3 to 2 decision the Court found that when there is a criminal investigation in which there is reasonable suspicion of a real and imminent danger for the victim the right to protect private communications is inapplicable Accordingly in cases in which the authority has reason to believe there is a real and imminent danger then it can require without judicial warrant telecommunication companies for private communications in which the victim had intervened In all other cases the Court considered a judicial authorization is required to allow the police to access private communications for criminal investigationsrdquo 12
12 Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-Clough Center 2016
Global Review of Constitutional Law (August 3 2017) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough Center 2016 Global Review of
8
Reino Unido
Wikileaks
R v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs ex parte Bancoult (No 2)
[2008] ldquoNa Inglaterra em 2017 a Suprema Corte admitiu por unanimidade a
admissibilidade de documentos sigilosos vazados publicamente no conhecido episoacutedio
Wikileakrdquo13
Repuacuteblica Checa
Judgment No III UacuteS 407117 of 31 July 2018 - Eligibility of secret recording of court
deliberation as evidence
ldquoIn a criminal matter the defendant challenged the impartiality of one of the judges
deciding his case based on an unauthorized recording of deliberation of the judicial
panel In the recording the judge made offensive remarks about the defendant and his
attorney The challenge was denied by appellate court based on the fact that the
recording was made without knowledge of the judges and was therefore inadmissible
as evidence CC recognized that there is between the right to a fair trial of the defendant
and the right to privacy of the judge and conducted the test of proportionality to balance
them It noted that the recording might have contained parts where the judicial panel
was deliberating andor voting and this type of information is confidential However
such information was not part of the evidence during the determination of impartiality
of the judge because the judgersquos comments were definitely not part of deliberations or
voting of the panel CC concluded that the recording could not be excluded from
evidence on this basis It understood the recording as a piece of valuable information
concerning the impartiality of the judge and stated that in this particular situation there
were no other possible pieces of evidence of similar information value that would
interfere in a lesser amount with the judgersquos right to privacy According to the CC
without the recording the right to a fair trial of the defendant would be almost
impossible to enforce effectively while the intensity of interference with the right to
privacy of the judge was minor because the judgersquos remarks were made during the
decision-making process Also the CC noted that the recording effectively cast doubt on
the objective element of judicial independence the public trust in independent
decision-making of that particular judge in this case was diminished For this reason
Constitutional Law ISBN 9780692925164 Published by the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy Available at SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3014378
13 Breda Juliano Admissibilidade processual das mensagens reveladas pelo The Intercept Conjur 8 de fevereiro de 2021 Disponiacutevel em httpswwwconjurcombr2021-fev-08breda-admissibilidade-processual-mensagens-interceptfbclid=IwAR1Aua12oOez-QqCARt2Kl0CyrfbgbCqmLgTNRC_t2AtqJ07cSJEP64zO58_ftnref5
9
the CC concluded that the previous decisions infringed the defendantrsquos right to a fair
trial and annulled themrdquo14
Suiacuteccedila
Decisatildeo 4A_362 (2013) Supremo Tribunal Federal Suiacuteccedilo Gravaccedilatildeo de viacutedeo obtido
ilegalmente sentenccedila natildeo violaccedilatildeo de poliacuteticas puacuteblicas Idem 4A_448 (2013)
Tribunal de Justiccedila da Uniatildeo Europeia
Persia International Bank plc v Council of the European Union (2013) Poliacutetica externa e
de seguranccedila medidas restritivas contra o Iratilde prevenir proliferaccedilatildeo nuclear
congelamento de fundos admissatildeo de documentos apresentados oriundos do
Wikileaks natureza possivelmente ilegal direitos de defesa direito agrave proteccedilatildeo judicial
eficaz
Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos
Gaumlfgen v Germany ldquoTorture or inhuman treatment or threats of the same may not be
used even in situations where there is a risk to the life of an individual Where evidence
is obtained as a result of prohibited methods of investigations such as to constitute a
breach of Article 3 ECHR Article 6 ECHR will only be infringed if the evidence is relied on
for a conviction Failure to exclude evidence obtained following a confession extracted
by means of inhuman treatment does not constitute a breach of the right to a fair trial
if that failure had no bearing on the conviction and sentence or on the overall fairness
of the trialrdquo
NN e TA v Beacutelgica (2008) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Divoacutercio correspondecircncias trocadas entre esposo e outro provas no processo natildeo enquadramento das regras de sigilo profissional documentos trazidos aos autos natildeo os torna puacuteblicos tendo em vista as restriccedilotildees de acesso aos arquivos do caso Jalloh v Alemanha (2006) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Preso por traacutefico de drogas recusa em tomar um emeacutetico para regurgitar o que havia engolido provas obtidas agrave forccedila e usadas contra o peticionaacuterio intervenccedilatildeo meacutedica forccedilada deve ser convincentemente justificada sobre os fatos de um caso especiacutefico escrutiacutenio rigoroso de todas as circunstacircncias circundantes autoridades devem demonstrar que levaram em conta meacutetodos alternativos de recuperaccedilatildeo das evidecircncias LL v Franccedila (2007) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Divoacutercio decisatildeo menciona relatoacuterio meacutedico confidencial documento meacutedico utilizado em base
14 Idem paacuteg 82
10
secundaacuteria e mesma soluccedilatildeo poderia ter sido alcanccedilada sem o referido relatoacuterio15 (nota)
15 Na decisatildeo recorrida (Tribunal de Cassaccedilatildeo francecircs) a Corte ldquoafirmou que a ilegalidade das provas sob a Lei de
Proteccedilatildeo de Dados natildeo deve levar sistematicamente a sua decisatildeo inadmissiacutevelrdquo (notiacutecias)
11
Referecircncias
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law (November 26 2020) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy U of Texas Law Public Law Research
Paper No 727 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 934 Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3736382
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law (October 18 2019) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy (2019) U of Texas Law Public Law
Research Paper No 711 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 921 Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3471638 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3471638
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law (July 19 2018) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy FSU College of Law Public Law
Research Paper No 888 U of Texas Law Public Law Research Paper Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3215613 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3215613
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law (August 3 2017) The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 9780692925164 Published by
the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3014378
Breda Juliano Admissibilidade processual das mensagens reveladas pelo The Intercept
Conjur 8 de fevereiro de 2021 Disponiacutevel em httpswwwconjurcombr2021-fev-08breda-
admissibilidade-processual-mensagens-interceptfbclid=IwAR1Aua12oOez-
QqCARt2Kl0CyrfbgbCqmLgTNRC_t2AtqJ07cSJEP64zO58_ftnref5
Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should
lsquoendsrsquo justify the lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-
tree-doctrine-should-the-ends-justify-the-means
CHAVARRIacuteA Ana Belem Garciacutea La Prueba en la Funcioacuten Jurisdiccional de la Corte
Interamericana de Derechos Humanos Corte Nacional de Direitos Humanos Meacutexico 2016
Fallah Sara Mansour The Admissibility of Unlawfully Obtained Evidence before International
Courts and Tribunals In The Law amp Practice of International Courts and Tribunals Online
Publication Date 26 Aug 2020 In Volume 19 Issue 2 Pages 147-176
12
Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees
acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos
Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016
GUTIEacuteRREZ Juan Felipe Saacutenchez e outros Flexibilizacioacuten probatoria y equidad propuestas para
la justicia del posconflicto Universidad Santo Tomaacutes Via inveniendi et iudicandi vol 14 n 1
2019
JAIN NITYA Can an Arbitral Tribunal Admit Evidence Obtained through a Cyber-Attack
Kluwer Arbitration Blog 2019
MOURA Maria Thereza Rocha de Assis e outros Provas Iliacutecitas e o Sistema Interamericano de
Proteccedilatildeo dos Direitos Humanos Relatoacuterio - Brasil 2009 Biblioteca Juriacutedica Virtual del Instituto
de Investigaciones Juriacutedicas de La Universidad Nacional Autoacutenoma de Meacutexico
PAUacuteL Aacutelvaro Admissibility of evidence before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
Revista Direito da Fundaccedilatildeo Getuacutelio Vargas vol 13 n 2 2017 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscielobrscielophpscript=sci_arttextamppid=S1808-24322017000200653
TORRES CHEDRAUI Ana Mariacutea An analysis of the exclusion of evidence obtained in violation
of human rights in light of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights Tilburg
Law Review v 15 p 205-234 2011 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwresearchgatenetpublication286237562_An_analysis_of_the_exclusion_of_evid
ence_obtained_in_violation_of_human_rights_in_light_of_the_jurisprudence_of_the_Europe
an_Court_of_Human_Rightslink601533fb45851517ef26bde9download
Bases de Dados e de Jurisprudecircncia
Base de Decisotildees do Sistema Juriacutedico da Iacutendia ndash Kanoon Disponiacutevel em httpsindiankanoonorg Base de Jurisprudecircncia da Comissatildeo de Veneza (Codices - Infobase on Constitution Case Law of the Venice Commission) Disponiacutevel em httpwwwcodicescoeintNXTgatewaydllf=templatesampfn=defaulthtm Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos Disponiacutevel em httpswwwcorteidhorcrindexcfmlang=en Tribunal Constitucional Federal da Alemanha Disponiacutevel em httpswwwbundesverfassungsgerichtdeSiteGlobalsFormsSucheENEntscheidungensuche_Formularhtmlnn=5403310ampfacettedYear=2020amplanguage_=en Suprema Corte do Canadaacute Disponiacutevel em httpsscc-csccacase-dossierinfosearch-recherche-engaspx Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos da Ameacuterica Disponiacutevel em httpswwwsupremecourtgovopinionsopinionsaspx
13
Secretaria de Altos Estudos Pesquisas e Gestatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Coordenadoria de Difusatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Jurisprudecircncia Internacional
3
sentencia condenatoria se hayan fundado en pruebas separadas independientes y autoacutenomas de eacutesta y suficientes para demostrar la ocurrencia de la conducta tiacutepica y la responsabilidad penal del procesadordquo Casos relevantes sobre valoraccedilatildeo da prova da Corte Constitucional da Colocircmbia SU-15902 C-59105 C-115405 T-05706 C-21007 T-23307 A227 DE 2007 T-59009
Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos
Lori Berenson Mejiacutea v Peru (2004) Detenccedilatildeo e posterior julgamento por tribunal militar
com restriccedilotildees a direito de defesa ilegalidade probatoacuteria afirmada como decorrecircncia
do reconhecimento da violaccedilatildeo das garantias do juiz natural natildeo reconhecimento da
imprestabilidade da prova prova transposta do juiacutezo militar ao juiacutezo comum
Corte Internacional de Justiccedila
Corfu Channel (United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland v Albania) 1949
Canal de Corfu responsabilidade estatal por danos no mar doutrina da passagem
inocente documento obtido em violaccedilatildeo do territoacuterio do oponente premissas
diplomaacuteticas regra excludente violaccedilatildeo de soberania territorial ldquoInternational Court
of Justice (ICJ) triggered debates on the existence of an lsquoexclusionary rulersquo in
international lawrdquo2 [Case Summary]
Admissibility of Hacked or Leaked Emails
Caratube International Oil Company LLP v The Republic of Kazakhstan case ldquoIn a more
recent case involving the Kazakhstan government the tribunal reached an admissibility
decision that could come to be seen as a watershed The arbitral tribunal basically stated
that documents protected by legal professional privilege cannot be admitted as
evidence but others could be Caratube International Oil Company and American-
national Devincci Salah Hourani who were suing Kazakhstan over the alleged seizure of
their oil exploration and production rights wanted leaked documents that were now
publicly available due to the WikiLeaks page to be considered by the tribunal as
evidencerdquo 3
2 Fallah Sara Mansour The Admissibility of Unlawfully Obtained Evidence before International Courts and
Tribunals In The Law amp Practice of International Courts and Tribunals Online Publication Date 26 Aug 2020 In Volume 19 Issue 2 Pages 147-176 Disponiacutevel em
httpsbrillcomviewjournalslape192article-p147_2xmlref_FN000143 3 Ortiz Ricardo Calvillo Admissibility of Hacked Emails as Evidence in Arbitration May 14 2018 Disponiacutevel em
httpsblogslawnyuedutransnational201805admissibility-of-hacked-emails-as-evidence-in-arbitration_ftn21
4
Conoco Phillips Case4 ldquoAfter issuing the award the tribunal had to deal with new
evidence presented due to information available in WikiLeaks This case concerned the
expropriation of oil and gas assets by the Venezuelan government Conoco Phillips
claimed that Venezuela illegally forced it to cede its majority holding in certain oil and
gas projects and was unwilling to negotiate fair compensation for the governmentrsquos
taking The tribunal found that Venezuela breached its obligation to negotiate in good
faith in order to reach an acceptable settlement between the parties After the award
was issued Venezuela sent a letter to the tribunal contesting this decision in which
Venezuela requested a new hearing to address the ruling on lack of good faith
Specifically the letter cited new evidence obtained via WikiLeaks including
communications between diplomatic officials in the United States Embassy in Caracas
and Conoco Phillipsrsquo executives discussing the Venezuelan governmentrsquos offer to
compensate the company for expropriation using market value standards instead of
their previous offer of book value Venezuela argued that this contradicted the tribunalrsquos
conclusion that Venezuela negotiated in bad faith Ultimately however the tribunal
addressed neither the merits nor the admissibility question raised by this evidence
instead it found that it did not have the power to reconsider its decision However one
of the arbitrators issued a dissenting opinion which relied on the revelations contained
in the WikiLeaks cables effectively opening a new window by considering leaked
information as evidence in an arbitration procedurerdquo5
Estados Unidos
Kansas v Ventris 556 US 586 (2009) ldquoWhether evidence obtained in violation of
constitution guarantees while otherwise inadmissible at trial can be admitted for
purposes of impeachment of a witnesss testimony depends upon the nature of the
constitutional guarantee that is violated When the constitutional guarantee against
compelled self-incrimination is violated it may not be admitted at trial for any purpose
including impeachment of witness testimony When the constitutional guarantee
against unreasonable searches and seizures is violated the admissibility of the evidence
thereby obtained for purposes of impeachment of witness testimony is a question to be
decided by a balancing of the competing interests rather than an automatic exclusion
Evidence obtained in violation of the constitutional right to counsel is not automatically
inadmissible for all purposes while inadmissible for purposes of affirmatively proving
guilt it may be admitted for purposes of witness impeachment because the need to
prevent perjury and to assure the integrity of the trial process outweigh the perceived
deterrent effect on police officersrdquo [Resumo]
4 Idem 5 Ortiz Ricardo Calvillo Admissibility of Hacked Emails as Evidence in Arbitration May 14 2018 Disponiacutevel em
httpsblogslawnyuedutransnational201805admissibility-of-hacked-emails-as-evidence-in-arbitration_ftn21
5
Wikileaks
Bryana Bible v United Student Aid Funds Inc (2015) Tribunal de Apelaccedilatildeo dos Estados
Unidos da Ameacuterica do Seacutetimo Circuito Documentos e evidecircncias liberados por terceiros
no WikiLeaks admissatildeo das provas informaccedilotildees em domiacutenio puacuteblico acessiacuteveis sem
dificuldades indevidas (notiacutecias)
Exceccedilotildees agrave teoria do fruit of the poisonous tree6
dissipation of taint
Murray v United States 487 US 533 480 (1988) Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos
ldquoldquoThe exclusionary rule prohibits introduction into evidence of tangible materials seized
during an unlawful search Beyond that the exclusionary rule also prohibits the
introduction of derivative evidence both tangible and testimonial that is the product of
the primary evidence or that is otherwise acquired as a result of the unlawful search up
to the point at which the connection with the unlawful search becomes acuteso attenuated
as to dissipate the taintrdquo7
Independent source
Segura v United States 468 US 796 (1984) A teoria da fonte independente ldquoremete agrave
inaplicabilidade da teoria do fruit of the poisonous tree nos casos em que a prova deriva
de uma fonte diversa da maculada pelo viacutecio da ilicitude Ela foi o fundamento da
manutenccedilatildeo de condenaccedilatildeo de indiviacuteduo que teve seu domiciacutelio ilicitamente invadido
por policiais e quando estes estavam no local outros policiais ali chegaram munidos de
competente mandado e lograram apreender drogasrdquo 8
Inevitable discovery
Nix v Williams 467 US 431 (1984) ldquoA teoria da descoberta inevitaacutevel eacute semelhante agrave
da fonte independente com a diferenccedila de a prova jaacute ter sido obtida de maneira iliacutecita
mas se chega agrave conclusatildeo que ela teria sido certamente descoberta licitamente eg
pelo segundo grupo de policiais que ao dar cumprimento agrave mandado judicial descobre
6 Para Thiago de Filippo as trecircs limitaccedilotildees agrave fruits doctrine parecem ter sido adotadas pelo Brasil por meio da Lei
116902008 que alterou a redaccedilatildeo do art 157 do Coacutedigo de Processo Penal (Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016)
7 Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016
8 Idem
6
que os objetos iliacutecitos jaacute foram apreendidos pelo primeiro grupo de policiais que invadiu
o domiciacutelio sem que tivessem obtido a competente ordemrdquo 9
Franccedila
Acoacuterdatildeo n 1119 (2020) Tribunal de Cassaccedilatildeo da Franccedila Cacircmara Social Demissatildeo de
empregado maacute conduta envio de informaccedilotildees a empresa concorrente dados contidos
no processamento de dados do empregado produccedilatildeo de provas que satildeo ilegais sob a
Lei de Proteccedilatildeo de Dados natildeo satildeo sistematicamente inadmissiacuteveis em processos
judiciais (notiacutecias)
Iacutendia
Ukha Kolhe v State of Maharashtra Supreme Court of India 1963 1963 AIR 1531 1964
SCR (1) 926 ldquoIn this case the police had fixed a tape-recording instrument to a telephone
with the consent of only one of the parties to record the conversation however the
other side contended that the tape-recorded conversation had been procured through
illegal means In this background it was held that lsquoeven if evidence is illegally obtained
it is admissiblersquordquo10
Poorna Mal v Director of Inspection of Income Tax (Investigation) Supreme Court of
India 1974 (1975 AIR 67 1975 SCR (2) 104) A Corte decidiu que ldquowhile ruling on the
question of admissibility of material seized in a search alleged to be vitiated by illegality
the Court held that lsquounless there is an express or necessary implied prohibition in the
Constitution or other law evidence obtained as a result of illegal search or seizure is not
liable to be shut outrsquordquo11
State of MP through CBI v Paltan Mallah Supreme Court of India 2005 ldquoIn India the
evidence obtained under illegal search is not completely excluded unless it has caused
serious prejudice to the accused The discretion has always been given to the court to
decide whether such evidence is to be accepted or notrdquo (hellip) lsquoThe general provisions
given in the Criminal Procedure Code are to be treated as guidelines and if at all there is
9 Idem 10 Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should lsquoendsrsquo justify the
lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-tree-doctrine-should-
the-ends-justify-the-means 11 Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should lsquoendsrsquo justify the
lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-tree-doctrine-should-
the-ends-justify-the-means
7
any minor violation still the court can accept the evidence and the courts have got
discretionary power to either accept it or reject itrsquordquo
Casos em que a Suprema Corte da Iacutendia natildeo admitiu prova ilegalmente obtida por
exercer um fator injusto ao acusado Umesh Kumar v State of AP Selvi v State of
Karnataka KS Puttaswamy v Union of India
Israel
CrimA 512198 Suprema Corte de Israel (High Court of Justice) 2006 ldquoEvidence may
be deemed inadmissible in criminal cases due to the manner in which it has been
obtained if two conditions are met simultaneously The evidence must have been
obtained illegally and admitting it in the trial must have a significant negative impact on
the accuseds rights to a fair trial Illegally obtained evidence can be excluded if admitting
it in the trial would violate the fairness of the proceedings in a substantial way for an
improper purpose and to an excessive degree This balancing formula is to be applied at
the discretion of the court in each individual case taking into account three main points
The first point is the nature and severity of the illegality involved in obtaining the
evidence The second is the influence of the illegality on the evidence ie whether it
makes the evidence less credible and whether the evidence exists independently from
the illegality Finally courts should consider the social benefit or harm that would result
from exclusion Here the primary concerns are the usefulness of the evidence and the
seriousness of the crime of which the defendant stands accusedrdquo
Meacutexico
Amparo Directo en Revisioacuten 38862013 Suprema Corte de Justiccedila da Naccedilatildeo do Meacutexico Geolocation without judicial warrant ndash ldquoIn this criminal case the First Chamber decided on the limits of the right to privacy and private communications The defendant argued that the use of geolocation of the phone of the victim should be dismissed as evidence in the trial in which he stood accused for kidnapping because on the one hand the victim had not authorized to reveal private communications and on the other hand this had been done without judicial warrant In a 3 to 2 decision the Court found that when there is a criminal investigation in which there is reasonable suspicion of a real and imminent danger for the victim the right to protect private communications is inapplicable Accordingly in cases in which the authority has reason to believe there is a real and imminent danger then it can require without judicial warrant telecommunication companies for private communications in which the victim had intervened In all other cases the Court considered a judicial authorization is required to allow the police to access private communications for criminal investigationsrdquo 12
12 Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-Clough Center 2016
Global Review of Constitutional Law (August 3 2017) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough Center 2016 Global Review of
8
Reino Unido
Wikileaks
R v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs ex parte Bancoult (No 2)
[2008] ldquoNa Inglaterra em 2017 a Suprema Corte admitiu por unanimidade a
admissibilidade de documentos sigilosos vazados publicamente no conhecido episoacutedio
Wikileakrdquo13
Repuacuteblica Checa
Judgment No III UacuteS 407117 of 31 July 2018 - Eligibility of secret recording of court
deliberation as evidence
ldquoIn a criminal matter the defendant challenged the impartiality of one of the judges
deciding his case based on an unauthorized recording of deliberation of the judicial
panel In the recording the judge made offensive remarks about the defendant and his
attorney The challenge was denied by appellate court based on the fact that the
recording was made without knowledge of the judges and was therefore inadmissible
as evidence CC recognized that there is between the right to a fair trial of the defendant
and the right to privacy of the judge and conducted the test of proportionality to balance
them It noted that the recording might have contained parts where the judicial panel
was deliberating andor voting and this type of information is confidential However
such information was not part of the evidence during the determination of impartiality
of the judge because the judgersquos comments were definitely not part of deliberations or
voting of the panel CC concluded that the recording could not be excluded from
evidence on this basis It understood the recording as a piece of valuable information
concerning the impartiality of the judge and stated that in this particular situation there
were no other possible pieces of evidence of similar information value that would
interfere in a lesser amount with the judgersquos right to privacy According to the CC
without the recording the right to a fair trial of the defendant would be almost
impossible to enforce effectively while the intensity of interference with the right to
privacy of the judge was minor because the judgersquos remarks were made during the
decision-making process Also the CC noted that the recording effectively cast doubt on
the objective element of judicial independence the public trust in independent
decision-making of that particular judge in this case was diminished For this reason
Constitutional Law ISBN 9780692925164 Published by the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy Available at SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3014378
13 Breda Juliano Admissibilidade processual das mensagens reveladas pelo The Intercept Conjur 8 de fevereiro de 2021 Disponiacutevel em httpswwwconjurcombr2021-fev-08breda-admissibilidade-processual-mensagens-interceptfbclid=IwAR1Aua12oOez-QqCARt2Kl0CyrfbgbCqmLgTNRC_t2AtqJ07cSJEP64zO58_ftnref5
9
the CC concluded that the previous decisions infringed the defendantrsquos right to a fair
trial and annulled themrdquo14
Suiacuteccedila
Decisatildeo 4A_362 (2013) Supremo Tribunal Federal Suiacuteccedilo Gravaccedilatildeo de viacutedeo obtido
ilegalmente sentenccedila natildeo violaccedilatildeo de poliacuteticas puacuteblicas Idem 4A_448 (2013)
Tribunal de Justiccedila da Uniatildeo Europeia
Persia International Bank plc v Council of the European Union (2013) Poliacutetica externa e
de seguranccedila medidas restritivas contra o Iratilde prevenir proliferaccedilatildeo nuclear
congelamento de fundos admissatildeo de documentos apresentados oriundos do
Wikileaks natureza possivelmente ilegal direitos de defesa direito agrave proteccedilatildeo judicial
eficaz
Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos
Gaumlfgen v Germany ldquoTorture or inhuman treatment or threats of the same may not be
used even in situations where there is a risk to the life of an individual Where evidence
is obtained as a result of prohibited methods of investigations such as to constitute a
breach of Article 3 ECHR Article 6 ECHR will only be infringed if the evidence is relied on
for a conviction Failure to exclude evidence obtained following a confession extracted
by means of inhuman treatment does not constitute a breach of the right to a fair trial
if that failure had no bearing on the conviction and sentence or on the overall fairness
of the trialrdquo
NN e TA v Beacutelgica (2008) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Divoacutercio correspondecircncias trocadas entre esposo e outro provas no processo natildeo enquadramento das regras de sigilo profissional documentos trazidos aos autos natildeo os torna puacuteblicos tendo em vista as restriccedilotildees de acesso aos arquivos do caso Jalloh v Alemanha (2006) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Preso por traacutefico de drogas recusa em tomar um emeacutetico para regurgitar o que havia engolido provas obtidas agrave forccedila e usadas contra o peticionaacuterio intervenccedilatildeo meacutedica forccedilada deve ser convincentemente justificada sobre os fatos de um caso especiacutefico escrutiacutenio rigoroso de todas as circunstacircncias circundantes autoridades devem demonstrar que levaram em conta meacutetodos alternativos de recuperaccedilatildeo das evidecircncias LL v Franccedila (2007) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Divoacutercio decisatildeo menciona relatoacuterio meacutedico confidencial documento meacutedico utilizado em base
14 Idem paacuteg 82
10
secundaacuteria e mesma soluccedilatildeo poderia ter sido alcanccedilada sem o referido relatoacuterio15 (nota)
15 Na decisatildeo recorrida (Tribunal de Cassaccedilatildeo francecircs) a Corte ldquoafirmou que a ilegalidade das provas sob a Lei de
Proteccedilatildeo de Dados natildeo deve levar sistematicamente a sua decisatildeo inadmissiacutevelrdquo (notiacutecias)
11
Referecircncias
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law (November 26 2020) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy U of Texas Law Public Law Research
Paper No 727 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 934 Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3736382
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law (October 18 2019) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy (2019) U of Texas Law Public Law
Research Paper No 711 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 921 Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3471638 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3471638
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law (July 19 2018) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy FSU College of Law Public Law
Research Paper No 888 U of Texas Law Public Law Research Paper Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3215613 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3215613
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law (August 3 2017) The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 9780692925164 Published by
the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3014378
Breda Juliano Admissibilidade processual das mensagens reveladas pelo The Intercept
Conjur 8 de fevereiro de 2021 Disponiacutevel em httpswwwconjurcombr2021-fev-08breda-
admissibilidade-processual-mensagens-interceptfbclid=IwAR1Aua12oOez-
QqCARt2Kl0CyrfbgbCqmLgTNRC_t2AtqJ07cSJEP64zO58_ftnref5
Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should
lsquoendsrsquo justify the lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-
tree-doctrine-should-the-ends-justify-the-means
CHAVARRIacuteA Ana Belem Garciacutea La Prueba en la Funcioacuten Jurisdiccional de la Corte
Interamericana de Derechos Humanos Corte Nacional de Direitos Humanos Meacutexico 2016
Fallah Sara Mansour The Admissibility of Unlawfully Obtained Evidence before International
Courts and Tribunals In The Law amp Practice of International Courts and Tribunals Online
Publication Date 26 Aug 2020 In Volume 19 Issue 2 Pages 147-176
12
Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees
acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos
Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016
GUTIEacuteRREZ Juan Felipe Saacutenchez e outros Flexibilizacioacuten probatoria y equidad propuestas para
la justicia del posconflicto Universidad Santo Tomaacutes Via inveniendi et iudicandi vol 14 n 1
2019
JAIN NITYA Can an Arbitral Tribunal Admit Evidence Obtained through a Cyber-Attack
Kluwer Arbitration Blog 2019
MOURA Maria Thereza Rocha de Assis e outros Provas Iliacutecitas e o Sistema Interamericano de
Proteccedilatildeo dos Direitos Humanos Relatoacuterio - Brasil 2009 Biblioteca Juriacutedica Virtual del Instituto
de Investigaciones Juriacutedicas de La Universidad Nacional Autoacutenoma de Meacutexico
PAUacuteL Aacutelvaro Admissibility of evidence before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
Revista Direito da Fundaccedilatildeo Getuacutelio Vargas vol 13 n 2 2017 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscielobrscielophpscript=sci_arttextamppid=S1808-24322017000200653
TORRES CHEDRAUI Ana Mariacutea An analysis of the exclusion of evidence obtained in violation
of human rights in light of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights Tilburg
Law Review v 15 p 205-234 2011 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwresearchgatenetpublication286237562_An_analysis_of_the_exclusion_of_evid
ence_obtained_in_violation_of_human_rights_in_light_of_the_jurisprudence_of_the_Europe
an_Court_of_Human_Rightslink601533fb45851517ef26bde9download
Bases de Dados e de Jurisprudecircncia
Base de Decisotildees do Sistema Juriacutedico da Iacutendia ndash Kanoon Disponiacutevel em httpsindiankanoonorg Base de Jurisprudecircncia da Comissatildeo de Veneza (Codices - Infobase on Constitution Case Law of the Venice Commission) Disponiacutevel em httpwwwcodicescoeintNXTgatewaydllf=templatesampfn=defaulthtm Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos Disponiacutevel em httpswwwcorteidhorcrindexcfmlang=en Tribunal Constitucional Federal da Alemanha Disponiacutevel em httpswwwbundesverfassungsgerichtdeSiteGlobalsFormsSucheENEntscheidungensuche_Formularhtmlnn=5403310ampfacettedYear=2020amplanguage_=en Suprema Corte do Canadaacute Disponiacutevel em httpsscc-csccacase-dossierinfosearch-recherche-engaspx Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos da Ameacuterica Disponiacutevel em httpswwwsupremecourtgovopinionsopinionsaspx
13
Secretaria de Altos Estudos Pesquisas e Gestatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Coordenadoria de Difusatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Jurisprudecircncia Internacional
4
Conoco Phillips Case4 ldquoAfter issuing the award the tribunal had to deal with new
evidence presented due to information available in WikiLeaks This case concerned the
expropriation of oil and gas assets by the Venezuelan government Conoco Phillips
claimed that Venezuela illegally forced it to cede its majority holding in certain oil and
gas projects and was unwilling to negotiate fair compensation for the governmentrsquos
taking The tribunal found that Venezuela breached its obligation to negotiate in good
faith in order to reach an acceptable settlement between the parties After the award
was issued Venezuela sent a letter to the tribunal contesting this decision in which
Venezuela requested a new hearing to address the ruling on lack of good faith
Specifically the letter cited new evidence obtained via WikiLeaks including
communications between diplomatic officials in the United States Embassy in Caracas
and Conoco Phillipsrsquo executives discussing the Venezuelan governmentrsquos offer to
compensate the company for expropriation using market value standards instead of
their previous offer of book value Venezuela argued that this contradicted the tribunalrsquos
conclusion that Venezuela negotiated in bad faith Ultimately however the tribunal
addressed neither the merits nor the admissibility question raised by this evidence
instead it found that it did not have the power to reconsider its decision However one
of the arbitrators issued a dissenting opinion which relied on the revelations contained
in the WikiLeaks cables effectively opening a new window by considering leaked
information as evidence in an arbitration procedurerdquo5
Estados Unidos
Kansas v Ventris 556 US 586 (2009) ldquoWhether evidence obtained in violation of
constitution guarantees while otherwise inadmissible at trial can be admitted for
purposes of impeachment of a witnesss testimony depends upon the nature of the
constitutional guarantee that is violated When the constitutional guarantee against
compelled self-incrimination is violated it may not be admitted at trial for any purpose
including impeachment of witness testimony When the constitutional guarantee
against unreasonable searches and seizures is violated the admissibility of the evidence
thereby obtained for purposes of impeachment of witness testimony is a question to be
decided by a balancing of the competing interests rather than an automatic exclusion
Evidence obtained in violation of the constitutional right to counsel is not automatically
inadmissible for all purposes while inadmissible for purposes of affirmatively proving
guilt it may be admitted for purposes of witness impeachment because the need to
prevent perjury and to assure the integrity of the trial process outweigh the perceived
deterrent effect on police officersrdquo [Resumo]
4 Idem 5 Ortiz Ricardo Calvillo Admissibility of Hacked Emails as Evidence in Arbitration May 14 2018 Disponiacutevel em
httpsblogslawnyuedutransnational201805admissibility-of-hacked-emails-as-evidence-in-arbitration_ftn21
5
Wikileaks
Bryana Bible v United Student Aid Funds Inc (2015) Tribunal de Apelaccedilatildeo dos Estados
Unidos da Ameacuterica do Seacutetimo Circuito Documentos e evidecircncias liberados por terceiros
no WikiLeaks admissatildeo das provas informaccedilotildees em domiacutenio puacuteblico acessiacuteveis sem
dificuldades indevidas (notiacutecias)
Exceccedilotildees agrave teoria do fruit of the poisonous tree6
dissipation of taint
Murray v United States 487 US 533 480 (1988) Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos
ldquoldquoThe exclusionary rule prohibits introduction into evidence of tangible materials seized
during an unlawful search Beyond that the exclusionary rule also prohibits the
introduction of derivative evidence both tangible and testimonial that is the product of
the primary evidence or that is otherwise acquired as a result of the unlawful search up
to the point at which the connection with the unlawful search becomes acuteso attenuated
as to dissipate the taintrdquo7
Independent source
Segura v United States 468 US 796 (1984) A teoria da fonte independente ldquoremete agrave
inaplicabilidade da teoria do fruit of the poisonous tree nos casos em que a prova deriva
de uma fonte diversa da maculada pelo viacutecio da ilicitude Ela foi o fundamento da
manutenccedilatildeo de condenaccedilatildeo de indiviacuteduo que teve seu domiciacutelio ilicitamente invadido
por policiais e quando estes estavam no local outros policiais ali chegaram munidos de
competente mandado e lograram apreender drogasrdquo 8
Inevitable discovery
Nix v Williams 467 US 431 (1984) ldquoA teoria da descoberta inevitaacutevel eacute semelhante agrave
da fonte independente com a diferenccedila de a prova jaacute ter sido obtida de maneira iliacutecita
mas se chega agrave conclusatildeo que ela teria sido certamente descoberta licitamente eg
pelo segundo grupo de policiais que ao dar cumprimento agrave mandado judicial descobre
6 Para Thiago de Filippo as trecircs limitaccedilotildees agrave fruits doctrine parecem ter sido adotadas pelo Brasil por meio da Lei
116902008 que alterou a redaccedilatildeo do art 157 do Coacutedigo de Processo Penal (Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016)
7 Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016
8 Idem
6
que os objetos iliacutecitos jaacute foram apreendidos pelo primeiro grupo de policiais que invadiu
o domiciacutelio sem que tivessem obtido a competente ordemrdquo 9
Franccedila
Acoacuterdatildeo n 1119 (2020) Tribunal de Cassaccedilatildeo da Franccedila Cacircmara Social Demissatildeo de
empregado maacute conduta envio de informaccedilotildees a empresa concorrente dados contidos
no processamento de dados do empregado produccedilatildeo de provas que satildeo ilegais sob a
Lei de Proteccedilatildeo de Dados natildeo satildeo sistematicamente inadmissiacuteveis em processos
judiciais (notiacutecias)
Iacutendia
Ukha Kolhe v State of Maharashtra Supreme Court of India 1963 1963 AIR 1531 1964
SCR (1) 926 ldquoIn this case the police had fixed a tape-recording instrument to a telephone
with the consent of only one of the parties to record the conversation however the
other side contended that the tape-recorded conversation had been procured through
illegal means In this background it was held that lsquoeven if evidence is illegally obtained
it is admissiblersquordquo10
Poorna Mal v Director of Inspection of Income Tax (Investigation) Supreme Court of
India 1974 (1975 AIR 67 1975 SCR (2) 104) A Corte decidiu que ldquowhile ruling on the
question of admissibility of material seized in a search alleged to be vitiated by illegality
the Court held that lsquounless there is an express or necessary implied prohibition in the
Constitution or other law evidence obtained as a result of illegal search or seizure is not
liable to be shut outrsquordquo11
State of MP through CBI v Paltan Mallah Supreme Court of India 2005 ldquoIn India the
evidence obtained under illegal search is not completely excluded unless it has caused
serious prejudice to the accused The discretion has always been given to the court to
decide whether such evidence is to be accepted or notrdquo (hellip) lsquoThe general provisions
given in the Criminal Procedure Code are to be treated as guidelines and if at all there is
9 Idem 10 Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should lsquoendsrsquo justify the
lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-tree-doctrine-should-
the-ends-justify-the-means 11 Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should lsquoendsrsquo justify the
lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-tree-doctrine-should-
the-ends-justify-the-means
7
any minor violation still the court can accept the evidence and the courts have got
discretionary power to either accept it or reject itrsquordquo
Casos em que a Suprema Corte da Iacutendia natildeo admitiu prova ilegalmente obtida por
exercer um fator injusto ao acusado Umesh Kumar v State of AP Selvi v State of
Karnataka KS Puttaswamy v Union of India
Israel
CrimA 512198 Suprema Corte de Israel (High Court of Justice) 2006 ldquoEvidence may
be deemed inadmissible in criminal cases due to the manner in which it has been
obtained if two conditions are met simultaneously The evidence must have been
obtained illegally and admitting it in the trial must have a significant negative impact on
the accuseds rights to a fair trial Illegally obtained evidence can be excluded if admitting
it in the trial would violate the fairness of the proceedings in a substantial way for an
improper purpose and to an excessive degree This balancing formula is to be applied at
the discretion of the court in each individual case taking into account three main points
The first point is the nature and severity of the illegality involved in obtaining the
evidence The second is the influence of the illegality on the evidence ie whether it
makes the evidence less credible and whether the evidence exists independently from
the illegality Finally courts should consider the social benefit or harm that would result
from exclusion Here the primary concerns are the usefulness of the evidence and the
seriousness of the crime of which the defendant stands accusedrdquo
Meacutexico
Amparo Directo en Revisioacuten 38862013 Suprema Corte de Justiccedila da Naccedilatildeo do Meacutexico Geolocation without judicial warrant ndash ldquoIn this criminal case the First Chamber decided on the limits of the right to privacy and private communications The defendant argued that the use of geolocation of the phone of the victim should be dismissed as evidence in the trial in which he stood accused for kidnapping because on the one hand the victim had not authorized to reveal private communications and on the other hand this had been done without judicial warrant In a 3 to 2 decision the Court found that when there is a criminal investigation in which there is reasonable suspicion of a real and imminent danger for the victim the right to protect private communications is inapplicable Accordingly in cases in which the authority has reason to believe there is a real and imminent danger then it can require without judicial warrant telecommunication companies for private communications in which the victim had intervened In all other cases the Court considered a judicial authorization is required to allow the police to access private communications for criminal investigationsrdquo 12
12 Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-Clough Center 2016
Global Review of Constitutional Law (August 3 2017) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough Center 2016 Global Review of
8
Reino Unido
Wikileaks
R v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs ex parte Bancoult (No 2)
[2008] ldquoNa Inglaterra em 2017 a Suprema Corte admitiu por unanimidade a
admissibilidade de documentos sigilosos vazados publicamente no conhecido episoacutedio
Wikileakrdquo13
Repuacuteblica Checa
Judgment No III UacuteS 407117 of 31 July 2018 - Eligibility of secret recording of court
deliberation as evidence
ldquoIn a criminal matter the defendant challenged the impartiality of one of the judges
deciding his case based on an unauthorized recording of deliberation of the judicial
panel In the recording the judge made offensive remarks about the defendant and his
attorney The challenge was denied by appellate court based on the fact that the
recording was made without knowledge of the judges and was therefore inadmissible
as evidence CC recognized that there is between the right to a fair trial of the defendant
and the right to privacy of the judge and conducted the test of proportionality to balance
them It noted that the recording might have contained parts where the judicial panel
was deliberating andor voting and this type of information is confidential However
such information was not part of the evidence during the determination of impartiality
of the judge because the judgersquos comments were definitely not part of deliberations or
voting of the panel CC concluded that the recording could not be excluded from
evidence on this basis It understood the recording as a piece of valuable information
concerning the impartiality of the judge and stated that in this particular situation there
were no other possible pieces of evidence of similar information value that would
interfere in a lesser amount with the judgersquos right to privacy According to the CC
without the recording the right to a fair trial of the defendant would be almost
impossible to enforce effectively while the intensity of interference with the right to
privacy of the judge was minor because the judgersquos remarks were made during the
decision-making process Also the CC noted that the recording effectively cast doubt on
the objective element of judicial independence the public trust in independent
decision-making of that particular judge in this case was diminished For this reason
Constitutional Law ISBN 9780692925164 Published by the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy Available at SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3014378
13 Breda Juliano Admissibilidade processual das mensagens reveladas pelo The Intercept Conjur 8 de fevereiro de 2021 Disponiacutevel em httpswwwconjurcombr2021-fev-08breda-admissibilidade-processual-mensagens-interceptfbclid=IwAR1Aua12oOez-QqCARt2Kl0CyrfbgbCqmLgTNRC_t2AtqJ07cSJEP64zO58_ftnref5
9
the CC concluded that the previous decisions infringed the defendantrsquos right to a fair
trial and annulled themrdquo14
Suiacuteccedila
Decisatildeo 4A_362 (2013) Supremo Tribunal Federal Suiacuteccedilo Gravaccedilatildeo de viacutedeo obtido
ilegalmente sentenccedila natildeo violaccedilatildeo de poliacuteticas puacuteblicas Idem 4A_448 (2013)
Tribunal de Justiccedila da Uniatildeo Europeia
Persia International Bank plc v Council of the European Union (2013) Poliacutetica externa e
de seguranccedila medidas restritivas contra o Iratilde prevenir proliferaccedilatildeo nuclear
congelamento de fundos admissatildeo de documentos apresentados oriundos do
Wikileaks natureza possivelmente ilegal direitos de defesa direito agrave proteccedilatildeo judicial
eficaz
Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos
Gaumlfgen v Germany ldquoTorture or inhuman treatment or threats of the same may not be
used even in situations where there is a risk to the life of an individual Where evidence
is obtained as a result of prohibited methods of investigations such as to constitute a
breach of Article 3 ECHR Article 6 ECHR will only be infringed if the evidence is relied on
for a conviction Failure to exclude evidence obtained following a confession extracted
by means of inhuman treatment does not constitute a breach of the right to a fair trial
if that failure had no bearing on the conviction and sentence or on the overall fairness
of the trialrdquo
NN e TA v Beacutelgica (2008) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Divoacutercio correspondecircncias trocadas entre esposo e outro provas no processo natildeo enquadramento das regras de sigilo profissional documentos trazidos aos autos natildeo os torna puacuteblicos tendo em vista as restriccedilotildees de acesso aos arquivos do caso Jalloh v Alemanha (2006) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Preso por traacutefico de drogas recusa em tomar um emeacutetico para regurgitar o que havia engolido provas obtidas agrave forccedila e usadas contra o peticionaacuterio intervenccedilatildeo meacutedica forccedilada deve ser convincentemente justificada sobre os fatos de um caso especiacutefico escrutiacutenio rigoroso de todas as circunstacircncias circundantes autoridades devem demonstrar que levaram em conta meacutetodos alternativos de recuperaccedilatildeo das evidecircncias LL v Franccedila (2007) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Divoacutercio decisatildeo menciona relatoacuterio meacutedico confidencial documento meacutedico utilizado em base
14 Idem paacuteg 82
10
secundaacuteria e mesma soluccedilatildeo poderia ter sido alcanccedilada sem o referido relatoacuterio15 (nota)
15 Na decisatildeo recorrida (Tribunal de Cassaccedilatildeo francecircs) a Corte ldquoafirmou que a ilegalidade das provas sob a Lei de
Proteccedilatildeo de Dados natildeo deve levar sistematicamente a sua decisatildeo inadmissiacutevelrdquo (notiacutecias)
11
Referecircncias
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law (November 26 2020) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy U of Texas Law Public Law Research
Paper No 727 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 934 Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3736382
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law (October 18 2019) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy (2019) U of Texas Law Public Law
Research Paper No 711 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 921 Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3471638 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3471638
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law (July 19 2018) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy FSU College of Law Public Law
Research Paper No 888 U of Texas Law Public Law Research Paper Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3215613 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3215613
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law (August 3 2017) The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 9780692925164 Published by
the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3014378
Breda Juliano Admissibilidade processual das mensagens reveladas pelo The Intercept
Conjur 8 de fevereiro de 2021 Disponiacutevel em httpswwwconjurcombr2021-fev-08breda-
admissibilidade-processual-mensagens-interceptfbclid=IwAR1Aua12oOez-
QqCARt2Kl0CyrfbgbCqmLgTNRC_t2AtqJ07cSJEP64zO58_ftnref5
Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should
lsquoendsrsquo justify the lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-
tree-doctrine-should-the-ends-justify-the-means
CHAVARRIacuteA Ana Belem Garciacutea La Prueba en la Funcioacuten Jurisdiccional de la Corte
Interamericana de Derechos Humanos Corte Nacional de Direitos Humanos Meacutexico 2016
Fallah Sara Mansour The Admissibility of Unlawfully Obtained Evidence before International
Courts and Tribunals In The Law amp Practice of International Courts and Tribunals Online
Publication Date 26 Aug 2020 In Volume 19 Issue 2 Pages 147-176
12
Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees
acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos
Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016
GUTIEacuteRREZ Juan Felipe Saacutenchez e outros Flexibilizacioacuten probatoria y equidad propuestas para
la justicia del posconflicto Universidad Santo Tomaacutes Via inveniendi et iudicandi vol 14 n 1
2019
JAIN NITYA Can an Arbitral Tribunal Admit Evidence Obtained through a Cyber-Attack
Kluwer Arbitration Blog 2019
MOURA Maria Thereza Rocha de Assis e outros Provas Iliacutecitas e o Sistema Interamericano de
Proteccedilatildeo dos Direitos Humanos Relatoacuterio - Brasil 2009 Biblioteca Juriacutedica Virtual del Instituto
de Investigaciones Juriacutedicas de La Universidad Nacional Autoacutenoma de Meacutexico
PAUacuteL Aacutelvaro Admissibility of evidence before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
Revista Direito da Fundaccedilatildeo Getuacutelio Vargas vol 13 n 2 2017 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscielobrscielophpscript=sci_arttextamppid=S1808-24322017000200653
TORRES CHEDRAUI Ana Mariacutea An analysis of the exclusion of evidence obtained in violation
of human rights in light of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights Tilburg
Law Review v 15 p 205-234 2011 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwresearchgatenetpublication286237562_An_analysis_of_the_exclusion_of_evid
ence_obtained_in_violation_of_human_rights_in_light_of_the_jurisprudence_of_the_Europe
an_Court_of_Human_Rightslink601533fb45851517ef26bde9download
Bases de Dados e de Jurisprudecircncia
Base de Decisotildees do Sistema Juriacutedico da Iacutendia ndash Kanoon Disponiacutevel em httpsindiankanoonorg Base de Jurisprudecircncia da Comissatildeo de Veneza (Codices - Infobase on Constitution Case Law of the Venice Commission) Disponiacutevel em httpwwwcodicescoeintNXTgatewaydllf=templatesampfn=defaulthtm Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos Disponiacutevel em httpswwwcorteidhorcrindexcfmlang=en Tribunal Constitucional Federal da Alemanha Disponiacutevel em httpswwwbundesverfassungsgerichtdeSiteGlobalsFormsSucheENEntscheidungensuche_Formularhtmlnn=5403310ampfacettedYear=2020amplanguage_=en Suprema Corte do Canadaacute Disponiacutevel em httpsscc-csccacase-dossierinfosearch-recherche-engaspx Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos da Ameacuterica Disponiacutevel em httpswwwsupremecourtgovopinionsopinionsaspx
13
Secretaria de Altos Estudos Pesquisas e Gestatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Coordenadoria de Difusatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Jurisprudecircncia Internacional
5
Wikileaks
Bryana Bible v United Student Aid Funds Inc (2015) Tribunal de Apelaccedilatildeo dos Estados
Unidos da Ameacuterica do Seacutetimo Circuito Documentos e evidecircncias liberados por terceiros
no WikiLeaks admissatildeo das provas informaccedilotildees em domiacutenio puacuteblico acessiacuteveis sem
dificuldades indevidas (notiacutecias)
Exceccedilotildees agrave teoria do fruit of the poisonous tree6
dissipation of taint
Murray v United States 487 US 533 480 (1988) Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos
ldquoldquoThe exclusionary rule prohibits introduction into evidence of tangible materials seized
during an unlawful search Beyond that the exclusionary rule also prohibits the
introduction of derivative evidence both tangible and testimonial that is the product of
the primary evidence or that is otherwise acquired as a result of the unlawful search up
to the point at which the connection with the unlawful search becomes acuteso attenuated
as to dissipate the taintrdquo7
Independent source
Segura v United States 468 US 796 (1984) A teoria da fonte independente ldquoremete agrave
inaplicabilidade da teoria do fruit of the poisonous tree nos casos em que a prova deriva
de uma fonte diversa da maculada pelo viacutecio da ilicitude Ela foi o fundamento da
manutenccedilatildeo de condenaccedilatildeo de indiviacuteduo que teve seu domiciacutelio ilicitamente invadido
por policiais e quando estes estavam no local outros policiais ali chegaram munidos de
competente mandado e lograram apreender drogasrdquo 8
Inevitable discovery
Nix v Williams 467 US 431 (1984) ldquoA teoria da descoberta inevitaacutevel eacute semelhante agrave
da fonte independente com a diferenccedila de a prova jaacute ter sido obtida de maneira iliacutecita
mas se chega agrave conclusatildeo que ela teria sido certamente descoberta licitamente eg
pelo segundo grupo de policiais que ao dar cumprimento agrave mandado judicial descobre
6 Para Thiago de Filippo as trecircs limitaccedilotildees agrave fruits doctrine parecem ter sido adotadas pelo Brasil por meio da Lei
116902008 que alterou a redaccedilatildeo do art 157 do Coacutedigo de Processo Penal (Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016)
7 Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016
8 Idem
6
que os objetos iliacutecitos jaacute foram apreendidos pelo primeiro grupo de policiais que invadiu
o domiciacutelio sem que tivessem obtido a competente ordemrdquo 9
Franccedila
Acoacuterdatildeo n 1119 (2020) Tribunal de Cassaccedilatildeo da Franccedila Cacircmara Social Demissatildeo de
empregado maacute conduta envio de informaccedilotildees a empresa concorrente dados contidos
no processamento de dados do empregado produccedilatildeo de provas que satildeo ilegais sob a
Lei de Proteccedilatildeo de Dados natildeo satildeo sistematicamente inadmissiacuteveis em processos
judiciais (notiacutecias)
Iacutendia
Ukha Kolhe v State of Maharashtra Supreme Court of India 1963 1963 AIR 1531 1964
SCR (1) 926 ldquoIn this case the police had fixed a tape-recording instrument to a telephone
with the consent of only one of the parties to record the conversation however the
other side contended that the tape-recorded conversation had been procured through
illegal means In this background it was held that lsquoeven if evidence is illegally obtained
it is admissiblersquordquo10
Poorna Mal v Director of Inspection of Income Tax (Investigation) Supreme Court of
India 1974 (1975 AIR 67 1975 SCR (2) 104) A Corte decidiu que ldquowhile ruling on the
question of admissibility of material seized in a search alleged to be vitiated by illegality
the Court held that lsquounless there is an express or necessary implied prohibition in the
Constitution or other law evidence obtained as a result of illegal search or seizure is not
liable to be shut outrsquordquo11
State of MP through CBI v Paltan Mallah Supreme Court of India 2005 ldquoIn India the
evidence obtained under illegal search is not completely excluded unless it has caused
serious prejudice to the accused The discretion has always been given to the court to
decide whether such evidence is to be accepted or notrdquo (hellip) lsquoThe general provisions
given in the Criminal Procedure Code are to be treated as guidelines and if at all there is
9 Idem 10 Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should lsquoendsrsquo justify the
lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-tree-doctrine-should-
the-ends-justify-the-means 11 Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should lsquoendsrsquo justify the
lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-tree-doctrine-should-
the-ends-justify-the-means
7
any minor violation still the court can accept the evidence and the courts have got
discretionary power to either accept it or reject itrsquordquo
Casos em que a Suprema Corte da Iacutendia natildeo admitiu prova ilegalmente obtida por
exercer um fator injusto ao acusado Umesh Kumar v State of AP Selvi v State of
Karnataka KS Puttaswamy v Union of India
Israel
CrimA 512198 Suprema Corte de Israel (High Court of Justice) 2006 ldquoEvidence may
be deemed inadmissible in criminal cases due to the manner in which it has been
obtained if two conditions are met simultaneously The evidence must have been
obtained illegally and admitting it in the trial must have a significant negative impact on
the accuseds rights to a fair trial Illegally obtained evidence can be excluded if admitting
it in the trial would violate the fairness of the proceedings in a substantial way for an
improper purpose and to an excessive degree This balancing formula is to be applied at
the discretion of the court in each individual case taking into account three main points
The first point is the nature and severity of the illegality involved in obtaining the
evidence The second is the influence of the illegality on the evidence ie whether it
makes the evidence less credible and whether the evidence exists independently from
the illegality Finally courts should consider the social benefit or harm that would result
from exclusion Here the primary concerns are the usefulness of the evidence and the
seriousness of the crime of which the defendant stands accusedrdquo
Meacutexico
Amparo Directo en Revisioacuten 38862013 Suprema Corte de Justiccedila da Naccedilatildeo do Meacutexico Geolocation without judicial warrant ndash ldquoIn this criminal case the First Chamber decided on the limits of the right to privacy and private communications The defendant argued that the use of geolocation of the phone of the victim should be dismissed as evidence in the trial in which he stood accused for kidnapping because on the one hand the victim had not authorized to reveal private communications and on the other hand this had been done without judicial warrant In a 3 to 2 decision the Court found that when there is a criminal investigation in which there is reasonable suspicion of a real and imminent danger for the victim the right to protect private communications is inapplicable Accordingly in cases in which the authority has reason to believe there is a real and imminent danger then it can require without judicial warrant telecommunication companies for private communications in which the victim had intervened In all other cases the Court considered a judicial authorization is required to allow the police to access private communications for criminal investigationsrdquo 12
12 Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-Clough Center 2016
Global Review of Constitutional Law (August 3 2017) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough Center 2016 Global Review of
8
Reino Unido
Wikileaks
R v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs ex parte Bancoult (No 2)
[2008] ldquoNa Inglaterra em 2017 a Suprema Corte admitiu por unanimidade a
admissibilidade de documentos sigilosos vazados publicamente no conhecido episoacutedio
Wikileakrdquo13
Repuacuteblica Checa
Judgment No III UacuteS 407117 of 31 July 2018 - Eligibility of secret recording of court
deliberation as evidence
ldquoIn a criminal matter the defendant challenged the impartiality of one of the judges
deciding his case based on an unauthorized recording of deliberation of the judicial
panel In the recording the judge made offensive remarks about the defendant and his
attorney The challenge was denied by appellate court based on the fact that the
recording was made without knowledge of the judges and was therefore inadmissible
as evidence CC recognized that there is between the right to a fair trial of the defendant
and the right to privacy of the judge and conducted the test of proportionality to balance
them It noted that the recording might have contained parts where the judicial panel
was deliberating andor voting and this type of information is confidential However
such information was not part of the evidence during the determination of impartiality
of the judge because the judgersquos comments were definitely not part of deliberations or
voting of the panel CC concluded that the recording could not be excluded from
evidence on this basis It understood the recording as a piece of valuable information
concerning the impartiality of the judge and stated that in this particular situation there
were no other possible pieces of evidence of similar information value that would
interfere in a lesser amount with the judgersquos right to privacy According to the CC
without the recording the right to a fair trial of the defendant would be almost
impossible to enforce effectively while the intensity of interference with the right to
privacy of the judge was minor because the judgersquos remarks were made during the
decision-making process Also the CC noted that the recording effectively cast doubt on
the objective element of judicial independence the public trust in independent
decision-making of that particular judge in this case was diminished For this reason
Constitutional Law ISBN 9780692925164 Published by the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy Available at SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3014378
13 Breda Juliano Admissibilidade processual das mensagens reveladas pelo The Intercept Conjur 8 de fevereiro de 2021 Disponiacutevel em httpswwwconjurcombr2021-fev-08breda-admissibilidade-processual-mensagens-interceptfbclid=IwAR1Aua12oOez-QqCARt2Kl0CyrfbgbCqmLgTNRC_t2AtqJ07cSJEP64zO58_ftnref5
9
the CC concluded that the previous decisions infringed the defendantrsquos right to a fair
trial and annulled themrdquo14
Suiacuteccedila
Decisatildeo 4A_362 (2013) Supremo Tribunal Federal Suiacuteccedilo Gravaccedilatildeo de viacutedeo obtido
ilegalmente sentenccedila natildeo violaccedilatildeo de poliacuteticas puacuteblicas Idem 4A_448 (2013)
Tribunal de Justiccedila da Uniatildeo Europeia
Persia International Bank plc v Council of the European Union (2013) Poliacutetica externa e
de seguranccedila medidas restritivas contra o Iratilde prevenir proliferaccedilatildeo nuclear
congelamento de fundos admissatildeo de documentos apresentados oriundos do
Wikileaks natureza possivelmente ilegal direitos de defesa direito agrave proteccedilatildeo judicial
eficaz
Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos
Gaumlfgen v Germany ldquoTorture or inhuman treatment or threats of the same may not be
used even in situations where there is a risk to the life of an individual Where evidence
is obtained as a result of prohibited methods of investigations such as to constitute a
breach of Article 3 ECHR Article 6 ECHR will only be infringed if the evidence is relied on
for a conviction Failure to exclude evidence obtained following a confession extracted
by means of inhuman treatment does not constitute a breach of the right to a fair trial
if that failure had no bearing on the conviction and sentence or on the overall fairness
of the trialrdquo
NN e TA v Beacutelgica (2008) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Divoacutercio correspondecircncias trocadas entre esposo e outro provas no processo natildeo enquadramento das regras de sigilo profissional documentos trazidos aos autos natildeo os torna puacuteblicos tendo em vista as restriccedilotildees de acesso aos arquivos do caso Jalloh v Alemanha (2006) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Preso por traacutefico de drogas recusa em tomar um emeacutetico para regurgitar o que havia engolido provas obtidas agrave forccedila e usadas contra o peticionaacuterio intervenccedilatildeo meacutedica forccedilada deve ser convincentemente justificada sobre os fatos de um caso especiacutefico escrutiacutenio rigoroso de todas as circunstacircncias circundantes autoridades devem demonstrar que levaram em conta meacutetodos alternativos de recuperaccedilatildeo das evidecircncias LL v Franccedila (2007) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Divoacutercio decisatildeo menciona relatoacuterio meacutedico confidencial documento meacutedico utilizado em base
14 Idem paacuteg 82
10
secundaacuteria e mesma soluccedilatildeo poderia ter sido alcanccedilada sem o referido relatoacuterio15 (nota)
15 Na decisatildeo recorrida (Tribunal de Cassaccedilatildeo francecircs) a Corte ldquoafirmou que a ilegalidade das provas sob a Lei de
Proteccedilatildeo de Dados natildeo deve levar sistematicamente a sua decisatildeo inadmissiacutevelrdquo (notiacutecias)
11
Referecircncias
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law (November 26 2020) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy U of Texas Law Public Law Research
Paper No 727 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 934 Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3736382
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law (October 18 2019) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy (2019) U of Texas Law Public Law
Research Paper No 711 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 921 Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3471638 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3471638
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law (July 19 2018) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy FSU College of Law Public Law
Research Paper No 888 U of Texas Law Public Law Research Paper Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3215613 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3215613
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law (August 3 2017) The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 9780692925164 Published by
the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3014378
Breda Juliano Admissibilidade processual das mensagens reveladas pelo The Intercept
Conjur 8 de fevereiro de 2021 Disponiacutevel em httpswwwconjurcombr2021-fev-08breda-
admissibilidade-processual-mensagens-interceptfbclid=IwAR1Aua12oOez-
QqCARt2Kl0CyrfbgbCqmLgTNRC_t2AtqJ07cSJEP64zO58_ftnref5
Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should
lsquoendsrsquo justify the lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-
tree-doctrine-should-the-ends-justify-the-means
CHAVARRIacuteA Ana Belem Garciacutea La Prueba en la Funcioacuten Jurisdiccional de la Corte
Interamericana de Derechos Humanos Corte Nacional de Direitos Humanos Meacutexico 2016
Fallah Sara Mansour The Admissibility of Unlawfully Obtained Evidence before International
Courts and Tribunals In The Law amp Practice of International Courts and Tribunals Online
Publication Date 26 Aug 2020 In Volume 19 Issue 2 Pages 147-176
12
Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees
acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos
Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016
GUTIEacuteRREZ Juan Felipe Saacutenchez e outros Flexibilizacioacuten probatoria y equidad propuestas para
la justicia del posconflicto Universidad Santo Tomaacutes Via inveniendi et iudicandi vol 14 n 1
2019
JAIN NITYA Can an Arbitral Tribunal Admit Evidence Obtained through a Cyber-Attack
Kluwer Arbitration Blog 2019
MOURA Maria Thereza Rocha de Assis e outros Provas Iliacutecitas e o Sistema Interamericano de
Proteccedilatildeo dos Direitos Humanos Relatoacuterio - Brasil 2009 Biblioteca Juriacutedica Virtual del Instituto
de Investigaciones Juriacutedicas de La Universidad Nacional Autoacutenoma de Meacutexico
PAUacuteL Aacutelvaro Admissibility of evidence before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
Revista Direito da Fundaccedilatildeo Getuacutelio Vargas vol 13 n 2 2017 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscielobrscielophpscript=sci_arttextamppid=S1808-24322017000200653
TORRES CHEDRAUI Ana Mariacutea An analysis of the exclusion of evidence obtained in violation
of human rights in light of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights Tilburg
Law Review v 15 p 205-234 2011 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwresearchgatenetpublication286237562_An_analysis_of_the_exclusion_of_evid
ence_obtained_in_violation_of_human_rights_in_light_of_the_jurisprudence_of_the_Europe
an_Court_of_Human_Rightslink601533fb45851517ef26bde9download
Bases de Dados e de Jurisprudecircncia
Base de Decisotildees do Sistema Juriacutedico da Iacutendia ndash Kanoon Disponiacutevel em httpsindiankanoonorg Base de Jurisprudecircncia da Comissatildeo de Veneza (Codices - Infobase on Constitution Case Law of the Venice Commission) Disponiacutevel em httpwwwcodicescoeintNXTgatewaydllf=templatesampfn=defaulthtm Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos Disponiacutevel em httpswwwcorteidhorcrindexcfmlang=en Tribunal Constitucional Federal da Alemanha Disponiacutevel em httpswwwbundesverfassungsgerichtdeSiteGlobalsFormsSucheENEntscheidungensuche_Formularhtmlnn=5403310ampfacettedYear=2020amplanguage_=en Suprema Corte do Canadaacute Disponiacutevel em httpsscc-csccacase-dossierinfosearch-recherche-engaspx Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos da Ameacuterica Disponiacutevel em httpswwwsupremecourtgovopinionsopinionsaspx
13
Secretaria de Altos Estudos Pesquisas e Gestatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Coordenadoria de Difusatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Jurisprudecircncia Internacional
6
que os objetos iliacutecitos jaacute foram apreendidos pelo primeiro grupo de policiais que invadiu
o domiciacutelio sem que tivessem obtido a competente ordemrdquo 9
Franccedila
Acoacuterdatildeo n 1119 (2020) Tribunal de Cassaccedilatildeo da Franccedila Cacircmara Social Demissatildeo de
empregado maacute conduta envio de informaccedilotildees a empresa concorrente dados contidos
no processamento de dados do empregado produccedilatildeo de provas que satildeo ilegais sob a
Lei de Proteccedilatildeo de Dados natildeo satildeo sistematicamente inadmissiacuteveis em processos
judiciais (notiacutecias)
Iacutendia
Ukha Kolhe v State of Maharashtra Supreme Court of India 1963 1963 AIR 1531 1964
SCR (1) 926 ldquoIn this case the police had fixed a tape-recording instrument to a telephone
with the consent of only one of the parties to record the conversation however the
other side contended that the tape-recorded conversation had been procured through
illegal means In this background it was held that lsquoeven if evidence is illegally obtained
it is admissiblersquordquo10
Poorna Mal v Director of Inspection of Income Tax (Investigation) Supreme Court of
India 1974 (1975 AIR 67 1975 SCR (2) 104) A Corte decidiu que ldquowhile ruling on the
question of admissibility of material seized in a search alleged to be vitiated by illegality
the Court held that lsquounless there is an express or necessary implied prohibition in the
Constitution or other law evidence obtained as a result of illegal search or seizure is not
liable to be shut outrsquordquo11
State of MP through CBI v Paltan Mallah Supreme Court of India 2005 ldquoIn India the
evidence obtained under illegal search is not completely excluded unless it has caused
serious prejudice to the accused The discretion has always been given to the court to
decide whether such evidence is to be accepted or notrdquo (hellip) lsquoThe general provisions
given in the Criminal Procedure Code are to be treated as guidelines and if at all there is
9 Idem 10 Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should lsquoendsrsquo justify the
lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-tree-doctrine-should-
the-ends-justify-the-means 11 Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should lsquoendsrsquo justify the
lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-tree-doctrine-should-
the-ends-justify-the-means
7
any minor violation still the court can accept the evidence and the courts have got
discretionary power to either accept it or reject itrsquordquo
Casos em que a Suprema Corte da Iacutendia natildeo admitiu prova ilegalmente obtida por
exercer um fator injusto ao acusado Umesh Kumar v State of AP Selvi v State of
Karnataka KS Puttaswamy v Union of India
Israel
CrimA 512198 Suprema Corte de Israel (High Court of Justice) 2006 ldquoEvidence may
be deemed inadmissible in criminal cases due to the manner in which it has been
obtained if two conditions are met simultaneously The evidence must have been
obtained illegally and admitting it in the trial must have a significant negative impact on
the accuseds rights to a fair trial Illegally obtained evidence can be excluded if admitting
it in the trial would violate the fairness of the proceedings in a substantial way for an
improper purpose and to an excessive degree This balancing formula is to be applied at
the discretion of the court in each individual case taking into account three main points
The first point is the nature and severity of the illegality involved in obtaining the
evidence The second is the influence of the illegality on the evidence ie whether it
makes the evidence less credible and whether the evidence exists independently from
the illegality Finally courts should consider the social benefit or harm that would result
from exclusion Here the primary concerns are the usefulness of the evidence and the
seriousness of the crime of which the defendant stands accusedrdquo
Meacutexico
Amparo Directo en Revisioacuten 38862013 Suprema Corte de Justiccedila da Naccedilatildeo do Meacutexico Geolocation without judicial warrant ndash ldquoIn this criminal case the First Chamber decided on the limits of the right to privacy and private communications The defendant argued that the use of geolocation of the phone of the victim should be dismissed as evidence in the trial in which he stood accused for kidnapping because on the one hand the victim had not authorized to reveal private communications and on the other hand this had been done without judicial warrant In a 3 to 2 decision the Court found that when there is a criminal investigation in which there is reasonable suspicion of a real and imminent danger for the victim the right to protect private communications is inapplicable Accordingly in cases in which the authority has reason to believe there is a real and imminent danger then it can require without judicial warrant telecommunication companies for private communications in which the victim had intervened In all other cases the Court considered a judicial authorization is required to allow the police to access private communications for criminal investigationsrdquo 12
12 Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-Clough Center 2016
Global Review of Constitutional Law (August 3 2017) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough Center 2016 Global Review of
8
Reino Unido
Wikileaks
R v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs ex parte Bancoult (No 2)
[2008] ldquoNa Inglaterra em 2017 a Suprema Corte admitiu por unanimidade a
admissibilidade de documentos sigilosos vazados publicamente no conhecido episoacutedio
Wikileakrdquo13
Repuacuteblica Checa
Judgment No III UacuteS 407117 of 31 July 2018 - Eligibility of secret recording of court
deliberation as evidence
ldquoIn a criminal matter the defendant challenged the impartiality of one of the judges
deciding his case based on an unauthorized recording of deliberation of the judicial
panel In the recording the judge made offensive remarks about the defendant and his
attorney The challenge was denied by appellate court based on the fact that the
recording was made without knowledge of the judges and was therefore inadmissible
as evidence CC recognized that there is between the right to a fair trial of the defendant
and the right to privacy of the judge and conducted the test of proportionality to balance
them It noted that the recording might have contained parts where the judicial panel
was deliberating andor voting and this type of information is confidential However
such information was not part of the evidence during the determination of impartiality
of the judge because the judgersquos comments were definitely not part of deliberations or
voting of the panel CC concluded that the recording could not be excluded from
evidence on this basis It understood the recording as a piece of valuable information
concerning the impartiality of the judge and stated that in this particular situation there
were no other possible pieces of evidence of similar information value that would
interfere in a lesser amount with the judgersquos right to privacy According to the CC
without the recording the right to a fair trial of the defendant would be almost
impossible to enforce effectively while the intensity of interference with the right to
privacy of the judge was minor because the judgersquos remarks were made during the
decision-making process Also the CC noted that the recording effectively cast doubt on
the objective element of judicial independence the public trust in independent
decision-making of that particular judge in this case was diminished For this reason
Constitutional Law ISBN 9780692925164 Published by the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy Available at SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3014378
13 Breda Juliano Admissibilidade processual das mensagens reveladas pelo The Intercept Conjur 8 de fevereiro de 2021 Disponiacutevel em httpswwwconjurcombr2021-fev-08breda-admissibilidade-processual-mensagens-interceptfbclid=IwAR1Aua12oOez-QqCARt2Kl0CyrfbgbCqmLgTNRC_t2AtqJ07cSJEP64zO58_ftnref5
9
the CC concluded that the previous decisions infringed the defendantrsquos right to a fair
trial and annulled themrdquo14
Suiacuteccedila
Decisatildeo 4A_362 (2013) Supremo Tribunal Federal Suiacuteccedilo Gravaccedilatildeo de viacutedeo obtido
ilegalmente sentenccedila natildeo violaccedilatildeo de poliacuteticas puacuteblicas Idem 4A_448 (2013)
Tribunal de Justiccedila da Uniatildeo Europeia
Persia International Bank plc v Council of the European Union (2013) Poliacutetica externa e
de seguranccedila medidas restritivas contra o Iratilde prevenir proliferaccedilatildeo nuclear
congelamento de fundos admissatildeo de documentos apresentados oriundos do
Wikileaks natureza possivelmente ilegal direitos de defesa direito agrave proteccedilatildeo judicial
eficaz
Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos
Gaumlfgen v Germany ldquoTorture or inhuman treatment or threats of the same may not be
used even in situations where there is a risk to the life of an individual Where evidence
is obtained as a result of prohibited methods of investigations such as to constitute a
breach of Article 3 ECHR Article 6 ECHR will only be infringed if the evidence is relied on
for a conviction Failure to exclude evidence obtained following a confession extracted
by means of inhuman treatment does not constitute a breach of the right to a fair trial
if that failure had no bearing on the conviction and sentence or on the overall fairness
of the trialrdquo
NN e TA v Beacutelgica (2008) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Divoacutercio correspondecircncias trocadas entre esposo e outro provas no processo natildeo enquadramento das regras de sigilo profissional documentos trazidos aos autos natildeo os torna puacuteblicos tendo em vista as restriccedilotildees de acesso aos arquivos do caso Jalloh v Alemanha (2006) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Preso por traacutefico de drogas recusa em tomar um emeacutetico para regurgitar o que havia engolido provas obtidas agrave forccedila e usadas contra o peticionaacuterio intervenccedilatildeo meacutedica forccedilada deve ser convincentemente justificada sobre os fatos de um caso especiacutefico escrutiacutenio rigoroso de todas as circunstacircncias circundantes autoridades devem demonstrar que levaram em conta meacutetodos alternativos de recuperaccedilatildeo das evidecircncias LL v Franccedila (2007) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Divoacutercio decisatildeo menciona relatoacuterio meacutedico confidencial documento meacutedico utilizado em base
14 Idem paacuteg 82
10
secundaacuteria e mesma soluccedilatildeo poderia ter sido alcanccedilada sem o referido relatoacuterio15 (nota)
15 Na decisatildeo recorrida (Tribunal de Cassaccedilatildeo francecircs) a Corte ldquoafirmou que a ilegalidade das provas sob a Lei de
Proteccedilatildeo de Dados natildeo deve levar sistematicamente a sua decisatildeo inadmissiacutevelrdquo (notiacutecias)
11
Referecircncias
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law (November 26 2020) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy U of Texas Law Public Law Research
Paper No 727 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 934 Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3736382
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law (October 18 2019) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy (2019) U of Texas Law Public Law
Research Paper No 711 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 921 Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3471638 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3471638
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law (July 19 2018) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy FSU College of Law Public Law
Research Paper No 888 U of Texas Law Public Law Research Paper Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3215613 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3215613
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law (August 3 2017) The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 9780692925164 Published by
the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3014378
Breda Juliano Admissibilidade processual das mensagens reveladas pelo The Intercept
Conjur 8 de fevereiro de 2021 Disponiacutevel em httpswwwconjurcombr2021-fev-08breda-
admissibilidade-processual-mensagens-interceptfbclid=IwAR1Aua12oOez-
QqCARt2Kl0CyrfbgbCqmLgTNRC_t2AtqJ07cSJEP64zO58_ftnref5
Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should
lsquoendsrsquo justify the lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-
tree-doctrine-should-the-ends-justify-the-means
CHAVARRIacuteA Ana Belem Garciacutea La Prueba en la Funcioacuten Jurisdiccional de la Corte
Interamericana de Derechos Humanos Corte Nacional de Direitos Humanos Meacutexico 2016
Fallah Sara Mansour The Admissibility of Unlawfully Obtained Evidence before International
Courts and Tribunals In The Law amp Practice of International Courts and Tribunals Online
Publication Date 26 Aug 2020 In Volume 19 Issue 2 Pages 147-176
12
Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees
acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos
Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016
GUTIEacuteRREZ Juan Felipe Saacutenchez e outros Flexibilizacioacuten probatoria y equidad propuestas para
la justicia del posconflicto Universidad Santo Tomaacutes Via inveniendi et iudicandi vol 14 n 1
2019
JAIN NITYA Can an Arbitral Tribunal Admit Evidence Obtained through a Cyber-Attack
Kluwer Arbitration Blog 2019
MOURA Maria Thereza Rocha de Assis e outros Provas Iliacutecitas e o Sistema Interamericano de
Proteccedilatildeo dos Direitos Humanos Relatoacuterio - Brasil 2009 Biblioteca Juriacutedica Virtual del Instituto
de Investigaciones Juriacutedicas de La Universidad Nacional Autoacutenoma de Meacutexico
PAUacuteL Aacutelvaro Admissibility of evidence before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
Revista Direito da Fundaccedilatildeo Getuacutelio Vargas vol 13 n 2 2017 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscielobrscielophpscript=sci_arttextamppid=S1808-24322017000200653
TORRES CHEDRAUI Ana Mariacutea An analysis of the exclusion of evidence obtained in violation
of human rights in light of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights Tilburg
Law Review v 15 p 205-234 2011 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwresearchgatenetpublication286237562_An_analysis_of_the_exclusion_of_evid
ence_obtained_in_violation_of_human_rights_in_light_of_the_jurisprudence_of_the_Europe
an_Court_of_Human_Rightslink601533fb45851517ef26bde9download
Bases de Dados e de Jurisprudecircncia
Base de Decisotildees do Sistema Juriacutedico da Iacutendia ndash Kanoon Disponiacutevel em httpsindiankanoonorg Base de Jurisprudecircncia da Comissatildeo de Veneza (Codices - Infobase on Constitution Case Law of the Venice Commission) Disponiacutevel em httpwwwcodicescoeintNXTgatewaydllf=templatesampfn=defaulthtm Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos Disponiacutevel em httpswwwcorteidhorcrindexcfmlang=en Tribunal Constitucional Federal da Alemanha Disponiacutevel em httpswwwbundesverfassungsgerichtdeSiteGlobalsFormsSucheENEntscheidungensuche_Formularhtmlnn=5403310ampfacettedYear=2020amplanguage_=en Suprema Corte do Canadaacute Disponiacutevel em httpsscc-csccacase-dossierinfosearch-recherche-engaspx Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos da Ameacuterica Disponiacutevel em httpswwwsupremecourtgovopinionsopinionsaspx
13
Secretaria de Altos Estudos Pesquisas e Gestatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Coordenadoria de Difusatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Jurisprudecircncia Internacional
7
any minor violation still the court can accept the evidence and the courts have got
discretionary power to either accept it or reject itrsquordquo
Casos em que a Suprema Corte da Iacutendia natildeo admitiu prova ilegalmente obtida por
exercer um fator injusto ao acusado Umesh Kumar v State of AP Selvi v State of
Karnataka KS Puttaswamy v Union of India
Israel
CrimA 512198 Suprema Corte de Israel (High Court of Justice) 2006 ldquoEvidence may
be deemed inadmissible in criminal cases due to the manner in which it has been
obtained if two conditions are met simultaneously The evidence must have been
obtained illegally and admitting it in the trial must have a significant negative impact on
the accuseds rights to a fair trial Illegally obtained evidence can be excluded if admitting
it in the trial would violate the fairness of the proceedings in a substantial way for an
improper purpose and to an excessive degree This balancing formula is to be applied at
the discretion of the court in each individual case taking into account three main points
The first point is the nature and severity of the illegality involved in obtaining the
evidence The second is the influence of the illegality on the evidence ie whether it
makes the evidence less credible and whether the evidence exists independently from
the illegality Finally courts should consider the social benefit or harm that would result
from exclusion Here the primary concerns are the usefulness of the evidence and the
seriousness of the crime of which the defendant stands accusedrdquo
Meacutexico
Amparo Directo en Revisioacuten 38862013 Suprema Corte de Justiccedila da Naccedilatildeo do Meacutexico Geolocation without judicial warrant ndash ldquoIn this criminal case the First Chamber decided on the limits of the right to privacy and private communications The defendant argued that the use of geolocation of the phone of the victim should be dismissed as evidence in the trial in which he stood accused for kidnapping because on the one hand the victim had not authorized to reveal private communications and on the other hand this had been done without judicial warrant In a 3 to 2 decision the Court found that when there is a criminal investigation in which there is reasonable suspicion of a real and imminent danger for the victim the right to protect private communications is inapplicable Accordingly in cases in which the authority has reason to believe there is a real and imminent danger then it can require without judicial warrant telecommunication companies for private communications in which the victim had intervened In all other cases the Court considered a judicial authorization is required to allow the police to access private communications for criminal investigationsrdquo 12
12 Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-Clough Center 2016
Global Review of Constitutional Law (August 3 2017) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough Center 2016 Global Review of
8
Reino Unido
Wikileaks
R v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs ex parte Bancoult (No 2)
[2008] ldquoNa Inglaterra em 2017 a Suprema Corte admitiu por unanimidade a
admissibilidade de documentos sigilosos vazados publicamente no conhecido episoacutedio
Wikileakrdquo13
Repuacuteblica Checa
Judgment No III UacuteS 407117 of 31 July 2018 - Eligibility of secret recording of court
deliberation as evidence
ldquoIn a criminal matter the defendant challenged the impartiality of one of the judges
deciding his case based on an unauthorized recording of deliberation of the judicial
panel In the recording the judge made offensive remarks about the defendant and his
attorney The challenge was denied by appellate court based on the fact that the
recording was made without knowledge of the judges and was therefore inadmissible
as evidence CC recognized that there is between the right to a fair trial of the defendant
and the right to privacy of the judge and conducted the test of proportionality to balance
them It noted that the recording might have contained parts where the judicial panel
was deliberating andor voting and this type of information is confidential However
such information was not part of the evidence during the determination of impartiality
of the judge because the judgersquos comments were definitely not part of deliberations or
voting of the panel CC concluded that the recording could not be excluded from
evidence on this basis It understood the recording as a piece of valuable information
concerning the impartiality of the judge and stated that in this particular situation there
were no other possible pieces of evidence of similar information value that would
interfere in a lesser amount with the judgersquos right to privacy According to the CC
without the recording the right to a fair trial of the defendant would be almost
impossible to enforce effectively while the intensity of interference with the right to
privacy of the judge was minor because the judgersquos remarks were made during the
decision-making process Also the CC noted that the recording effectively cast doubt on
the objective element of judicial independence the public trust in independent
decision-making of that particular judge in this case was diminished For this reason
Constitutional Law ISBN 9780692925164 Published by the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy Available at SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3014378
13 Breda Juliano Admissibilidade processual das mensagens reveladas pelo The Intercept Conjur 8 de fevereiro de 2021 Disponiacutevel em httpswwwconjurcombr2021-fev-08breda-admissibilidade-processual-mensagens-interceptfbclid=IwAR1Aua12oOez-QqCARt2Kl0CyrfbgbCqmLgTNRC_t2AtqJ07cSJEP64zO58_ftnref5
9
the CC concluded that the previous decisions infringed the defendantrsquos right to a fair
trial and annulled themrdquo14
Suiacuteccedila
Decisatildeo 4A_362 (2013) Supremo Tribunal Federal Suiacuteccedilo Gravaccedilatildeo de viacutedeo obtido
ilegalmente sentenccedila natildeo violaccedilatildeo de poliacuteticas puacuteblicas Idem 4A_448 (2013)
Tribunal de Justiccedila da Uniatildeo Europeia
Persia International Bank plc v Council of the European Union (2013) Poliacutetica externa e
de seguranccedila medidas restritivas contra o Iratilde prevenir proliferaccedilatildeo nuclear
congelamento de fundos admissatildeo de documentos apresentados oriundos do
Wikileaks natureza possivelmente ilegal direitos de defesa direito agrave proteccedilatildeo judicial
eficaz
Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos
Gaumlfgen v Germany ldquoTorture or inhuman treatment or threats of the same may not be
used even in situations where there is a risk to the life of an individual Where evidence
is obtained as a result of prohibited methods of investigations such as to constitute a
breach of Article 3 ECHR Article 6 ECHR will only be infringed if the evidence is relied on
for a conviction Failure to exclude evidence obtained following a confession extracted
by means of inhuman treatment does not constitute a breach of the right to a fair trial
if that failure had no bearing on the conviction and sentence or on the overall fairness
of the trialrdquo
NN e TA v Beacutelgica (2008) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Divoacutercio correspondecircncias trocadas entre esposo e outro provas no processo natildeo enquadramento das regras de sigilo profissional documentos trazidos aos autos natildeo os torna puacuteblicos tendo em vista as restriccedilotildees de acesso aos arquivos do caso Jalloh v Alemanha (2006) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Preso por traacutefico de drogas recusa em tomar um emeacutetico para regurgitar o que havia engolido provas obtidas agrave forccedila e usadas contra o peticionaacuterio intervenccedilatildeo meacutedica forccedilada deve ser convincentemente justificada sobre os fatos de um caso especiacutefico escrutiacutenio rigoroso de todas as circunstacircncias circundantes autoridades devem demonstrar que levaram em conta meacutetodos alternativos de recuperaccedilatildeo das evidecircncias LL v Franccedila (2007) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Divoacutercio decisatildeo menciona relatoacuterio meacutedico confidencial documento meacutedico utilizado em base
14 Idem paacuteg 82
10
secundaacuteria e mesma soluccedilatildeo poderia ter sido alcanccedilada sem o referido relatoacuterio15 (nota)
15 Na decisatildeo recorrida (Tribunal de Cassaccedilatildeo francecircs) a Corte ldquoafirmou que a ilegalidade das provas sob a Lei de
Proteccedilatildeo de Dados natildeo deve levar sistematicamente a sua decisatildeo inadmissiacutevelrdquo (notiacutecias)
11
Referecircncias
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law (November 26 2020) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy U of Texas Law Public Law Research
Paper No 727 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 934 Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3736382
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law (October 18 2019) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy (2019) U of Texas Law Public Law
Research Paper No 711 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 921 Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3471638 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3471638
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law (July 19 2018) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy FSU College of Law Public Law
Research Paper No 888 U of Texas Law Public Law Research Paper Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3215613 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3215613
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law (August 3 2017) The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 9780692925164 Published by
the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3014378
Breda Juliano Admissibilidade processual das mensagens reveladas pelo The Intercept
Conjur 8 de fevereiro de 2021 Disponiacutevel em httpswwwconjurcombr2021-fev-08breda-
admissibilidade-processual-mensagens-interceptfbclid=IwAR1Aua12oOez-
QqCARt2Kl0CyrfbgbCqmLgTNRC_t2AtqJ07cSJEP64zO58_ftnref5
Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should
lsquoendsrsquo justify the lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-
tree-doctrine-should-the-ends-justify-the-means
CHAVARRIacuteA Ana Belem Garciacutea La Prueba en la Funcioacuten Jurisdiccional de la Corte
Interamericana de Derechos Humanos Corte Nacional de Direitos Humanos Meacutexico 2016
Fallah Sara Mansour The Admissibility of Unlawfully Obtained Evidence before International
Courts and Tribunals In The Law amp Practice of International Courts and Tribunals Online
Publication Date 26 Aug 2020 In Volume 19 Issue 2 Pages 147-176
12
Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees
acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos
Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016
GUTIEacuteRREZ Juan Felipe Saacutenchez e outros Flexibilizacioacuten probatoria y equidad propuestas para
la justicia del posconflicto Universidad Santo Tomaacutes Via inveniendi et iudicandi vol 14 n 1
2019
JAIN NITYA Can an Arbitral Tribunal Admit Evidence Obtained through a Cyber-Attack
Kluwer Arbitration Blog 2019
MOURA Maria Thereza Rocha de Assis e outros Provas Iliacutecitas e o Sistema Interamericano de
Proteccedilatildeo dos Direitos Humanos Relatoacuterio - Brasil 2009 Biblioteca Juriacutedica Virtual del Instituto
de Investigaciones Juriacutedicas de La Universidad Nacional Autoacutenoma de Meacutexico
PAUacuteL Aacutelvaro Admissibility of evidence before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
Revista Direito da Fundaccedilatildeo Getuacutelio Vargas vol 13 n 2 2017 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscielobrscielophpscript=sci_arttextamppid=S1808-24322017000200653
TORRES CHEDRAUI Ana Mariacutea An analysis of the exclusion of evidence obtained in violation
of human rights in light of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights Tilburg
Law Review v 15 p 205-234 2011 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwresearchgatenetpublication286237562_An_analysis_of_the_exclusion_of_evid
ence_obtained_in_violation_of_human_rights_in_light_of_the_jurisprudence_of_the_Europe
an_Court_of_Human_Rightslink601533fb45851517ef26bde9download
Bases de Dados e de Jurisprudecircncia
Base de Decisotildees do Sistema Juriacutedico da Iacutendia ndash Kanoon Disponiacutevel em httpsindiankanoonorg Base de Jurisprudecircncia da Comissatildeo de Veneza (Codices - Infobase on Constitution Case Law of the Venice Commission) Disponiacutevel em httpwwwcodicescoeintNXTgatewaydllf=templatesampfn=defaulthtm Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos Disponiacutevel em httpswwwcorteidhorcrindexcfmlang=en Tribunal Constitucional Federal da Alemanha Disponiacutevel em httpswwwbundesverfassungsgerichtdeSiteGlobalsFormsSucheENEntscheidungensuche_Formularhtmlnn=5403310ampfacettedYear=2020amplanguage_=en Suprema Corte do Canadaacute Disponiacutevel em httpsscc-csccacase-dossierinfosearch-recherche-engaspx Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos da Ameacuterica Disponiacutevel em httpswwwsupremecourtgovopinionsopinionsaspx
13
Secretaria de Altos Estudos Pesquisas e Gestatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Coordenadoria de Difusatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Jurisprudecircncia Internacional
8
Reino Unido
Wikileaks
R v Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs ex parte Bancoult (No 2)
[2008] ldquoNa Inglaterra em 2017 a Suprema Corte admitiu por unanimidade a
admissibilidade de documentos sigilosos vazados publicamente no conhecido episoacutedio
Wikileakrdquo13
Repuacuteblica Checa
Judgment No III UacuteS 407117 of 31 July 2018 - Eligibility of secret recording of court
deliberation as evidence
ldquoIn a criminal matter the defendant challenged the impartiality of one of the judges
deciding his case based on an unauthorized recording of deliberation of the judicial
panel In the recording the judge made offensive remarks about the defendant and his
attorney The challenge was denied by appellate court based on the fact that the
recording was made without knowledge of the judges and was therefore inadmissible
as evidence CC recognized that there is between the right to a fair trial of the defendant
and the right to privacy of the judge and conducted the test of proportionality to balance
them It noted that the recording might have contained parts where the judicial panel
was deliberating andor voting and this type of information is confidential However
such information was not part of the evidence during the determination of impartiality
of the judge because the judgersquos comments were definitely not part of deliberations or
voting of the panel CC concluded that the recording could not be excluded from
evidence on this basis It understood the recording as a piece of valuable information
concerning the impartiality of the judge and stated that in this particular situation there
were no other possible pieces of evidence of similar information value that would
interfere in a lesser amount with the judgersquos right to privacy According to the CC
without the recording the right to a fair trial of the defendant would be almost
impossible to enforce effectively while the intensity of interference with the right to
privacy of the judge was minor because the judgersquos remarks were made during the
decision-making process Also the CC noted that the recording effectively cast doubt on
the objective element of judicial independence the public trust in independent
decision-making of that particular judge in this case was diminished For this reason
Constitutional Law ISBN 9780692925164 Published by the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy Available at SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3014378
13 Breda Juliano Admissibilidade processual das mensagens reveladas pelo The Intercept Conjur 8 de fevereiro de 2021 Disponiacutevel em httpswwwconjurcombr2021-fev-08breda-admissibilidade-processual-mensagens-interceptfbclid=IwAR1Aua12oOez-QqCARt2Kl0CyrfbgbCqmLgTNRC_t2AtqJ07cSJEP64zO58_ftnref5
9
the CC concluded that the previous decisions infringed the defendantrsquos right to a fair
trial and annulled themrdquo14
Suiacuteccedila
Decisatildeo 4A_362 (2013) Supremo Tribunal Federal Suiacuteccedilo Gravaccedilatildeo de viacutedeo obtido
ilegalmente sentenccedila natildeo violaccedilatildeo de poliacuteticas puacuteblicas Idem 4A_448 (2013)
Tribunal de Justiccedila da Uniatildeo Europeia
Persia International Bank plc v Council of the European Union (2013) Poliacutetica externa e
de seguranccedila medidas restritivas contra o Iratilde prevenir proliferaccedilatildeo nuclear
congelamento de fundos admissatildeo de documentos apresentados oriundos do
Wikileaks natureza possivelmente ilegal direitos de defesa direito agrave proteccedilatildeo judicial
eficaz
Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos
Gaumlfgen v Germany ldquoTorture or inhuman treatment or threats of the same may not be
used even in situations where there is a risk to the life of an individual Where evidence
is obtained as a result of prohibited methods of investigations such as to constitute a
breach of Article 3 ECHR Article 6 ECHR will only be infringed if the evidence is relied on
for a conviction Failure to exclude evidence obtained following a confession extracted
by means of inhuman treatment does not constitute a breach of the right to a fair trial
if that failure had no bearing on the conviction and sentence or on the overall fairness
of the trialrdquo
NN e TA v Beacutelgica (2008) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Divoacutercio correspondecircncias trocadas entre esposo e outro provas no processo natildeo enquadramento das regras de sigilo profissional documentos trazidos aos autos natildeo os torna puacuteblicos tendo em vista as restriccedilotildees de acesso aos arquivos do caso Jalloh v Alemanha (2006) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Preso por traacutefico de drogas recusa em tomar um emeacutetico para regurgitar o que havia engolido provas obtidas agrave forccedila e usadas contra o peticionaacuterio intervenccedilatildeo meacutedica forccedilada deve ser convincentemente justificada sobre os fatos de um caso especiacutefico escrutiacutenio rigoroso de todas as circunstacircncias circundantes autoridades devem demonstrar que levaram em conta meacutetodos alternativos de recuperaccedilatildeo das evidecircncias LL v Franccedila (2007) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Divoacutercio decisatildeo menciona relatoacuterio meacutedico confidencial documento meacutedico utilizado em base
14 Idem paacuteg 82
10
secundaacuteria e mesma soluccedilatildeo poderia ter sido alcanccedilada sem o referido relatoacuterio15 (nota)
15 Na decisatildeo recorrida (Tribunal de Cassaccedilatildeo francecircs) a Corte ldquoafirmou que a ilegalidade das provas sob a Lei de
Proteccedilatildeo de Dados natildeo deve levar sistematicamente a sua decisatildeo inadmissiacutevelrdquo (notiacutecias)
11
Referecircncias
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law (November 26 2020) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy U of Texas Law Public Law Research
Paper No 727 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 934 Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3736382
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law (October 18 2019) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy (2019) U of Texas Law Public Law
Research Paper No 711 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 921 Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3471638 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3471638
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law (July 19 2018) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy FSU College of Law Public Law
Research Paper No 888 U of Texas Law Public Law Research Paper Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3215613 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3215613
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law (August 3 2017) The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 9780692925164 Published by
the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3014378
Breda Juliano Admissibilidade processual das mensagens reveladas pelo The Intercept
Conjur 8 de fevereiro de 2021 Disponiacutevel em httpswwwconjurcombr2021-fev-08breda-
admissibilidade-processual-mensagens-interceptfbclid=IwAR1Aua12oOez-
QqCARt2Kl0CyrfbgbCqmLgTNRC_t2AtqJ07cSJEP64zO58_ftnref5
Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should
lsquoendsrsquo justify the lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-
tree-doctrine-should-the-ends-justify-the-means
CHAVARRIacuteA Ana Belem Garciacutea La Prueba en la Funcioacuten Jurisdiccional de la Corte
Interamericana de Derechos Humanos Corte Nacional de Direitos Humanos Meacutexico 2016
Fallah Sara Mansour The Admissibility of Unlawfully Obtained Evidence before International
Courts and Tribunals In The Law amp Practice of International Courts and Tribunals Online
Publication Date 26 Aug 2020 In Volume 19 Issue 2 Pages 147-176
12
Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees
acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos
Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016
GUTIEacuteRREZ Juan Felipe Saacutenchez e outros Flexibilizacioacuten probatoria y equidad propuestas para
la justicia del posconflicto Universidad Santo Tomaacutes Via inveniendi et iudicandi vol 14 n 1
2019
JAIN NITYA Can an Arbitral Tribunal Admit Evidence Obtained through a Cyber-Attack
Kluwer Arbitration Blog 2019
MOURA Maria Thereza Rocha de Assis e outros Provas Iliacutecitas e o Sistema Interamericano de
Proteccedilatildeo dos Direitos Humanos Relatoacuterio - Brasil 2009 Biblioteca Juriacutedica Virtual del Instituto
de Investigaciones Juriacutedicas de La Universidad Nacional Autoacutenoma de Meacutexico
PAUacuteL Aacutelvaro Admissibility of evidence before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
Revista Direito da Fundaccedilatildeo Getuacutelio Vargas vol 13 n 2 2017 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscielobrscielophpscript=sci_arttextamppid=S1808-24322017000200653
TORRES CHEDRAUI Ana Mariacutea An analysis of the exclusion of evidence obtained in violation
of human rights in light of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights Tilburg
Law Review v 15 p 205-234 2011 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwresearchgatenetpublication286237562_An_analysis_of_the_exclusion_of_evid
ence_obtained_in_violation_of_human_rights_in_light_of_the_jurisprudence_of_the_Europe
an_Court_of_Human_Rightslink601533fb45851517ef26bde9download
Bases de Dados e de Jurisprudecircncia
Base de Decisotildees do Sistema Juriacutedico da Iacutendia ndash Kanoon Disponiacutevel em httpsindiankanoonorg Base de Jurisprudecircncia da Comissatildeo de Veneza (Codices - Infobase on Constitution Case Law of the Venice Commission) Disponiacutevel em httpwwwcodicescoeintNXTgatewaydllf=templatesampfn=defaulthtm Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos Disponiacutevel em httpswwwcorteidhorcrindexcfmlang=en Tribunal Constitucional Federal da Alemanha Disponiacutevel em httpswwwbundesverfassungsgerichtdeSiteGlobalsFormsSucheENEntscheidungensuche_Formularhtmlnn=5403310ampfacettedYear=2020amplanguage_=en Suprema Corte do Canadaacute Disponiacutevel em httpsscc-csccacase-dossierinfosearch-recherche-engaspx Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos da Ameacuterica Disponiacutevel em httpswwwsupremecourtgovopinionsopinionsaspx
13
Secretaria de Altos Estudos Pesquisas e Gestatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Coordenadoria de Difusatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Jurisprudecircncia Internacional
9
the CC concluded that the previous decisions infringed the defendantrsquos right to a fair
trial and annulled themrdquo14
Suiacuteccedila
Decisatildeo 4A_362 (2013) Supremo Tribunal Federal Suiacuteccedilo Gravaccedilatildeo de viacutedeo obtido
ilegalmente sentenccedila natildeo violaccedilatildeo de poliacuteticas puacuteblicas Idem 4A_448 (2013)
Tribunal de Justiccedila da Uniatildeo Europeia
Persia International Bank plc v Council of the European Union (2013) Poliacutetica externa e
de seguranccedila medidas restritivas contra o Iratilde prevenir proliferaccedilatildeo nuclear
congelamento de fundos admissatildeo de documentos apresentados oriundos do
Wikileaks natureza possivelmente ilegal direitos de defesa direito agrave proteccedilatildeo judicial
eficaz
Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos
Gaumlfgen v Germany ldquoTorture or inhuman treatment or threats of the same may not be
used even in situations where there is a risk to the life of an individual Where evidence
is obtained as a result of prohibited methods of investigations such as to constitute a
breach of Article 3 ECHR Article 6 ECHR will only be infringed if the evidence is relied on
for a conviction Failure to exclude evidence obtained following a confession extracted
by means of inhuman treatment does not constitute a breach of the right to a fair trial
if that failure had no bearing on the conviction and sentence or on the overall fairness
of the trialrdquo
NN e TA v Beacutelgica (2008) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Divoacutercio correspondecircncias trocadas entre esposo e outro provas no processo natildeo enquadramento das regras de sigilo profissional documentos trazidos aos autos natildeo os torna puacuteblicos tendo em vista as restriccedilotildees de acesso aos arquivos do caso Jalloh v Alemanha (2006) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Preso por traacutefico de drogas recusa em tomar um emeacutetico para regurgitar o que havia engolido provas obtidas agrave forccedila e usadas contra o peticionaacuterio intervenccedilatildeo meacutedica forccedilada deve ser convincentemente justificada sobre os fatos de um caso especiacutefico escrutiacutenio rigoroso de todas as circunstacircncias circundantes autoridades devem demonstrar que levaram em conta meacutetodos alternativos de recuperaccedilatildeo das evidecircncias LL v Franccedila (2007) Tribunal Europeu de Direitos Humanos Divoacutercio decisatildeo menciona relatoacuterio meacutedico confidencial documento meacutedico utilizado em base
14 Idem paacuteg 82
10
secundaacuteria e mesma soluccedilatildeo poderia ter sido alcanccedilada sem o referido relatoacuterio15 (nota)
15 Na decisatildeo recorrida (Tribunal de Cassaccedilatildeo francecircs) a Corte ldquoafirmou que a ilegalidade das provas sob a Lei de
Proteccedilatildeo de Dados natildeo deve levar sistematicamente a sua decisatildeo inadmissiacutevelrdquo (notiacutecias)
11
Referecircncias
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law (November 26 2020) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy U of Texas Law Public Law Research
Paper No 727 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 934 Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3736382
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law (October 18 2019) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy (2019) U of Texas Law Public Law
Research Paper No 711 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 921 Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3471638 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3471638
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law (July 19 2018) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy FSU College of Law Public Law
Research Paper No 888 U of Texas Law Public Law Research Paper Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3215613 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3215613
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law (August 3 2017) The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 9780692925164 Published by
the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3014378
Breda Juliano Admissibilidade processual das mensagens reveladas pelo The Intercept
Conjur 8 de fevereiro de 2021 Disponiacutevel em httpswwwconjurcombr2021-fev-08breda-
admissibilidade-processual-mensagens-interceptfbclid=IwAR1Aua12oOez-
QqCARt2Kl0CyrfbgbCqmLgTNRC_t2AtqJ07cSJEP64zO58_ftnref5
Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should
lsquoendsrsquo justify the lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-
tree-doctrine-should-the-ends-justify-the-means
CHAVARRIacuteA Ana Belem Garciacutea La Prueba en la Funcioacuten Jurisdiccional de la Corte
Interamericana de Derechos Humanos Corte Nacional de Direitos Humanos Meacutexico 2016
Fallah Sara Mansour The Admissibility of Unlawfully Obtained Evidence before International
Courts and Tribunals In The Law amp Practice of International Courts and Tribunals Online
Publication Date 26 Aug 2020 In Volume 19 Issue 2 Pages 147-176
12
Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees
acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos
Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016
GUTIEacuteRREZ Juan Felipe Saacutenchez e outros Flexibilizacioacuten probatoria y equidad propuestas para
la justicia del posconflicto Universidad Santo Tomaacutes Via inveniendi et iudicandi vol 14 n 1
2019
JAIN NITYA Can an Arbitral Tribunal Admit Evidence Obtained through a Cyber-Attack
Kluwer Arbitration Blog 2019
MOURA Maria Thereza Rocha de Assis e outros Provas Iliacutecitas e o Sistema Interamericano de
Proteccedilatildeo dos Direitos Humanos Relatoacuterio - Brasil 2009 Biblioteca Juriacutedica Virtual del Instituto
de Investigaciones Juriacutedicas de La Universidad Nacional Autoacutenoma de Meacutexico
PAUacuteL Aacutelvaro Admissibility of evidence before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
Revista Direito da Fundaccedilatildeo Getuacutelio Vargas vol 13 n 2 2017 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscielobrscielophpscript=sci_arttextamppid=S1808-24322017000200653
TORRES CHEDRAUI Ana Mariacutea An analysis of the exclusion of evidence obtained in violation
of human rights in light of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights Tilburg
Law Review v 15 p 205-234 2011 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwresearchgatenetpublication286237562_An_analysis_of_the_exclusion_of_evid
ence_obtained_in_violation_of_human_rights_in_light_of_the_jurisprudence_of_the_Europe
an_Court_of_Human_Rightslink601533fb45851517ef26bde9download
Bases de Dados e de Jurisprudecircncia
Base de Decisotildees do Sistema Juriacutedico da Iacutendia ndash Kanoon Disponiacutevel em httpsindiankanoonorg Base de Jurisprudecircncia da Comissatildeo de Veneza (Codices - Infobase on Constitution Case Law of the Venice Commission) Disponiacutevel em httpwwwcodicescoeintNXTgatewaydllf=templatesampfn=defaulthtm Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos Disponiacutevel em httpswwwcorteidhorcrindexcfmlang=en Tribunal Constitucional Federal da Alemanha Disponiacutevel em httpswwwbundesverfassungsgerichtdeSiteGlobalsFormsSucheENEntscheidungensuche_Formularhtmlnn=5403310ampfacettedYear=2020amplanguage_=en Suprema Corte do Canadaacute Disponiacutevel em httpsscc-csccacase-dossierinfosearch-recherche-engaspx Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos da Ameacuterica Disponiacutevel em httpswwwsupremecourtgovopinionsopinionsaspx
13
Secretaria de Altos Estudos Pesquisas e Gestatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Coordenadoria de Difusatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Jurisprudecircncia Internacional
10
secundaacuteria e mesma soluccedilatildeo poderia ter sido alcanccedilada sem o referido relatoacuterio15 (nota)
15 Na decisatildeo recorrida (Tribunal de Cassaccedilatildeo francecircs) a Corte ldquoafirmou que a ilegalidade das provas sob a Lei de
Proteccedilatildeo de Dados natildeo deve levar sistematicamente a sua decisatildeo inadmissiacutevelrdquo (notiacutecias)
11
Referecircncias
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law (November 26 2020) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy U of Texas Law Public Law Research
Paper No 727 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 934 Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3736382
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law (October 18 2019) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy (2019) U of Texas Law Public Law
Research Paper No 711 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 921 Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3471638 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3471638
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law (July 19 2018) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy FSU College of Law Public Law
Research Paper No 888 U of Texas Law Public Law Research Paper Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3215613 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3215613
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law (August 3 2017) The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 9780692925164 Published by
the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3014378
Breda Juliano Admissibilidade processual das mensagens reveladas pelo The Intercept
Conjur 8 de fevereiro de 2021 Disponiacutevel em httpswwwconjurcombr2021-fev-08breda-
admissibilidade-processual-mensagens-interceptfbclid=IwAR1Aua12oOez-
QqCARt2Kl0CyrfbgbCqmLgTNRC_t2AtqJ07cSJEP64zO58_ftnref5
Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should
lsquoendsrsquo justify the lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-
tree-doctrine-should-the-ends-justify-the-means
CHAVARRIacuteA Ana Belem Garciacutea La Prueba en la Funcioacuten Jurisdiccional de la Corte
Interamericana de Derechos Humanos Corte Nacional de Direitos Humanos Meacutexico 2016
Fallah Sara Mansour The Admissibility of Unlawfully Obtained Evidence before International
Courts and Tribunals In The Law amp Practice of International Courts and Tribunals Online
Publication Date 26 Aug 2020 In Volume 19 Issue 2 Pages 147-176
12
Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees
acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos
Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016
GUTIEacuteRREZ Juan Felipe Saacutenchez e outros Flexibilizacioacuten probatoria y equidad propuestas para
la justicia del posconflicto Universidad Santo Tomaacutes Via inveniendi et iudicandi vol 14 n 1
2019
JAIN NITYA Can an Arbitral Tribunal Admit Evidence Obtained through a Cyber-Attack
Kluwer Arbitration Blog 2019
MOURA Maria Thereza Rocha de Assis e outros Provas Iliacutecitas e o Sistema Interamericano de
Proteccedilatildeo dos Direitos Humanos Relatoacuterio - Brasil 2009 Biblioteca Juriacutedica Virtual del Instituto
de Investigaciones Juriacutedicas de La Universidad Nacional Autoacutenoma de Meacutexico
PAUacuteL Aacutelvaro Admissibility of evidence before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
Revista Direito da Fundaccedilatildeo Getuacutelio Vargas vol 13 n 2 2017 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscielobrscielophpscript=sci_arttextamppid=S1808-24322017000200653
TORRES CHEDRAUI Ana Mariacutea An analysis of the exclusion of evidence obtained in violation
of human rights in light of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights Tilburg
Law Review v 15 p 205-234 2011 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwresearchgatenetpublication286237562_An_analysis_of_the_exclusion_of_evid
ence_obtained_in_violation_of_human_rights_in_light_of_the_jurisprudence_of_the_Europe
an_Court_of_Human_Rightslink601533fb45851517ef26bde9download
Bases de Dados e de Jurisprudecircncia
Base de Decisotildees do Sistema Juriacutedico da Iacutendia ndash Kanoon Disponiacutevel em httpsindiankanoonorg Base de Jurisprudecircncia da Comissatildeo de Veneza (Codices - Infobase on Constitution Case Law of the Venice Commission) Disponiacutevel em httpwwwcodicescoeintNXTgatewaydllf=templatesampfn=defaulthtm Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos Disponiacutevel em httpswwwcorteidhorcrindexcfmlang=en Tribunal Constitucional Federal da Alemanha Disponiacutevel em httpswwwbundesverfassungsgerichtdeSiteGlobalsFormsSucheENEntscheidungensuche_Formularhtmlnn=5403310ampfacettedYear=2020amplanguage_=en Suprema Corte do Canadaacute Disponiacutevel em httpsscc-csccacase-dossierinfosearch-recherche-engaspx Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos da Ameacuterica Disponiacutevel em httpswwwsupremecourtgovopinionsopinionsaspx
13
Secretaria de Altos Estudos Pesquisas e Gestatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Coordenadoria de Difusatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Jurisprudecircncia Internacional
11
Referecircncias
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law (November 26 2020) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2019 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy U of Texas Law Public Law Research
Paper No 727 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 934 Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3736382
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law (October 18 2019) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2018 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy (2019) U of Texas Law Public Law
Research Paper No 711 FSU College of Law Public Law Research Paper No 921 Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3471638 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3471638
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law (July 19 2018) The ImiddotCONnect-Clough
Center 2017 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 978-0-692-15916-3 Published by the
Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy FSU College of Law Public Law
Research Paper No 888 U of Texas Law Public Law Research Paper Available at SSRN
httpsssrncomabstract=3215613 or httpdxdoiorg102139ssrn3215613
Albert Richard and Landau David and Faraguna Pietro and Drugda Šimon The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law (August 3 2017) The ImiddotCONnect-
Clough Center 2016 Global Review of Constitutional Law ISBN 9780692925164 Published by
the Clough Center for the Study of Constitutional Democracy Available at
SSRN httpsssrncomabstract=3014378
Breda Juliano Admissibilidade processual das mensagens reveladas pelo The Intercept
Conjur 8 de fevereiro de 2021 Disponiacutevel em httpswwwconjurcombr2021-fev-08breda-
admissibilidade-processual-mensagens-interceptfbclid=IwAR1Aua12oOez-
QqCARt2Kl0CyrfbgbCqmLgTNRC_t2AtqJ07cSJEP64zO58_ftnref5
Bharat Chugh Taahaa Khan Rethinking the ldquoFruits of the poisonous treersquo doctrine should
lsquoendsrsquo justify the lsquomeansrsquo June 15 2020 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscconlinecomblogpost20200615rethinking-the-fruits-of-the-poisonous-
tree-doctrine-should-the-ends-justify-the-means
CHAVARRIacuteA Ana Belem Garciacutea La Prueba en la Funcioacuten Jurisdiccional de la Corte
Interamericana de Derechos Humanos Corte Nacional de Direitos Humanos Meacutexico 2016
Fallah Sara Mansour The Admissibility of Unlawfully Obtained Evidence before International
Courts and Tribunals In The Law amp Practice of International Courts and Tribunals Online
Publication Date 26 Aug 2020 In Volume 19 Issue 2 Pages 147-176
12
Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees
acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos
Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016
GUTIEacuteRREZ Juan Felipe Saacutenchez e outros Flexibilizacioacuten probatoria y equidad propuestas para
la justicia del posconflicto Universidad Santo Tomaacutes Via inveniendi et iudicandi vol 14 n 1
2019
JAIN NITYA Can an Arbitral Tribunal Admit Evidence Obtained through a Cyber-Attack
Kluwer Arbitration Blog 2019
MOURA Maria Thereza Rocha de Assis e outros Provas Iliacutecitas e o Sistema Interamericano de
Proteccedilatildeo dos Direitos Humanos Relatoacuterio - Brasil 2009 Biblioteca Juriacutedica Virtual del Instituto
de Investigaciones Juriacutedicas de La Universidad Nacional Autoacutenoma de Meacutexico
PAUacuteL Aacutelvaro Admissibility of evidence before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
Revista Direito da Fundaccedilatildeo Getuacutelio Vargas vol 13 n 2 2017 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscielobrscielophpscript=sci_arttextamppid=S1808-24322017000200653
TORRES CHEDRAUI Ana Mariacutea An analysis of the exclusion of evidence obtained in violation
of human rights in light of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights Tilburg
Law Review v 15 p 205-234 2011 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwresearchgatenetpublication286237562_An_analysis_of_the_exclusion_of_evid
ence_obtained_in_violation_of_human_rights_in_light_of_the_jurisprudence_of_the_Europe
an_Court_of_Human_Rightslink601533fb45851517ef26bde9download
Bases de Dados e de Jurisprudecircncia
Base de Decisotildees do Sistema Juriacutedico da Iacutendia ndash Kanoon Disponiacutevel em httpsindiankanoonorg Base de Jurisprudecircncia da Comissatildeo de Veneza (Codices - Infobase on Constitution Case Law of the Venice Commission) Disponiacutevel em httpwwwcodicescoeintNXTgatewaydllf=templatesampfn=defaulthtm Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos Disponiacutevel em httpswwwcorteidhorcrindexcfmlang=en Tribunal Constitucional Federal da Alemanha Disponiacutevel em httpswwwbundesverfassungsgerichtdeSiteGlobalsFormsSucheENEntscheidungensuche_Formularhtmlnn=5403310ampfacettedYear=2020amplanguage_=en Suprema Corte do Canadaacute Disponiacutevel em httpsscc-csccacase-dossierinfosearch-recherche-engaspx Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos da Ameacuterica Disponiacutevel em httpswwwsupremecourtgovopinionsopinionsaspx
13
Secretaria de Altos Estudos Pesquisas e Gestatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Coordenadoria de Difusatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Jurisprudecircncia Internacional
12
Filippo Thiago Baldani Gomes de Buscas domiciliares sem mandado e provas iliacutecitas reflexotildees
acerca do julgamento do recurso extraordinaacuterio 603616 agrave luz do Direito dos Estados Unidos
Cadernos Juriacutedicos Satildeo Paulo ano 17 n 44 p 131-146 Julho-Setembro2016
GUTIEacuteRREZ Juan Felipe Saacutenchez e outros Flexibilizacioacuten probatoria y equidad propuestas para
la justicia del posconflicto Universidad Santo Tomaacutes Via inveniendi et iudicandi vol 14 n 1
2019
JAIN NITYA Can an Arbitral Tribunal Admit Evidence Obtained through a Cyber-Attack
Kluwer Arbitration Blog 2019
MOURA Maria Thereza Rocha de Assis e outros Provas Iliacutecitas e o Sistema Interamericano de
Proteccedilatildeo dos Direitos Humanos Relatoacuterio - Brasil 2009 Biblioteca Juriacutedica Virtual del Instituto
de Investigaciones Juriacutedicas de La Universidad Nacional Autoacutenoma de Meacutexico
PAUacuteL Aacutelvaro Admissibility of evidence before the Inter-American Court of Human Rights
Revista Direito da Fundaccedilatildeo Getuacutelio Vargas vol 13 n 2 2017 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwscielobrscielophpscript=sci_arttextamppid=S1808-24322017000200653
TORRES CHEDRAUI Ana Mariacutea An analysis of the exclusion of evidence obtained in violation
of human rights in light of the jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights Tilburg
Law Review v 15 p 205-234 2011 Disponiacutevel em
httpswwwresearchgatenetpublication286237562_An_analysis_of_the_exclusion_of_evid
ence_obtained_in_violation_of_human_rights_in_light_of_the_jurisprudence_of_the_Europe
an_Court_of_Human_Rightslink601533fb45851517ef26bde9download
Bases de Dados e de Jurisprudecircncia
Base de Decisotildees do Sistema Juriacutedico da Iacutendia ndash Kanoon Disponiacutevel em httpsindiankanoonorg Base de Jurisprudecircncia da Comissatildeo de Veneza (Codices - Infobase on Constitution Case Law of the Venice Commission) Disponiacutevel em httpwwwcodicescoeintNXTgatewaydllf=templatesampfn=defaulthtm Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos Disponiacutevel em httpswwwcorteidhorcrindexcfmlang=en Tribunal Constitucional Federal da Alemanha Disponiacutevel em httpswwwbundesverfassungsgerichtdeSiteGlobalsFormsSucheENEntscheidungensuche_Formularhtmlnn=5403310ampfacettedYear=2020amplanguage_=en Suprema Corte do Canadaacute Disponiacutevel em httpsscc-csccacase-dossierinfosearch-recherche-engaspx Suprema Corte dos Estados Unidos da Ameacuterica Disponiacutevel em httpswwwsupremecourtgovopinionsopinionsaspx
13
Secretaria de Altos Estudos Pesquisas e Gestatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Coordenadoria de Difusatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Jurisprudecircncia Internacional
13
Secretaria de Altos Estudos Pesquisas e Gestatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Coordenadoria de Difusatildeo da Informaccedilatildeo
Jurisprudecircncia Internacional
Top Related