MONTEIRO, T. D.; http://lattes.cnpq.br/3093209756243612; MONTEIRO, Thaís Diniz.
Resumen:
This presente work looks to analyse the apparent conflict of constitutional
requirements, descendant of the maintenance of the parliamentary mandate which
has criminal conviction has become final, before the fact that have as consequence
the suspension of condemned political rights. Appears then, the questioning about
the immediate cassation or not of the elective mandate of the condemned. Having
two positions about the theme, the first line of thought asserts that the suspension or
privation of political rights entails in theory the immediate loss of elective mandate. In
turn, the second current sustains the not apply to immediate loss of the political rights
suspension, in which case would fit resolution by the Legislative House that belongs
the parliamentary, to decide about the mandate cassation. Despite the Constitution
provide for the suspension of political rights as an effect of condemnatory criminal
sentence, and be that a hypothesis of mandate's cassation, there is also
constitutional provision of deliberation about losing or not of elective mandate by the
Nacional Congress that belong the parliamentary in the cases of criminal conviction
has become final. Faced with this apparent conflict, and the discussion raised in the
debate of on which standard should be applied to the case, is necessary the study of
the subject, in order to find to settle the conflict. Therefore the present monograph
uses the deductive method of approach and making use of constitutional exegesis,
with the aid of the doctrine and homeland jurisprudence. Aims to comprehend the
functions inherent each of the branches of Government, scrutinize political rights and
eligibility conditions and the chances of cassation elective mandate.