DANTAS, P. M. A.; http://lattes.cnpq.br/9816183910344467; DANTAS, Pâmela Monique Abrantes.
Resumo:
The current situation of the Brazilian prison system demonstrates that there is a utopia to
believe that the prison is able to resocialize the inmates. Under these circumstances, the
search for the establishment alternative sentences for not dangerous convicts, in order to
prevent them from being corrupted by the flawed prison system, it comes up the idea of
electronic surveillance. The possibility of using that brand new technology serving the
criminal justice has raised heated discussions on legal and social contexts. The doctrine
divides and highlights the questioning about the compatibility of the measure with the
principle of human dignity. The opponents of the mechanism of electronic surveillance argue
that their use violates the principle of human dignity because it represents an invasion by the
State to the privacy of the monitored convict. Opposing this criticism, the supporters argue
that this technology came up to exactly the rescue the mentioned principle, which is violated
during the daytime when the penalty is executed in prison. This being done, the scientific
work has the purpose of verify if the electronic surveillance of people exposed to the prison is
compatible with the principle of human dignity. The study under discussion shows itself of
great significance to the legal field, justified by the intention of contribute to the formation of
a more rational position concerning the discussion that involves electronic surveillance and
the principle of human dignity. In this work, it was used the research method called deductive
reasoning, the method of procedure historical-evolutionary, as well as the comparative
method. In what concerns the technique of research, the work is founded in the indirect
documentation, especially in the bibliographic research, performed in specialized books and
related doctrine, journals, published articles in magazines and on the Internet. After the
proposed study, it is clear that, faced with the possibility of monitoring regarding the intimacy
or imprisoning with every restraint peculiar to the imprisonment, the right to privacy must
give way in favor of the application of the electronic surveillance. Hence, it is concluded that
the compatibility between the electronic surveillance and the principle of human dignity
depends on the way the measure is imposed, with the privacy not being an obstacle to its
application. So, once established ethical means for the application of the electronic
surveillance, there is no need to talk about violation, but in true compatibility of the measure
with the principle of human dignity.