YEAR 2020 N.º 1

ISSN 2182-9845

The judicial decisions and their reasons: a study of the Brazilian Supreme Court's decisions on the crime of contemporary slavery

Isabele Bandeira de Moraes D’Angelo, Pablo Ricardo de Lima Falcão


Contemporary slavery; Judicial decisions; Absolution; Brazilian Supreme Court.


In May 2018, on the 13th, 130 years of the abolition of slavery in Brazil were celebrated. However, has the exploitation of this workforce really ceased to be practiced in our country? Research has directed the practice of contemporary slavery still wide and its overwhelming numbers. Victims are condemned to sell their labor force precariously in order to survive. Another fact will darken its lawyers: the absence of convictions. Thus, the article again presents sets of sets of mandatory research groups, from the University of Pernambuco, at the Arcoverde Campus, which provided a question: What are the reasons for the absence of convictions for such a crime? Are these legal reasons? Is there really (IN) crime in Brazil? In response, 8 (eight) STF decisions were analyzed, with no delay of 6 (six) years, without a period from 2010 to 2016. The data were analyzed in two lines of attack: a) critical / dogmatic, centered on dogmatic labor policy in the light of Critical Social Theory and b) metadogmatic, centered on the linguistic approach to the legal phenomenon of decision-making. In the light of the first, the study takes a critical / prospective approach to the phenomenon of Sociology, Anthropology and History of Work; In the light of the rhetorical attack as a methodical destructurer, this analytical tool describes the cultural barriers and the condemnations denouncing the use of the expression “work analogous to slavery”, the attempts to signify the related crime (Section XX) classic abusive exploitation (19th Century).

Table of contents

1. Introduction - 130 years of abolition: the old new farms
2. The analyzed decisions
3. Samples found: rhetoric analysis of votes 2 and 4
3.1. Rhetorical analysis of vote 2
3.2. Rhetorical analysis of vote 4
3.3. Tables and graphics
4. Conclusions: the invisible fetters of legitimized exploitation
Case Law