A aplicação da Lei Maria da Penha no tribunal do júri: perspectivas e desafios
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58725/rivjr.v3i3.170Keywords:
Jury court, femicide, gender stereotypes, defense of honor, law n. 14.994/2024Abstract
This article analyzes the challenges in applying the Maria da Penha Law and the legal norms addressing femicide within the Brazilian Jury Court system. It acknowledges the structural limitations of the Jury in handling gender-based crimes, often marked by discriminatory discourse, stereotypes, and rhetorical strategies that revictimize women. Based on bibliographic research and a deductive methodological approach, it examines recent legislative changes, particularly the enactment of Law n. 14.994/2024 (Anti-Femicide Package) and the role of the Federal Supreme Court in overcoming the defense of honor thesis and reviewing jury verdicts when contrary to evidence. The study discusses the need for ethical conduct by legal professionals and active judicial oversight during trials. The main objective is to assess the compatibility between jury sovereignty and constitutional principles such as equality, human dignity, and comprehensive protection of women, proposing institutional measures to strengthen gender-sensitive criminal justice. We concluded that even with the importance of the legislative and jurisprudential advances int the women’s defense, it’s effectivity still in progress.
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 International Journal of Victimology and Restorative Justice

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish in REVISTA INTERNACIONAL DE VITIMOLOGIA E JUSTIÇA RESTORATIVE, preserving their copyrights, grant the Journal the right to publish, under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which allows others to distribute, create and adapt their work , as well as sharing it, including in productions for commercial purposes, as long as they give due credit for the article and content presented, recognizing its authorship. In addition, the articles, from their authors, express their point of view and not necessarily the official position of the International Journal of Victimology and Restorative Justice.

