The legal good protected primarily by the crime of non-compliance with a protective measure and its implications

Abstract

The Maria da Penha law brought numerous legal innovations that seek to prevent and repress conducts of violence, within the domestic and family context, which violence, before the enactment of the law, hardly reached the analysis of the judiciary. In addition to the crimes already typified, the law also aims to prevent conduct of violence, which had no express classification, as well as to prevent the practice of new crimes in the same victims, by granting Urgent Protective Measures. However, only the granting of these proved to be insufficient, making it necessary to make the conduct of noncompliance with these measures a crime. In spite of this legal provision, bringing more effective protective measures and consequently reducing the criminal practice, there are doubts as to its systematic, which end up resulting in arguments that seek to characterize the atypicality of the fact, in some concrete cases, such as the application of the law. principle of the consumption of this crime by another more serious, and the allegation of the victim's consent regarding the non-compliance. In order to analyze the appropriateness of these arguments in relation to the predicted crime, it is necessary to carry out a systematic analysis of this penal type, based on a bibliographic review, through the dialectical methodological bias, to understand the real objectives of the typification of the crime of non-compliance with measure emergency protection.