Bibliographic record
Abstract
A anistia e um instituto juridico previsto no Codigo Penal brasileiro como causa de extincao da punibilidade. No Brasil, em 28 de agosto de 1979, foi promulgada a Lei no 6.683/1979, conhecida como Lei da Anistia. Por consequencia, foram anistiados todos os envolvidos em crimes politicos ou conexos. Em agosto de 2009, a Lei de Anistia completou 30 anos. Diversas duvidas foram suscitadas quanto aos seus efeitos no âmbito social, culminando com o ajuizamento da Arguicao de Descumprimento de Preceito Fundamental (ADPF) 153 pela Ordem dos Advogados do Brasil (OAB) junto ao Supremo Tribunal Federal, com o intuito de revisar a lei e redefinir o conceito de “crime politico”. Recente julgamento havido no Supremo Tribunal Federal trouxe a tona a necessidade de rememorar ou esquecer o objeto da anistia, estendendo a analise de sua importância e de suas consequencias para alem do âmbito juridico. E necessario reunir os elementos que envolvem tanto aspectos juridicos quanto sociais – no que tange a memoria coletiva – para possibilitar a analise da decisao tomada no Supremo Tribunal Federal quanto a lei da Anistia no presente momento historico. A metodologia adotada e a do estudo da legislacao relacionada a anistia, a sua analise e seu historico no Brasil; dos fatos levantados pelos orgaos envolvidos no julgamento ocorrido no Supremo Tribunal Federal; do perdao e do esquecimento no âmbito dos estudos da Memoria Social e de reportagens veiculadas na midia referentes ao tema, bem como da repercussao delas na sociedade. Palavras-chave : Anistia; Memoria; Esquecimento. The amnesty and the role of forgiveness and forgetfulness Abstract The amnesty is a legal institution of Brazilian Penal Code that leads to the extinction of criminality. It can be used as a tool, since it extinguishes the act’s criminality. In Brazil, on August 28, 1979, was enacted Law No. 6.683/1979, known as the Amnesty Law. This legislation intended to guarantee the return of peace, necessary for the democratization in the country after years of dictatorial rule. Consequently, were pardoned all those involved in crimes or related. In it’s 30 Anniversary, several questions were raised about its effects in social work, culminating with the filing of Allegation of Breach of Fundamental Precept (ADPF) #153 by Brazilian Bar Association Brazil (OAB), in order to review the law and redefine the concept of political crime”. The recent trial occurred in the Supreme Court and brought up the debate about the necessity of remembering or forgetting the object of the amnesty, extending the analysis of its importance and its consequences beyond the legal scope. Elements that involve both legal and social aspects - in terms of collective memory – shall be reunited, in order to enable the analysis of the Supreme Court’s decision. The methodology adopted includes the study of law related to amnesty and legal analysis of this institute and its history in Brazil, as well as the facts raised by agencies involved in the trial; forgiveness and forgetfulness in the studies of social memory, and press reports on the subject, in order to illustrate the effects of such kind of debate in society. Key-words : Amnesty. Memory. Forgetfulness.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.021 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".