How Brazilian Legal Actors Debate the Rise of Negotiated Justice

Abstract

This study investigates how Brazilian legal actors interpret and debate the rise of negotiated justice and the influence of American criminal law, particularly following the introduction of the Acordo de Não Persecução Penal (ANPP) under Law 13.964/2019. Drawing on 68 articles published in IBCCRIM newsletters from 1993 to 2025, the research employs qualitative content analysis using NVivo to code legal commentaries by tone, theme, and argumentative focus. The findings reveal a shift in perceptions over time: while early debates were predominantly skeptical (emphasizing concerns over prosecutorial power, due process, and the risks of importing U.S. models) later discussions became more pragmatic, viewing the ANPP as a tool compatible with Brazil’s civil law traditions and judicial oversight. This transformation suggests that Brazilian legal actors have progressively redefined negotiated justice as both an efficiency mechanism and a culturally adapted practice rather than a direct transplantation of plea bargaining. Ultimately, the study highlights how evolving professional interpretations mirror broader tensions between fairness, efficiency, and the localization of global legal norms within Brazil’s constitutional framework.