Em busca de uma criminologia cautelar: um estudo com base na proposta de Zaffaroni

Abstract

This study analyzes the influence of punitive populism and infocracy on the structure of the contemporary Brazilian criminal system, discussing how media discourse, informational manipulation, and collective fear shape society’s perception of crime and punishment. Based on the observation that digital media have intensified the sensationalization of violence and the social pressure for immediate penal responses, the main objective of the research is to demonstrate that criminal law has been used as a symbolic instrument to meet social demands for security, to the detriment of the rationality and prudence that should guide justice. The methodology adopted is qualitative, theoretical, bibliographic, and analytical, grounded in a critical reading of authors such as Zaffaroni, Baratta, Garland, Wacquant, Foucault, and Byung-Chul Han, seeking to understand the punitive phenomenon from an interdisciplinary and critical perspective. The first chapter addresses the foundations of media criminology, showing how the discourse of communication channels reinforces a culture of fear and legitimizes practices of social exclusion. The second chapter discusses Eugenio Raúl Zaffaroni’s concept of cautious criminology, proposing it as a rational and ethical alternative to contain the abuses of punitive power and to restore human dignity as a central value in criminal discourse. The third chapter links Zaffaroni’s theoretical framework to the digital age and the rise of infocracy, analyzing how the control of information and technological surveillance expand mechanisms of domination and penal selectivity. The results indicate that the expansion of punitive populism and the logic of infocracy weaken constitutional principles and jeopardize the effectiveness of justice, making it essential to recover prudence and doubt as guiding values of legal practice. Therefore, it is concluded that cautious criminology offers a theoretical path capable of rebalancing reason and emotion in criminal policy, reaffirming the law’s commitment to freedom, ethics, and democracy.