On July 19, Law 6.350/19 was enacted, which amended Article 245 of the Criminal Procedure Code, regarding alternative measures to preventive detention.

Previously, if a criminal case, such as a corruption case, had the qualifications to impose preventive detention to a prosecuted individual, Courts had a certain degree of discretion to determine whether to impose the measure or not. This led to an excessive use of the preventive detention under a criterion of prudency, seeking to avoid the danger of escape or obstruction of justice while the criminal process was being conducted, which, in turn, had an impact on an overcrowding of the country's prisons. However, with the modification, when the danger of escape or obstruction of justice can be avoided by applying other less burdensome measures for the defendant's freedom, now Courts, ex officio, are obligated to impose an alternative or substitute measure for the preventive detention, which suspends its execution.

The alternative measures are the following:

  • House arrest, in the house of the accused or of another person, under surveillance or without it, now being able to adopt any means for the effective control of the measure, as long as it does not affect the intimacy or privacy of the accused, such as GPS tracking device 
  • Obligation to be subject of supervision of a specific person or institution which periodically informs the Court 
  • Obligation to periodically appear before the Court or other authority, such as the Police Station of the neighborhood 
  • Prohibition to attend certain meetings or visiting certain places 
  • Prohibition to communicate with certain persons, as long as the right of defense is not affected; or 
  • Posting a personal o real bond considered adequate by the Court.

The modification also eliminated the ability of the defendant’s lawyer to post a personal bond to avoid preventive detention of the client.

The modification now allows alternative measures to be maintained until the end of the criminal process. Before, the measures ceased in full after two years if the process hearings were not initiated within that period.

If alternative measures are breached without justification, preventive detention shall be immediately imposed.