A GUERRILHA DO ARAGUAIA, A LEI DE ANISTIA E O CONTROLE DE CONVENCIONALIDADE

Abstract

This study analyzes the validity and effects of the Amnesty Law (Law No. 6,683/1979) within the Brazilian legal system, considering its impact on the accountability of human rights violations committed during the Araguaia Guerrilla. The objective of the research is to examine the normative conflict between the ruling of the Supreme Federal Court (STF), which upheld the constitutionality of the Amnesty Law in the ADPF 153 case, and the jurisprudence of the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR), which, in Gomes Lund et al. v. Brazil, recognized the incompatibility of this legislation with international human rights treaties ratified by Brazil. The investigation is grounded in the theoretical framework of International Human Rights Law, particularly in the principles of the non-applicability of statutory limitations to crimes against humanity and in the theory of conventionality control, as established by the IACtHR. The research adopts a qualitative approach, guided by the deductive method, and is based on bibliographic and documentary research, including judicial decisions, international treaties, and specialized legal doctrine. The findings indicate that Brazil's resistance to fully adopting international human rights protection standards reflects the ongoing challenge of harmonizing constitutional law with its obligations under the Inter-American Human Rights System. The study concludes that the implementation of conventionality control by Brazilian judges and courts is essential to overcoming the normative deadlock and ensuring the prevalence of international protective norms, in accordance with Brazil’s commitments under international law.