Potency and safety analysis of hemp-derived delta-9 products: The hemp vs. cannabis demarcation problem

Edit links
ADPF 153
CourtSupreme Federal Court
Full case nameADPF 153 (Federal Council of the Order of Attorneys of Brazil v. President of the Republic)
Decided29 April 2010 (2010-04-29)
CitationADPF 153
Court membership
Judges sittingPresident

Cezar Peluso


Case opinions
Decision byGrau
ConcurrencePeluzo, Mello, Aurélio, Mendes, Lúcia and Gracie
DissentBritto and Lewandowski

ADPF 153 was a constitutional review case ruled by the Brazilian Supreme Federal Court, which the Order of Attorneys of Brazil (OAB) requested the acknowledgment of the inconstitutionality of the Amnesty Law. Ruled in April 2010, the Supreme Court considered the case unfounded in a voting of 7 to 2.[1][2]


ADPF 153 document, ruled by rapporteur Justice Eros Grau

In the collapse of the military dictatorship in Brazil, the government passed an amnesty in August 1979 which exempted from any penalties and eventual sanction all the political and related crimes occurred in Brazil from September 1961 to 15 August 1979.[3] "Related crimes", according to the single paragraph of the first article of the law, were "crimes of any nature related with political crimes or committed with political motivation".[4] The Order then requested a clarification of this excerpt, averting the amnesty of common crimes committed by public agents, such as murder, enforced disappearance and torture of their opponents.[5]

Then Prosecutor General of the Republic, Roberto Gurgel, manifested against the request.[6] In a two-day trial in April 2010, six justices concurred with justice Eros Grau to reject the appeal. According to him, the Supreme Court couldn't review the "historical agreement that permeated the fight for a broad, general and unrestricted amnesty".[7]

Later on, the Inter-American Court of Human Rights ruled, in the "Gomes Lund vs. Brazil" case, that the amnesty wasn't in compliance with the international obligations of the Brazilian State ratified with the American Convention on Human Rights.[8] Due to this, the Socialism and Liberty Party (PSOL) filed another appeal (ADPF 320), aiming to reppeal the amnesty.[9]

High Court decision

Supreme Court of Brazil.

Judiciary representation

Supreme Court members Ministers Yes No
Ayres Britto 1 1
Cármen Lúcia 1 1
Celso de Mello 1 1
Cezar Peluso 1 1
Gilmar Mendes 1 1
Marco Aurélio Mello 1 1
Ellen Gracie 1 1
Eros Grau 1 1
Ricardo Lewandowski 1 1
Total 9 02 07

Public Prosecutor's Office representation

Prosecutor General Prosecutor Yes No
Roberto Gurgel 1 1
Total 1 0 1


  1. ^ "STF é contra revisão da Lei da Anistia por sete votos a dois". Supremo Tribunal Federal (in Brazilian Portuguese). 29 April 2010. Archived from the original on 4 May 2010. Retrieved 14 September 2023.
  2. ^ Barrientos-Parra, Jorge; Mialhe, Jorge Luís (2012). "Lei da Anistia - Comentários à sentença do Supremo Tribunal Federal no caso da ADPF 153" (PDF). Senado Federal (in Brazilian Portuguese) (194). Brasília: Revista de Informação Legislativa. Retrieved 14 September 2023.
  3. ^ Roesler, Claudia Rosane; de Mello Senra, Laura Carneiro (2012). "Lei de anistia e justiça de transição: a releitura da ADPF 153 sob o viés argumentativo e principiológico". Scielo (in Brazilian Portuguese). Florianópolis: Revista Sequência. doi:10.5007/2177-7055.2012v33n63p131. ISSN 2177-7055. Retrieved 14 September 2023.
  4. ^ "Lei n° 6.683, de 28 de agosto de 1979". Palácio do Planalto (in Brazilian Portuguese). 28 August 1979. Retrieved 14 September 2023.
  5. ^ "OAB contesta no STF Lei da Anistia para crimes cometidos em nome do Estado". Migalhas (in Brazilian Portuguese). 22 October 2008. Retrieved 14 September 2023.
  6. ^ "PGR se manifesta pela improcedência da ADPF sobre a Lei da Anistia". Migalhas (in Brazilian Portuguese). 1 February 2010. Retrieved 14 September 2023.
  7. ^ Bonin, Robson (29 April 2010). "STF rejeita ação da OAB e decide que Lei da Anistia vale para todos". G1 (in Brazilian Portuguese). Retrieved 14 September 2023.
  8. ^ Volpini Silva, Carla Ribeiro; Wanderley Junior, Bruno (5 December 2015). "A responsabilidade internacional do brasil em face do controle de convencionalidade em sede de direitos humanos: conflito de interpretação entre a jurisdição da Corte Interamericana de Direitos Humanos e o Supremo Tribunal Federal quanto a Lei de anistia" (PDF). Corte Interamericana de Derechos Humanos (in Brazilian Portuguese). Revista de Direito Internacional. doi:10.5102/rdi.v12i2.3699. Retrieved 14 September 2023.
  9. ^ "Ação do PSOL que questiona a Lei da Anistia espera julgamento no STF há 5 anos". Partido Socialismo e Liberdade (in Brazilian Portuguese). 31 July 2019. Retrieved 14 September 2023.