The Electronic Monitoring Policy in the Federal District: The Social Representations of the Criminal Justice System
Electronic monitoring; Social representations; Criminal justice system; Sociology of deviance; Control society
This doctoral thesis analyzes the policy of electronic monitoring of offenders in the Federal District of Brazil, based on the social representations constructed by judges, prosecutors, public defenders, and criminal justice system managers. The general objective is to understand how the meanings attributed to electronic ankle bracelets influence their application and effects, both in penal execution and in pretrialmeasures. Specific goals include identifying the institutional factors that condition the use of the device, analyzing the criteria adopted in judicial decisions, and assessing the coherence between discourses of efficiency and humanization and the actual outcomes of the policy. The study adopts a qualitative approach, combining in-depth interviews, institutional observations, and documentary analysis, grounded in the theory of social representations, the sociology of deviance, and studies on control technologies. The Federal District presents an articulate and technically efficient justice system, but paradoxically remains resistant to expanding the use of electronic monitoring, despite prison overcrowding. This resistance reflects a punitive model that preserves elements of austerity and discipline, generating tensions between the promises of penal rationalization and the reaffirmation of traditional surveillance logics. The thesis shows that electronic monitoring, far from being a neutral alternative to incarceration,operates as an ambiguous instrument shaped by symbolic disputes, punitive rationalities, and operational constraints. It concludes that, in the context of the Federal District, the electronic monitoring policy reveals contradictions between control and freedom, efficiency and selectivity, humanitarian discourse and exclusionary practices. Its legitimacy will depend on continuous critical evaluation grounded in fundamental rights and democratic oversight of penal technologies.