102. As is the case in several countries, parliamentary immunity guaranteed by the Brazilian Constitution is divided into two categories: (i) material or “non-liability” immunity, which means exemption from liability of the parliamentarian for his or her ideas, votes and opinions expressed in the exercise of the office, even when they may potentially harm the rights of third parties, and (ii) formal or procedural immunity (“inviolability”), which prevents, to a greater or lesser extent, the preventive arrest of a parliamentarian and may condition the initiation or continuation of criminal proceedings against him or her, without the consent of the chamber to which they belong.188 103. The Court notes that the present case concerns only formal or procedural parliamentary immunity, given that the initiation of criminal proceedings against the then state deputy Aércio Pereira de Lima, accused of the murder of Márcia Barbosa de Souza, was postponed due to the application of parliamentary immunity by the Legislative Assembly of the state of Paraíba, in accordance with the constitutional regime in force at the time. Therefore, the Court’s analysis of the application of parliamentary immunity in this case will focus on this type of immunity. 104. In various countries of the region, as well as in most European constitutional and parliamentary systems, members of the respective legislative bodies enjoy different levels of protection against legal proceedings during their term of office.189 105. Regarding the regulation of parliamentary immunity in the States Parties to the Convention, the expert witness Javier García pointed out that many countries have different formulas for material immunity and several others have different mechanisms for procedural immunity, especially in relation to the possible arrest of a congressman.190 106. In examining the legal system of some States Parties to the Convention with respect to parliamentary immunity, the Court has found that the Constitution of Argentina191 recognizes “immunity of opinion” and “immunity from arrest.”192 Similarly, the Constitution of Costa Rica recognizes parliamentary immunity in paragraph 110, 193 which exempts deputies from liability for opinions expressed in the Assembly and prohibits their deprivation of liberty, except in Cf. Expert opinion rendered by Melina Fachin, supra; Expert opinion of Daniel Sarmento rendered by affidavit, supra; Expert opinion of Javier Hernández García, rendered by affidavit supra and Expert opinion of Edvaldo Fernandes da Silva, rendered by affidavit supra. Article 53 of the Brazilian Constitution also provides for the so-called "privilege by prerogative of office", whereby a federal deputy or senator must be tried directly before the Federal Supreme Court as soon as they begin to exercise elective office. 189 Cf. Expert opinion of Javier Hernández García, rendered by affidavit, supra (evidence file, folio 10368). According to the Venice Commission, nearly all democratic countries in the world have rules on material immunity for members of the legislative body. This type of immunity is generally absolute and cannot be waived. On the other hand, several countries have rules on procedural immunity, although they are “usually more narrowly construed and easier to waive or lift, usually by parliament itself.” Although, according to the Venice Commission, the latter type of immunity is more complex and controversial, and “there is a great variety both as to what they [members of the legislative body] are protected against and as to what kind of crimes this protection covers.” Cf. European Commission for Democracy through Law. Report on the scope and lifting of parliamentary immunities (Study No. 714/2013), paras. 12, 14 175, 176, Available at: https://www.venice.coe.int/webforms/documents/default.aspx?pdffile=CDLAD(2014)011-e. 190 Expert opinion of Javier Hernández García rendered by affidavit, supra (evidence file, folio 10368). 191 Cf. Constitution of the Argentine Republic: Law N° 24.430 of January 3, 1995. Available at: http://servicios.infoleg.gob.ar/infolegInternet/Annexs/0-4999/804/norma.htm. 192 Immunity of opinion is regulated in Article 68 of the Constitution, which establishes that: “No member of Congress shall be accused, judicially examined, or disturbed for opinions expressed or speeches delivered by him while holding office as legislator.” In addition, immunity from arrest is contemplated in Article 69, which states that: “No senator or deputy shall be arrested as from the day of his election until the expiration of his term, except when flagrantly surprised committing a crime deserving capital punishment or other infamous or serious punishment […].” 193 Cf. Constitution of the Republic of Costa Rica of November 7, 1949. Available at: https://www.pgrweb.go.cr/scij/Busqueda/Normativa/Normas/nrm_texto_completo.aspx?nValor1=1&nValor2=871. 188 -32-