The right to non-self-incrimination is the prerogative of the defendant or investigated person not to be forced to produce evidence against himself, without this causing him harm. In this context, the right to silence guarantees that no one is forced to testify in proceedings against them, and silence cannot be interpreted as an admission of guilt.
However, the exercise of silence can be selective, with answers only to certain questions. At each question, the defendant or person under investigation can decide whether or not to respond. Likewise, only questions asked by the defense can be answered, opting for partial silence in relation to what is asked by the judge or the prosecution.
According to a recent decision by the STJ, it is illegal to end the interrogation of someone who refuses to answer the judge's questions before the defense questions are given, as interrogation, as a means of defense, gives the accused the prerogative to answer all of them, none or a few questions, with the defense choosing the strategy that best suits them (HC 703.978 – Information 732).
