O sistema de responsabilização por atos de improbidade administrativa pela lei Nº 14.230/2021 e o instituto da indisponibilidade de bens
Tipo
TCC
Data de publicação
2023-12
Periódico
Citações (Scopus)
Autores
Santos, Gustavo Mariano dos
Orientador
Bruno, Reinaldo Moreira
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Membros da banca
Programa
Resumo
A Nova Lei de Improbidade Administrativa trouxe mudanças significativas que afetam a defesa do patrimônio público, o controle da conduta dos agentes públicos, bem como as penalidades aplicáveis e atuação da Administração Pública perante o Poder Judiciário, o que é de extrema relevância social, considerando a defesa do patrimônio público e histórico brasileiro de corrupção na Administração Pública. A Antiga Lei de Improbidade Administrativa, Lei nº 8.429/1992, apresentava em seu bojo alguns dispositivos abertos a interpretações variadas que por vezes feriam os princípios fundamentais e processuais expressos na Carta Magna de 1988, e por sua vez, a reforma da Lei de Improbidade Administrativa por meio da Lei nº 14.230/2021 mudou algumas destas disposições, abordando o funcionamento do instituto da indisponibilidade de bens, uma medida cautelar que possui objetivo de garantir o ressarcimento dos danos causados ao patrimônio público em casos de improbidade administrativa, e presente no ordenamento jurídico desde 1970, de maneira diversa do entendimento adotado anteriormente pela Jurisprudência, Doutrina e pela própria Lei de Improbidade Administrativa. Dessa forma, o presente projeto acadêmico busca apresentar um comparativo entre as formas de atuação da Administração Pública e Poder Judiciário frente aos atos de ímprobos nos períodos anteriores e posteriores à reforma da lei, promovendo uma análise sobre as principais mudanças trazidas pela Nova Lei de Improbidade Administrativa em relação a estes procedimentos administrativos e judiciais, especialmente em relação ao Instituto da Indisponibilidade de Bens e sua importância para o sistema de responsabilização por atos de improbidade administrativa, e demais reflexos em relação aos agentes públicos ou políticos acusados da prática ato de improbidade.
The new law about “Misconduct in Public Office” brought significant changes that affect the defense of public assets, the control of the conduct of public agents, and the applicable penalties and the acting of the Government before the Judiciary, which is of extreme social relevance, considering the defense of public assets. The old law about “Misconduct in Public Office”, Law No. 8,429/1992, contained within it some provisions open to varied interpretations that sometimes violated the fundamental and procedural principles expressed in the Federal Constitution enacted in 1988, and in turn, the reform of the law about “Misconduct in Public Office” through Law No. 14,230/2021 changed some of these law provisions, addressing the functioning of the economic sanction of asset freezing, a precautionary measure that aims to guarantee compensation for damages caused to public assets in cases of administrative improbity, that is present in the legal system legal since 1970, in a different way from the understanding previously adopted by Jurisprudence, Doctrine and the “Misconduct in Public Office” Law itself. Therefore, this academic project seeks to present a comparison between the forms of action of the Public Administration and the Judiciary in the face of impropriety acts in the periods before and after the law reform, promoting an analysis of the main changes brought about by the New Law about “Misconduct in Public Office” in relation to these administrative and judicial procedures, especially in relation to the Institute of Unavailability of Goods and its importance for the system of accountability for acts of administrative improbity, and other consequences in relation to public agents or politicians accused of committing acts of improbity.
The new law about “Misconduct in Public Office” brought significant changes that affect the defense of public assets, the control of the conduct of public agents, and the applicable penalties and the acting of the Government before the Judiciary, which is of extreme social relevance, considering the defense of public assets. The old law about “Misconduct in Public Office”, Law No. 8,429/1992, contained within it some provisions open to varied interpretations that sometimes violated the fundamental and procedural principles expressed in the Federal Constitution enacted in 1988, and in turn, the reform of the law about “Misconduct in Public Office” through Law No. 14,230/2021 changed some of these law provisions, addressing the functioning of the economic sanction of asset freezing, a precautionary measure that aims to guarantee compensation for damages caused to public assets in cases of administrative improbity, that is present in the legal system legal since 1970, in a different way from the understanding previously adopted by Jurisprudence, Doctrine and the “Misconduct in Public Office” Law itself. Therefore, this academic project seeks to present a comparison between the forms of action of the Public Administration and the Judiciary in the face of impropriety acts in the periods before and after the law reform, promoting an analysis of the main changes brought about by the New Law about “Misconduct in Public Office” in relation to these administrative and judicial procedures, especially in relation to the Institute of Unavailability of Goods and its importance for the system of accountability for acts of administrative improbity, and other consequences in relation to public agents or politicians accused of committing acts of improbity.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
improbidade administrativa , indisponibilidade de bens , direito administrativo sancionador , misconduct in public office , blocked asset , asset freezing , administrative sanctioning procedure