A aplicação da lei de improbidade administrativa aos prefeitos municipais:um estudo feito com base na reclamação 2138 no Supremo Tribunal Federal

Abstract

The present study deals with the Law of Administrative Improbity: a study made based on the Judgment of Complaint 2138 in the STF. According to the wording of the caput of Article 37 of the Federal Constitution, the direct and indirect public administration of any of the Powers of the Union, the States, the Federal District and the Municipalities shall obey the principles of legality, impersonality, morality, publicity and efficiency. For this study, what is most important is the principle of morality, because it has a direct relation with the subject matter here. It also provides for the Judgment of Complaint 2138 in the STF and the recent acknowledgment of general repercussion recognized through the STF Virtual Plenary to the issue that deals with the possibility of prosecution and judgment of mayors for acts of administrative impropriety, based on the Law of Administrative Improbity. Such issue shall be decided by the STF in the Analysis of the Extraordinary Appeal with Agravo (ARE) 683235, as well as the constituent in § 4 of this provision that acts of administrative improbity will affect the suspension of political rights, loss of public office, unavailability of property and reimbursement to the treasury, in the form and gradation provided for by law, without prejudice to the appropriate criminal action, and it is the law that establish limits of limitation for crimes committed by any agent, server or not, causing damages to the treasury, respective redress actions. In Brazil, the infraconstitutional rule that provides for sanctions applicable to public agents in cases of illicit enrichment in the exercise of a mandate, position, job or function in the direct, indirect or foundational public administration is Law No. 8,429 of 1992 - the Law of Administrative dishonesty. In this sense the following questions arise: How is the question posed and what is the issue that this complaint has judged? What is the path, legal value, principles and standards? What are the theses of the trial? What is the result of the STF? Would it be the only possible interpretive result or could there be others, which could be better or worse? Does the interpretive conclusion that is reached serve to achieve the intended effects or not? The general objective of this study is to identify the duties of the political agent and the sanctions applied to him in case of configuration of an act of administrative improbity. The methodology used is descriptive exploratory research of the qualitative type, through written documents, as well as in books concerning the theme.