Malice in administrative improbity: a rational quest for the subjective element in the violation of the principles of Public Administration
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2019 |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | por |
Título da fonte: | Revista Direito GV |
Texto Completo: | https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/80715 |
Resumo: | This article examines the application of the Law of Administrative Improbity by the Brazilian Superior Court of Justice (STJ), focusing on the debate about the need of demonstration of intent to hold the public agent accountable for violating the principles of Public Administration. Based on qualitative analysis of the arguments used in deciding the REsp n. 765.212/AC (special appeal in which the issue was more deeply discussed), it appears that the Court lacks clarity to deal with the concepts of ‘intention’ and ‘will’. And although the conclusions of the judges converge, the arguments they mobilize conceal deep theoretical differences, which cannot be ignored for a rational and intelligible application of the Law. Aiming at enriching this debate, the article proposes a recovery of the Aristotelian notion of practical reason, which allows for a more efficient distinction between illegal conduct and administrative improbity. It is also pointed out that understanding the intelligibility of human action depends on context analysis. Moreover, the fact that the public agent acts to carry out policies, and not only to avoid illegality, must be taken into consideration by courts. When deciding actions of administrative improbity judges must, therefore, address these matters. |
id |
FGV-2_01a552a8fd94db8cda2e92a731d2ee10 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:ojs.periodicos.fgv.br:article/80715 |
network_acronym_str |
FGV-2 |
network_name_str |
Revista Direito GV |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
Malice in administrative improbity: a rational quest for the subjective element in the violation of the principles of Public AdministrationO dolo da improbidade administrativa: uma busca racional pelo elemento subjetivo na violação aos princípios da Administração PúblicaAdministrative improbityMaliceRational actionPractical reasonLegal reasoningImprobidade administrativaDoloAção racionalRazão práticaFundamentação jurídicaThis article examines the application of the Law of Administrative Improbity by the Brazilian Superior Court of Justice (STJ), focusing on the debate about the need of demonstration of intent to hold the public agent accountable for violating the principles of Public Administration. Based on qualitative analysis of the arguments used in deciding the REsp n. 765.212/AC (special appeal in which the issue was more deeply discussed), it appears that the Court lacks clarity to deal with the concepts of ‘intention’ and ‘will’. And although the conclusions of the judges converge, the arguments they mobilize conceal deep theoretical differences, which cannot be ignored for a rational and intelligible application of the Law. Aiming at enriching this debate, the article proposes a recovery of the Aristotelian notion of practical reason, which allows for a more efficient distinction between illegal conduct and administrative improbity. It is also pointed out that understanding the intelligibility of human action depends on context analysis. Moreover, the fact that the public agent acts to carry out policies, and not only to avoid illegality, must be taken into consideration by courts. When deciding actions of administrative improbity judges must, therefore, address these matters.Este artigo investiga a jurisprudência do Superior Tribunal de Justiça (STF) na aplicação da Lei de Improbidade Administrativa, enfocando o debate sobre a necessidade de demonstração de dolo para que se responsabilize o agente público por violação aos princípios da Administração Pública. A partir da análise qualitativa dos argumentos trazidos pelos ministros ao decidir o Recurso Especial (REsp) n. 765.212/AC, caso no qual a questão foi mais profundamente debatida, verifica-se que falta clareza ao STF para lidar com os conceitos de “intenção” e “vontade” e que, embora as conclusões dos ministros sejam convergentes, os argumentos mobilizados escondem diferenças teóricas profundas, que não podem ser ignoradas se se pretende uma aplicação racional e inteligível da Lei de Improbidade Administrativa. Com vistas a enriquecer o debate sobre o tema, propõe-se um resgate teórico da noção aristotélica de razão prática, que permite distinguir mais eficientemente a conduta ilegal da conduta ímproba. Aponta-se, ainda, que a compreensão da inteligibilidade da ação do agente público acusado de improbidade depende de uma análise de contexto, bem como da clareza de que o administrador age no sentido de realizar projetos, e não apenas para evitar a ilegalidade, o que deve transparecer na motivação das decisões judiciais em ações de improbidade administrativa.Escola de Direito de São Paulo da Fundação Getulio Vargas2019-11-25info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/80715Revista Direito GV; Vol. 15 No. 3 (2019): set-dez. (34); e1937Revista Direito GV; Vol. 15 Núm. 3 (2019): set-dez. (34); e1937Revista Direito GV; v. 15 n. 3 (2019): set-dez. (34); e19372317-6172reponame:Revista Direito GVinstname:Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)instacron:FGVporhttps://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/80715/77056Copyright (c) 2019 Revista Direito GVinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccessFerreira, Vivian Maria Pereira2019-11-26T14:00:17Zoai:ojs.periodicos.fgv.br:article/80715Revistahttps://direitosp.fgv.br/publicacoes/revista/revista-direito-gvPRIhttps://old.scielo.br/oai/scielo-oai.php||revistadireitogv@fgv.br|| catarina.barbieri@fgv.br2317-61721808-2432opendoar:2019-11-26T14:00:17Revista Direito GV - Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
Malice in administrative improbity: a rational quest for the subjective element in the violation of the principles of Public Administration O dolo da improbidade administrativa: uma busca racional pelo elemento subjetivo na violação aos princípios da Administração Pública |
title |
Malice in administrative improbity: a rational quest for the subjective element in the violation of the principles of Public Administration |
spellingShingle |
Malice in administrative improbity: a rational quest for the subjective element in the violation of the principles of Public Administration Ferreira, Vivian Maria Pereira Administrative improbity Malice Rational action Practical reason Legal reasoning Improbidade administrativa Dolo Ação racional Razão prática Fundamentação jurídica |
title_short |
Malice in administrative improbity: a rational quest for the subjective element in the violation of the principles of Public Administration |
title_full |
Malice in administrative improbity: a rational quest for the subjective element in the violation of the principles of Public Administration |
title_fullStr |
Malice in administrative improbity: a rational quest for the subjective element in the violation of the principles of Public Administration |
title_full_unstemmed |
Malice in administrative improbity: a rational quest for the subjective element in the violation of the principles of Public Administration |
title_sort |
Malice in administrative improbity: a rational quest for the subjective element in the violation of the principles of Public Administration |
author |
Ferreira, Vivian Maria Pereira |
author_facet |
Ferreira, Vivian Maria Pereira |
author_role |
author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Ferreira, Vivian Maria Pereira |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Administrative improbity Malice Rational action Practical reason Legal reasoning Improbidade administrativa Dolo Ação racional Razão prática Fundamentação jurídica |
topic |
Administrative improbity Malice Rational action Practical reason Legal reasoning Improbidade administrativa Dolo Ação racional Razão prática Fundamentação jurídica |
description |
This article examines the application of the Law of Administrative Improbity by the Brazilian Superior Court of Justice (STJ), focusing on the debate about the need of demonstration of intent to hold the public agent accountable for violating the principles of Public Administration. Based on qualitative analysis of the arguments used in deciding the REsp n. 765.212/AC (special appeal in which the issue was more deeply discussed), it appears that the Court lacks clarity to deal with the concepts of ‘intention’ and ‘will’. And although the conclusions of the judges converge, the arguments they mobilize conceal deep theoretical differences, which cannot be ignored for a rational and intelligible application of the Law. Aiming at enriching this debate, the article proposes a recovery of the Aristotelian notion of practical reason, which allows for a more efficient distinction between illegal conduct and administrative improbity. It is also pointed out that understanding the intelligibility of human action depends on context analysis. Moreover, the fact that the public agent acts to carry out policies, and not only to avoid illegality, must be taken into consideration by courts. When deciding actions of administrative improbity judges must, therefore, address these matters. |
publishDate |
2019 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2019-11-25 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/80715 |
url |
https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/80715 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
por |
language |
por |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/80715/77056 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2019 Revista Direito GV info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
rights_invalid_str_mv |
Copyright (c) 2019 Revista Direito GV |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Escola de Direito de São Paulo da Fundação Getulio Vargas |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Escola de Direito de São Paulo da Fundação Getulio Vargas |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Revista Direito GV; Vol. 15 No. 3 (2019): set-dez. (34); e1937 Revista Direito GV; Vol. 15 Núm. 3 (2019): set-dez. (34); e1937 Revista Direito GV; v. 15 n. 3 (2019): set-dez. (34); e1937 2317-6172 reponame:Revista Direito GV instname:Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV) instacron:FGV |
instname_str |
Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV) |
instacron_str |
FGV |
institution |
FGV |
reponame_str |
Revista Direito GV |
collection |
Revista Direito GV |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Revista Direito GV - Fundação Getulio Vargas (FGV) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||revistadireitogv@fgv.br|| catarina.barbieri@fgv.br |
_version_ |
1798943710306631680 |