A natureza jurídica do Ministério Público de Contas à luz da jurisprudência do Supremo Tribunal Federal: uma abordagem crítica

Abstract

The story national policy records from the earliest days of the Republic the presence of representatives of the Public Prosecutor attached to the Court of Auditors in a prominent position. In 1988’ Constitution, prevailed the forecasting of standalone device to treat the members of special Parquet with assimilation into rights, seals and form of investiture in relation to members of the Parquet Floor common. As a logical consequence, in addition to the Court of Auditors of the Union, the Courts of Auditors State also started to predict the presence of members of the public Ministry in its composition, as a corollary of the need to execute a more effective control on the benefits of auditors on the part of the Executive. In practice, the proactive nature of the action of members of the body under examination in the various spheres of power has generated an environment of institutional conflicts of such magnitude that it is recommended to overcome a design chain in the case law of the STF that advocates the absence of institutional autonomy, under the argument of it has not the note of institutional physiognomy itself, which should be ruled out in tribute to the constitutional principles of citizenship and the dignity of the human person.