Uma análise sobre a prescrição intercorrente incluída pela lei n. 14.230/2021 na improbidade administrativa

Abstract

The intercurrent prescription, introduced by Law No. 14.230/2021 within the scope of administrative improbity, brought a significant innovation by providing for the termination of the process after the lapse of 4 (four) years between interruptive events, regardless of the plaintiff's inertia. Presented as a measure to promote procedural speed and ensure legal certainty, this form of prescription has generated intense debates regarding its impacts on the fight against corruption and the protection of the fundamental right to administrative probity. The main objective of this study is to analyze the legal, practical, and constitutional aspects of this new prescription. More specifically, it aims to recognize the intercurrent prescription as a legislative regression and a form of insufficient protection for the fundamental right to integrity, in addition to highlighting its incompatibility with the slowness of the Brazilian judicial system. To achieve these objectives, the methodology adopted was primarily based on a literature review through a qualitative examination of specialized bibliographies, including scientific articles, theses, dissertations, monographs, and relevant doctrinal works, as well as a jurisprudential analysis of the main Supreme Federal Court decisions related to administrative improbity. Additionally, in the third chapter, data from the "Justice in Numbers" Panel, prepared by the National Justice Council (CNJ), were presented to demonstrate the disproportionality between the deadline set by the legislator for the intercurrent prescription and the practical reality of the national judicial system. At the end of the research, it was found that the intercurrent prescription, as provided, is entirely incompatible with the real scenario of the Judiciary, potentially contributing to the impunity of corrupt agents and even encouraging the practice of acts of improbity. Therefore, it is concluded that the intercurrent prescription represents a legislative regression and an insufficient form of protection for the fundamental right to administrative integrity.