Advocacia pública e controle da probidade: proatividade e procedimento no exercício da legitimidade ativa nas ações de improbidade administrativa

Abstract

The repressive control of the administrative improbity performed by the Public Advocacy has been built within a new proactive stance and through a procedure that enables the exercise of active legitimacy in the respective public civil action. Given this, this research was conducted by the following key question: From the effective exercise of repressive control of administrative misconduct in a coordinated manner, by the use of the legitimacy of the advocacy of federal public entities, what are the main aspects necessary for an administrative procedure? prior to filing? Thus, the main objective of this dissertation is to verify the peculiarities of this active legitimacy of the Public Advocacy and whether the related legislation and the existing procedure in the Federal Attorney General‟s Office require improvements. Based on the description of Public Law as an essential function of justice, we sought to understand its role in controlling the legality of Public Administration. By dialectical method, we compared the procedure of the Federal Attorney General‟s Office, the rite of the public civil inquiry and the previous procedure for collecting information. From this confrontation, there were improvements that could allow a more accurate instruction, or even the extrajudicial solution of administrative misconduct, permeated by administrative consultation between the organs and entities involved. In the methodology, we used bibliographic and documentary research of the doctrine about the essential functions to justice that have active legitimacy for action, as well as norms and scientific articles about the previous procedure. The data collection of the Remote Work of Administrative Misconduct Actions (ETR-Probidade) within the scope of the Federal Attorney General‟s Office focused on the proceedings instituted, the actions filed, the municipalities involved and some more relevant routines of the previous rite. Proactive and procedural action by the Public Advocacy begins to overcome the stereotype, dominant in Brazilian doctrine, of omission and political capture in the active legitimacy of the injured entity in public civil actions for administrative misconduct. It was concluded that the active legitimacy of the Attorney General‟s Office should have a justifying differential that promotes contributions of repressive action to prevent acts of administrative misconduct by internal control of direct federal government, autarchic and foundational.