Campus de Goiabeiras, Vitória - ES

Name: LETICIA LEMGRUBER FRANCISCHETTO

Publication date: 15/07/2020
Advisor:

Namesort descending Role
FLAVIO CHEIM JORGE Advisor *

Examining board:

Namesort descending Role
FLAVIO CHEIM JORGE Advisor *
HERMES ZANETI JUNIOR Internal Examiner *

Summary: This study aims to analyze Public Prosecutor's Office’s
negotiation powers extension in punitive law’s area, conceived as criminal
law and sanctioning administrative law, this last one specifically around
Brazilian Acts 8.429/1992 and 12.846/2013. It approaches the ineffectiveness
of state-owned adjudicated full trial answer by the Judiciary; the impact of
the scopes expected from the law system in the different procedural legal
systems and in the different aspects of the principle of legality; the goals
indicated for the criminal procedure and for the civil procedure and the
influence over the procedural availability and over the allowed area for
legal system’s operationalization; the constitutional command’s
compatibilization for prioritize the consensual solution with the
unavailability of the diffused rights and the personal fundamental rights
involved with criminal illegalities and with sanctioning administrative law;
and the compatibilization of the negotiation in this area with Brazilian’s
law system and legal tradition. The search objective consisted on demonstrate
the substitution of principle of strict legality by administrative juridicity; the prevalence of general liberty power for the self-limitation of fundamental right legal positions under the offender’s perspective; the Public Prosecutor's Office’s possibility to choose the adequate protection of the diffused rights engaged in punitive law, even if it results in the non-application of the stipulated sanctions; and the different legal nature of the typologies and criminal sanctions towards the administrative typologies and sanctions. It concluded that Public Prosecutor's Office and offender have the possibility to negotiate the application of the legal consequences towards perpetrated illegalities, with different shapes, limits and consequences, depending on the illegalities’ area (criminal law or sanctioning administrative law) and on the transaction’s type (of pure repressive or of collaboration). Besides, given prosecutor’s binded to
Public Prosecutor's Office’s goals, strategic planning’s and rule, he’s obligated to satisfy the argumentative onus if the concrete case points the adequacy of a different kind of protection, being insufficient the argument of functional independence. In this performance, the Conselho Superior (exercising the reviewing power over the performed dismisses) and theCorregedoria Geral (by its orientational and supervisory competences), execute the finalistic control and the supervision of ideological and action’s unity of the Institution.

Access to document

Transparência Pública
Acesso à informação

© 2013 Universidade Federal do Espírito Santo. Todos os direitos reservados.
Av. Fernando Ferrari, 514 - Goiabeiras, Vitória - ES | CEP 29075-910