The Federal Supreme Court (STF) suspended, this Thursday (4), the judgment that will define whether the changes made to the Administrative Improbity Law last year can be applied to cases in progress and those already defined.
Congress ended the crime of culpable administrative improbity (that is, unintentional) and reduced the statute of limitations for acts of improbity.
So far, there are two votes so that changes (which were more beneficial to the defendants) can be applied to cases in progress in court.
Minister Alexandre de Moraes, rapporteur of the case, voted for the administrative improbity law not to retroact in past cases, but opened a loophole for those public agents who are still investigated or who have cases in progress in court.
In practice, by Moraes’ vote, the old rule of law, which provided for public agents to be held accountable for wrongful acts, cannot be applied to cases that are still pending in court, in any instance, which can benefit a series of agents. public and politicians with legal action.
The minister also defended that, as the culpable modality of the act of improbity no longer applies, it is up to the competent court in each case to analyze any bad faith or willful misconduct on the part of the accused public agent.
Minister André Mendonça, second to vote, gave a broader vote towards the application of the new law. For Mendonça, the new rules must be applied to all cases in progress in Justice (which coincides with Moraes’ understanding).
In addition, in the case of final convictions, Mendonça understood that the new rule can also be applied (it is up to the convict to go to court with a rescissory action to extinguish his conviction).
Mendonça also voted for the new statute of limitations for the processes, which have become shorter, to apply to those in progress.
The STF plenary judges actions that question parts of the new administrative improbity law. The lawsuit on trial this Thursday (4) had a recognized general repercussion, that is, it will serve as a guideline for similar cases in other instances of Justice.
In this case, the National Institute of Social Security (INSS) requested that a prosecutor, hired to defend the interests of the municipality, be sentenced to pay the damages suffered as a result of her actions. The prosecutor served between 1994 and 1999, and the lawsuit was filed in 2006.
Both Moraes and Mendonça voted in favor of dismissing the lawsuit against the lawyer.
Source: CNN Brasil
