{"title":"行政诚信的集体权利:从立法理论的角度分析第 14.230/2021 号法律","authors":"Rillary LETÍCIA DE MORAIS, Rogério De Araújo Lima","doi":"10.35265/2236-6717-240-12860","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The present study aims to analyze part of the legislative arguments that culminated in Law no. 14.230/2021, as well as evaluating the rationality of some of its provisions, based on Manuel Atienza's Theory of Legislation. For this purpose, bibliographical and documentary research was used, seeking to understand and reflect on the impacts of the new law on guaranteeing the constitutional and collective right to administrative probity. In this context, an imbalance can be observed between what was developed in the parliamentary arguments and the approved legal text. Although there is discussion that the old Administrative Improbity Law promoted numerous “unfair” convictions, there are concerns about the effectiveness of the new changes in holding public agents for committing acts that harm the public interest.","PeriodicalId":21289,"journal":{"name":"Revista Científica Semana Acadêmica","volume":"28 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"O DIREITO COLETIVO À PROBIDADE ADMINISTRATIVA: ANÁLISE DA LEI N. 14.230/2021 SOB O ENFOQUE DA TEORIA DA LEGISLAÇÃO\",\"authors\":\"Rillary LETÍCIA DE MORAIS, Rogério De Araújo Lima\",\"doi\":\"10.35265/2236-6717-240-12860\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The present study aims to analyze part of the legislative arguments that culminated in Law no. 14.230/2021, as well as evaluating the rationality of some of its provisions, based on Manuel Atienza's Theory of Legislation. For this purpose, bibliographical and documentary research was used, seeking to understand and reflect on the impacts of the new law on guaranteeing the constitutional and collective right to administrative probity. In this context, an imbalance can be observed between what was developed in the parliamentary arguments and the approved legal text. Although there is discussion that the old Administrative Improbity Law promoted numerous “unfair” convictions, there are concerns about the effectiveness of the new changes in holding public agents for committing acts that harm the public interest.\",\"PeriodicalId\":21289,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Revista Científica Semana Acadêmica\",\"volume\":\"28 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Revista Científica Semana Acadêmica\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.35265/2236-6717-240-12860\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Revista Científica Semana Acadêmica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.35265/2236-6717-240-12860","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
本研究旨在分析最终形成第 14.230/2021 号法律的部分立法论据,并根据 Manuel Atienza 的立法理论对其部分条款的合理性进行评估。为此,采用了书目和文献研究的方法,力求了解和思考新法律对保障行政廉正的宪法权利和集体权利的影响。在这种情况下,可以看到议会辩论中提出的观点与批准的法律文本之间存在不平衡。尽管有讨论认为旧的《行政不端法》推动了许多 "不公平 "的定罪,但也有人担心新的变化在追究公职人员损害公共利益的行为方面是否有效。
O DIREITO COLETIVO À PROBIDADE ADMINISTRATIVA: ANÁLISE DA LEI N. 14.230/2021 SOB O ENFOQUE DA TEORIA DA LEGISLAÇÃO
The present study aims to analyze part of the legislative arguments that culminated in Law no. 14.230/2021, as well as evaluating the rationality of some of its provisions, based on Manuel Atienza's Theory of Legislation. For this purpose, bibliographical and documentary research was used, seeking to understand and reflect on the impacts of the new law on guaranteeing the constitutional and collective right to administrative probity. In this context, an imbalance can be observed between what was developed in the parliamentary arguments and the approved legal text. Although there is discussion that the old Administrative Improbity Law promoted numerous “unfair” convictions, there are concerns about the effectiveness of the new changes in holding public agents for committing acts that harm the public interest.