Da prescrição nos processos de controle externo à luz da jurisprudência do STF: reflexos na pretensão constitutiva e na pretensão executória

This article aims, through analysis of judicial decisions and bibliographic review, to investigate aspects about constitutive prescription in external control processes, based on the principle of legal certainty. As the Supreme Court decided on the statute of limitations for executing a title based on a decision by the Courts of Auditors (Topic 899 of General Repercussion), it is important to discuss the extent to which the legal foundations that supported this understanding are equally valid for the purposes of constitutive prescription, which precedes the formation of the executive title itself. Decisions handed down in mandatory actions reveal that the Supreme Court has used a systematic and combined interpretation of Law n. 9.873/99, of Law no. 8.443/92 and the understanding obtained in RE 636.553 (Topic 445 of General Repercussion) as a normative basis for declaring the prescription of the sanctioning and indemnifying claim of the Federal Court of Accounts. While, in Direct Actions of Unconstitutionality, it considered that the States have competence to supplement the constitutional model of external control, including in terms of prescription, provided that they observe the “federal model”. Considering this context, everything leads to the belief that the normative parameter currently adopted in relation to the TCU processes will also apply to the actions established by the other Courts of Accounts, preferably based on a specific law within the scope of each federated States.