Submitted by Automa??o e Estat?stica (sst@bczm.ufrn.br) on 2017-02-02T13:18:35Z No. of bitstreams: 1 JoneFagnerRafaelMaciel_DISSERT.pdf: 1461066 bytes, checksum: 68bbd9149eafe6ac15ac737811f904dd (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Arlan Eloi Leite Silva (eloihistoriador@yahoo.com.br) on 2017-02-08T17:17:02Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 JoneFagnerRafaelMaciel_DISSERT.pdf: 1461066 bytes, checksum: 68bbd9149eafe6ac15ac737811f904dd (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-02-08T17:17:02Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 JoneFagnerRafaelMaciel_DISSERT.pdf: 1461066 bytes, checksum: 68bbd9149eafe6ac15ac737811f904dd (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-08-15 / A conforma??o constitucional da Advocacia de Estado, mediante a an?lise dos artigos 131 e 132 da Constitui??o Federal, e, a partir dela, a verifica??o da possibilidade de promover a defesa de agentes p?blicos, constituem o objeto do estudo que se apresenta. A an?lise a ser empreendida se concentrar? na especifica??o precisa do n?cleo de compet?ncias outorgadas ? Advocacia de Estado, levando em considera??o a configura??o promovida pelo constituinte, que a autonomizou frente aos Poderes Republicanos listados no artigo 2? CF ao inseri-la em cap?tulo pr?prio, e as repercuss?es decorrentes dessa op??o quando do ato fundante da nova ordem jur?dico-constitucional. Procurar-se-? explicitar, dessa conforma??o normativo-estruturante da Advocacia de Estado, o v?nculo que a interseciona com as demais Fun??es Essenciais ? Justi?a, e o que a particulariza, com vistas a saber o grau de autonomia que se lhe ? deferido, bem como os limites de sua atua??o final?stica, com base no exame das compet?ncias contenciosas (representa??o judicial e extrajudicial) e n?o contenciosas (consultaria e assessoramento), e as repercuss?es jur?dicas decorrentes da assistematicidade do constituinte quando dela especificamente tratou. Essas bases permitir?o enveredarmos sobre os limites do legislador, seja o constituinte reformador, seja o infraconstitucional, na tarefa de conforma??o organizacional da Advocacia de Estado, mormente quando procure estender sua compet?ncia para al?m daquelas extra?veis do art. 131, caput, e 132, da Constitui??o Federal, com vistas a discorrermos sobre a inconstitucionalidade, formal e material, da outorga da representa??o judicial ou extrajudicial de agentes p?blicos, como realizado pela Advocacia-Geral da Uni?o por interm?dio do art. 22 da Lei n. 9.028/95. A an?lise dessa inconstitucionalidade fundar-se-?, primordialmente, na assun??o pessoal de responsabilidade pelos agentes p?blicos, com base nas prescri??es que exsurgem do princ?pio republicano, contido no art. 1?, caput, da Constitui??o Federal. / The constitutional conformation of State Advocacy analyzed in Articles 131 and 132 of Federal Constitution and, based on it, the confirmation of prospect to promote the defense of public officials are the object of study presented herein. The undertaken analysis will focus on the specification of core competencies conferred to State Advocacy, taking into account the configuration promoted by the constitutional lawmaker that granted to it the autonomy related to Republican Powers described in FC Article 2nd as it was included in a separate chapter, and the repercussions that follow this option in the event of the new Brazilian legal and constitutional order founding act. We sought to explain, considering this normative-structural conformation of State Advocacy, the linkage that intersects it with other Justice Essential Functions and with what makes it specific, in order to know the degree of autonomy that is granted to it, and the limits of its end performance based on the examination of contentious competencies (judicial and extrajudicial representation) and non-contentious (consulting and advisory services), and the legal consequences arising from the constitutional lawmaker lack of systematicity when specifically dealt with it. These bases will allow us to step into the lawmaker?s limits, be it a reformer constitutional lawmaker or an infra-constitutional one, aimed at the organizational task of State Advocacy, especially when trying to understand its competence beyond those drawn out from FC Art. 131, caput, and 132, in order to discourse about the unconstitutionality of granting public officers with judicial or extrajudicial representation, as carried out by the Federal Advocacy General's Office through Art. 22 of the 9.028/95 Act. The analysis of unconstitutionality will be based on two aspects: the personal assumption of responsibility by public officials and the provisions of the Republican Principle contained in CF Art. 1?.

Submitted by JOSIANE SANTOS DE OLIVEIRA (josianeso) on 2018-02-01T14:54:48Z No. of bitstreams: 1 Sergionei Corrêa_.pdf: 2613130 bytes, checksum: 9267f941c14062b76bfea6182c37e829 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-02-01T14:54:48Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 Sergionei Corrêa_.pdf: 2613130 bytes, checksum: 9267f941c14062b76bfea6182c37e829 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2017-11-21 / Nenhuma / A partir da temática proposta; o percurso de (re)organização operacional da Administração Pública para o tratamento dos conflitos administrativos proposto pela consensualidade, emergiu o seguinte problema a ser respondido: o período de (re)leituras nos elementos estruturantes do Estado, direito e Administração Pública configuram um terreno fecundo para a inserção e maturação da consensualidade como mecanismo de tratamento dos conflitos administrativos? Ainda, como internalizar a lógica consensual na Administração Pública para reduzir os conflitos administrativos e contribuir no seu processo de (re)orientação operacional? Para responder, utilizou-se a metodologia hermenêutica para remover as inúmeras camadas de linguagem incidentes sobre a teoria do Estado, o direito e a lógica operacional na Administração Pública, possibilitando a revelação da consensualidade como matriz de (re)orientação operacional da Administração Pública para o tratamento dos conflitos administrativos. Portanto, o objetivo da pesquisa foi investigar o processo de (re)organização na Administração para o tratamento dos conflitos administrativos proposto pela consensualidade, tendo em vista o cenário contemporâneo de (re)leituras na tríade: Estado, sociedade e direito. Para assegurar fundamentação ao questionamento proposto e orientação ao percurso cognitivo, foram elaboradas as seguintes hipóteses: analisar o processo de (re)releitura no Estado, direito e Administração; (re)pensar os mecanismos tradicionais de tratamento e a própria concepção do conflito; investigar a importância do tempo kairológico para os mecanismos consensuais; estudar a atuação institucional das Advocacias de Estado, em particular da AGU, no processo de (re)organização da lógica operacional da Administração Pública para o tratamento dos conflitos administrativos. Conclui-se, o período de (re)leituras em trânsito mostra-se fértil para a inserção e maturação da consensualidade para o tratamento dos conflitos administrativos apresentando-se, a partir de um processo de internalização e organização nas Advocacias de Estado, uma alternativa viável para a consolidação do percurso de (re)leitura da lógica operacional da Administração Pública brasileira diante dos conflitos administrativos. / From the proposed theme; the route of (re) operational organization of Public Administration for the treatment of administrative conflict proposed by consensuality, the following problem has emerged: the period of (re) readings in the structuring elements of State, law and Public Administration is a fertile ground for the insertion and maturation of consensuality as a mechanism for the treatment of administrative conflicts? Also, how to internalize the consensual logic in the Administration to reduce administrative conflicts and contribute in its process of operational (re) orientation? In order to answer, the hermeneutic methodology to remove the innumerable layers of language incident on the theory of State, law and operational logic in the Administration, enabling the disclosure of consensuality as the matrix of operational (re) orientation of the Public Administration for the treatment of administrative conflicts. Therefore, the objective of the research was to investigate the process of (re) organization in the Administration for the treatment of administrative conflicts proposed by consensuality in view of the contemporary scenario of (re) readings in: State, society and law. The following hypotheses were elaborated to analyze the process of (re) re-reading in the State, Law and Administration; (re) thinking about traditional treatment mechanisms and the very design of the conflict; to investigate the importance of kairological time for consensual mechanisms; study the institutional performance of state law firms, particularly the AGU in the process of (re) organization of operational logic of Public Administration for the treatment of administrative conflicts. It can be concluded that the period of (re) readings in transit is fertile for the insertion and maturation of consensuality for the treatment of administrative conflicts, presenting, from a process of internalization and organization in State Advocacy, an alternative feasible to consolidate the course of (re) reading the operational logic of the Brazilian Public Administration in the face of administrative conflicts.

Submitted by Automa??o e Estat?stica (sst@bczm.ufrn.br) on 2017-02-13T19:58:38Z No. of bitstreams: 1 RodrigoGerentMattos_DISSERT.pdf: 1595220 bytes, checksum: 949e075a4c6fb1a1cc2d60f951fe99b9 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Arlan Eloi Leite Silva (eloihistoriador@yahoo.com.br) on 2017-02-15T23:36:09Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 RodrigoGerentMattos_DISSERT.pdf: 1595220 bytes, checksum: 949e075a4c6fb1a1cc2d60f951fe99b9 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-02-15T23:36:09Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 RodrigoGerentMattos_DISSERT.pdf: 1595220 bytes, checksum: 949e075a4c6fb1a1cc2d60f951fe99b9 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-09-12 / A presente disserta??o possui como tema a Independ?ncia Funcional do Advogado P?blico Federal na Constitui??o da Rep?blica Federativa do Brasil em uma Advocacia de Estado atenta aos Direitos dos Cidad?os. A Constitui??o Federal confere ? Advocacia P?blica o status de Fun??o Essencial ? Justi?a. A atividade est? regulada nos arts. 131 e 132 da Constitui??o Federal. No ?mbito federal, a Advocacia P?blica ? exercida pela Advocacia-Geral da Uni?o, integrada pelas carreiras de Advogado da Uni?o, Procurador da Fazenda Nacional, Procurador Federal e Procurador do Banco Central. Cumpre ao Advogado P?blico realizar a defesa do Estado e viabilizar juridicamente a concretiza??o das pol?ticas p?blicas. Imp?e-se, no entanto, verificar como se pode compatibilizar a tarefa de defesa dos interesses do Estado sem negar direitos aos cidad?os. Desse modo, tem-se como objetivo geral analisar a exist?ncia, ou n?o, da independ?ncia funcional para o Advogado P?blico desenvolver suas atribui??es, pois a Constitui??o n?o destaca essa prerrogativa expressamente, tal como fez em rela??o ao Minist?rio P?blico e ? Defensoria P?blica. Como objetivos espec?ficos procurar-se-? verificar como a independ?ncia funcional do Advogado P?blico poderia contribuir para a redu??o da litigiosidade estatal; analisar as incongru?ncias do paradigma atual de uma Advocacia de Governo e conceber aspectos inerentes ao paradigma ideal de uma Advocacia de Estado. Adotase a metodologia dedutiva, partindo-se dos conhecimentos gerais para o espec?fico, com a abordagem do tema proposto sob a ?tica da t?cnica da pesquisa bibliogr?fica, buscando elementos na legisla??o, na doutrina nacional e estrangeira, bem como na jurisprud?ncia p?tria e em normas internas da Advocacia-Geral da Uni?o. Realiza-se uma abordagem exemplificativa para demonstrar o quanto o paradigma da Advocacia P?blica est? centrado em uma Advocacia de Governo e o que se poderia esperar de uma Advocacia de Estado em um modelo republicano atento aos direitos dos cidad?os. Na forma republicana de governo a atua??o estatal deve ser dirigida para atender aos interesses e ?s necessidades prim?rias da sociedade, visando sempre ? promo??o do bem comum. A atua??o do Advogado P?blico deve ent?o estar calcada no fio t?nue entre defender o Estado, viabilizar a realiza??o das pol?ticas p?blicas ao mesmo tempo em que exerce importante papel preventivo para a observ?ncia da legalidade pelos ?rg?os estatais. Conclui-se que a independ?ncia funcional do Advogado P?blico constitui princ?pio constitucional impl?cito ao exerc?cio da atividade jur?dica decorrente da pr?pria investidura constitucional. Em um Estado Republicano e Democr?tico de Direito que possui como fundamento a constru??o de uma sociedade justa (CF, art. 3?, I) o princ?pio da independ?ncia funcional do Advogado P?blico ? extra?do do exame do art. 131 em conjunto com o art. 37, caput, da Constitui??o Federal, bem como pela observ?ncia dos princ?pios e direitos fundamentais. No entanto, ante a realidade do paradigma vigente de uma Advocacia de Governo o princ?pio da independ?ncia funcional do Advogado P?blico Federal vem sendo inobservado na realidade emp?rica, sendo uma das causas para o excesso de litigiosidade estatal e da dificuldade de reconhecimento de direitos pertencentes aos cidad?os. / This dissertation has as its theme the Functional Independence of the Federal Public Attorney in the Constitution of the Federative Republic of Brazil in a Advocacy of the State Attentive to the Rights of Citizens. The Federal Constitution gives the Public Advocacy status of Essential Function to justice. The activity is regulated in arts. 131 and 132 of the Federal Constitution. At the federal level, the Public Advocacy is exercised by the Advocacy General of the Union, composed by the careers of the Union Attorney, Attorney of the National Treasury, Federal Attorney and Attorney of the Central Bank. Meets the Public Attorney conduct the defense of the state and legally enable the implementation of public policies. It is necessary, however, to see how one can reconcile the defense task of state interests without denying rights to citizens. Thus, it has as general objective to analyze the existence or not of functional independence for the public attorney to develop his/her tasks, because the Constitution does not highlight this prerogative expressly, as it did in relation to the Public Ministry and the Public Defender's Office. Specific objectives will be sought to verify how the functional independence of the Public Attorney could contribute to the reduction of state litigation; analyze the inconsistencies of the current paradigm of a Government Advocacy and shape aspects of the ideal paradigm of an Advocacy of the State. It is adopt the deductive methodology, starting from the general knowledge to a specific one, with the theme of the approach proposed from the perspective of the literature technique, seeking elements in legislation, national and foreign doctrine and the country law and internal rules of the Advocacy General of the Union. It is realized an exemplary approach to demonstrate how the paradigm of Public Advocacy is focused on a Government Advocacy and what could be expected from an Advocacy of the State in a republican model attentive to the rights of citizens. The republican way of government the state action should be directed to meet the interests and basic needs of society, always seeking to promote the common good. The role of the Public Attorney should then be feet in the thin thread between defending the state, enabling the implementation of public policies and at the same time plays an important preventive role for the observance of the law by state bodies. It is concluded that the functional independence of the Public Attorney is implicit constitutional principle to the exercise of legal activity deriving from the constitutional endowment. In a Republican and Democratic State of Law that has the foundation to build a just society (CF, art. 3, I) the principle of functional independence of the Public Attorney is extracted from examination of art. 131 in conjunction with art. 37, caput, of the Federal Constitution, and the observance of fundamental principles and rights. However, given the reality of the current paradigm of a Government Advocacy the principle of functional independence of the Federal Public Attorney has being unobserved in empirical reality, being one of the causes for the excess state litigation and the difficulty of recognition of rights belonging to citizens.