Dissertação (mestrado)—Universidade de Brasília, Faculdade de Direito, Programa de Pós-Graduação em Direito, 2017. / Submitted by Raquel Almeida (raquel.df13@gmail.com) on 2018-03-05T17:01:13Z No. of bitstreams: 1 2017_ThiagoPereiraFigueirêdo.pdf: 496898 bytes, checksum: 6529709d115bc84e42fdd207c3f3802f (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Raquel Viana (raquelviana@bce.unb.br) on 2018-03-09T19:24:02Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 1 2017_ThiagoPereiraFigueirêdo.pdf: 496898 bytes, checksum: 6529709d115bc84e42fdd207c3f3802f (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2018-03-09T19:24:02Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 1 2017_ThiagoPereiraFigueirêdo.pdf: 496898 bytes, checksum: 6529709d115bc84e42fdd207c3f3802f (MD5) Previous issue date: 2018-03-09 / O Tribunal de Contas da União assumiu maior protagonismo no cenário político-jurídico nacional, especialmente após a Constituição Federal de 1988, com extenso rol de competências, prerrogativas e garantias para desempenhar a função de controle externo da atividade administrativa tanto sobre a regularidade formal quanto ao desempenho, mediante o processo de accountability, o qual se traduz em elemento de qualidade para uma boa democracia. As decisões administrativas desta Corte, de caráter técnico-jurídico, podem limitar o exercício de direitos fundamentais de alto relevo no contexto do estado democrático de direito. Todavia, elas não prescindem de justificativas válidas, fáticas e juridicamente aceitáveis. Em razão disso, analisa-se, sob a perspectiva da teoria discursiva de Jürgen Habermas no paradigma do estado democrático de direito e da teoria da argumentação de Klaus Günther, a adequabilidade constitucional do controle judicial das decisões do Tribunal de Contas da União, considerando a diferença entre as dimensões de justificação e aplicação da norma jurídica para a produção de uma decisão juridicamente correta e socialmente adequada. / The Federal Accounting Court assumed a greater role in the political and legal national scenario, especially after the Federal Constitution of 1988, with a wide range of competences, prerogatives and guarantees to perform a function of external control over the administrative activity, both about formal regularity and achievement, through the accountability process which translates into a quality element for good democracy. Administrative decisions of this court, of a technical and legal nature, may limit the exercise of legal rights of high relevance in the context of the democratic rule of law. However, they are demanding valid justifications, factually and legally acceptable. For this reason, it is analyzed, from the perspective of Jurgen Habermas's discourse theory in paradigm of the democratic rule of law and Klaus Günther's theory of argumentation, a constitutional appropriateness of the judicial control of the Federal Accounting Court’s decisions, considering the difference between speech of justification and speech of application of the legal standard to produce a legally correct and socially adequate decision.scenario, especially after the Federal Constitution of 1988, with a wide range of competences, prerogatives and guarantees to perform a function of external control over the administrative activity, both about formal regularity and achievement, through the accountability process which translates into a quality element for good democracy. Administrative decisions of this court, of a technical and legal nature, may limit the exercise of legal rights of high relevance in the context of the democratic rule of law. However, they are demanding valid justifications, factually and legally acceptable. For this reason, it is analyzed, from the perspective of Jurgen Habermas's discourse theory in paradigm of the democratic rule of law and Klaus Günther's theory of argumentation, a constitutional appropriateness of the judicial control of the Federal Accounting Court’s decisions, considering the difference between speech of justification and speech of application of the legal standard to produce a legally correct and socially adequate decision.