THE EXTERNAL EFFECTS OF PRIZE COLLABORATION AND ITS REFLEXES IN APPLYING THE ADMINISTRATIVE IMPROBITY LAW:

CAN THE PUBLIC MINISTRY NEGOTIATE PUBLIC HERITAGE?

Abstract

This article presents a current theme for being in the media and in discussion sand legal debates, including a topic of general repercussion recognizedby the Federal Supreme Court ARE1175650). In addition, because it exposes a historical vulnerability of Brazil that is corruption. It seeks to discuss the extra-budget Ary effect softheaward-in ning collaboration regarding the possible consequences for the application of the Administrative Improbity Law, since crimes against Public Administration of tenalso constituteacts of administrative impropriety, especially those that damagepublicas sets. Within this context, theoperation Lavajet, the largestanti-corruptionoperation in the country, the use of award-winning collaboration agreements for compensation purposes, as well as thea warding of prizes collaborator in the civil sphere, when the criminal conduct coincides with eventual configuration of actest ablished in Law nº 8.429 / 1992. At the point, the problemarises, since the Said Law Express lyprohibits the accomplishment of agreement, transaction and conciliation in the action of improbity. Evenso, jurisprudence hasadmitted the extrapenal effects of the agreements of prize collaboration and its reflexes in the actions of improbity. Within this context, weask: how to reconcile the legal prohibition of the LIA with the legislative advances that promote and stimulate cooperation for the solution of conflicts and jurisprudence on the subject? Canthe Public Prosecutor's Office negotiate the Public Patrimony?