DEVIDO PROCESSO LEGAL E PROCESSO ADMINISTRATIVO SANCIONADOR NAS AGÊNCIAS REGULADORAS

This paper discusses the growing attention that, over the last decades, has been given to the administrative procedure in Administrative Law, as it also highlights the procedures which are in tune with the new trappings of this legal field. It focuses on the sanctioning competence of regulatory agencies, notably what concerns the procedural guide that conditions its exercise. It aims at gathering varied elements, many times dispersed over the legal system, so it is possible to list, with a satisfactory degree of detail, the procedural constitutional guidelines which are indispensable to the sanctioning of private entities through punitive action by regulatory agencies. It highlights the due legal process clause, for the abundance of the protective set there is around it, as a guiding constitutional principle for the application of sanctions by regulatory agencies. It examines the repercussion of the constitutional principle of the due legal process on Administrative Law, focusing on the most relevant principles on which the first unfolds itself. It analyzes, in light of the due legal process principle, the sanctioning administrative procedure developed in regulatory agencies. In conclusion, it is asserted that there is no room, in the Brazilian legal system as a whole, for sanctions to be applied summarily; that there reigns, in our system, an absolute presumption, dictated by the Constitution, that only through regular procedures can the best and fairest decision, concerning cases in which the rights of private parties could be affected, be taken by the public administration; that, respecting the principle of the right to a fair hearing, it is indispensable that there be motivation of a decision that imposes a sanction; that there should be, in homage to the principle of full defense and for the need to preserve the autonomy of the regulatory party, an appeal court in every agency; that the principles listed in the federal law No. 9.784/1999 should be mandatorily monitored by the agencies, for this is the only alternative consistent with the Constitution

Teoria da despesa pública: uma leitura ético-constitucional em busca do possível da reserva

Brazilian law passes through a crisis of effectiveness commonly attributed to the extravagance of fundamental rights and public shortage. However, public finances are not dogmatically structured to solve the conflicts around the limitations of public spending. There are ethical conditioning factors, like morality, proportionality and impartiality, however, these principles act separately, while the problem of public shortage is holistic. Also, the subjectivity of politics discretionary in the definition of public spending, which is supported in an indeterminate concept of public interest, needs material orientation about the destination of public funds, making it vulnerable to ideological manipulation, resulting in real process of catching rights. Not even the judicial activism (such as influx of constitutionalism) is shown legally appropriate. The Reserve of Possible, also presents basic ethical failure. Understanding the formation of public shortage is therefore essential for understanding the crisis of effectiveness of state responsibilities, given the significant expansion of the state duty of protection, which does not find legal technique of defense of the established interests. The premise of argument, then, part of the possibility of deducting minimal model ethical of desire to spend (public interest) according to objective parameters of the normative system. Public spending has always been treated disdainfully by the Brazilian doctrine, according to the legal character accessory assigned to the monetary cost. Nonetheless, it is the meeting point between economics and law, or is in the marrow of the problem of public shortage. Expensive Subjects to modernity, as the effectiveness of fundamental rights, pass necessarily an ethical legal system of public spending. From the ethical principles deducted from the planning, only the democratic principle guides the public spending through the approval of public spending in the complex budget process. In other words, there is an ethical distancing of economic reality in relation to state responsibilities. From the dogmatic belief of insufficiency, public spending is evaluated ethically, according to the foundations of modern constitutionalism, in search of possible of the financial reserve, certain that the ethics of public economy is a sine qua non condition for legal ethics.

Parâmetros de concretização judicial do direito fundamental à saúde no fornecimento de medicamentos

In Brazil, social rights have always been considered secondary legal categories, whose implementation could wait for the pending of political decisions. At the end of the Second World War, International Law emphasizes the protection of human beings, raising his dignity as a legal pillar of the legal orders and one of the main foundations of Constitutions. At the post-positivism Constitutionalism, the realization of social rights receives special attention with the assumption of supremacy and normativity of the Constitutions, while the judiciary participates in the realization of democracy, not only as applicator of laws, but also as the guardian of constitutionality of the acts and administrative omissions, creatively contributing to the constitutional achievement, filling gaps and normative state omissions. In this aspect, the supply of medicines, whose costs can not be supported by the individual, keep a close connection with the right to life, health and dignity of the human being, as the subject of numerous lawsuits directed against the Public Administration. Such phenomenon has caused intense debate regarding judicial activism and legitimacy of these decisions, particularly on the need to define what are the limits and possibilities considering the principle of separation of powers and the principle of reserve of the possible; bieng this the problematic developed in this research. Thus, this research aims to verify the legitimacy of judicial decisions that determines to the Public Administration the compulsory providing of medicine to those who can not afford the cost of their treatment, as well as, contribute to the dogmatic constructions of parameters to be observed by judicial interference. Regarding the methodology, this research has an investigative and descriptive caracter and an theoretical approach based on bibliographical data collection (judicial and doutrine decisions) that received qualitative treatment and dialectical approach. As a result, it is known that the judicial decision that determines the supply of medicines to those individuals who can not afford them with their own resources is legitimate and complies with the democratic principle, not violating the principle of separation of powers and the reserve of the possible, since the judicial decison is not stripped with an uniform and reasonable criteria, failing to contain high burden of subjectivism and witch signifies a possible exacerbation of functions by the judiciary, suffering, in this case, of requirement of legal certainty. It is concluded that the Court decision that determines the government the providing of medicine to those who can not afford the cost of treatment should be based on parameters such as: the protection of human dignity and the minimum existencial principle, the inafastable jurisdiction principle; compliance critique of the possible reserve principle; subsidiarity of judicial intervention; proportionality (quantitative and qualitative) in the content of the decision; the questioning about the reasons for non-delivery of the drug through administrative via; and, finally, the attention not to turn the judiciary into a mere production factor of the pharmaceutical industry, contributing to the cartelization of the right to health