Atuação do tribunal de contas do estado do Rio de Janeiro: fatores que possibilitam a avaliação de políticas públicas

Este trabalho pretende descrever como o Tribunal de Contas do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, na perspectiva de uma organização que representa o povo, controlando as finanças públicas, e prestando atenção às crescentes demandas da sociedade poderá enfrentar os novos desafios institucionais em conseqüência de novas atribuições, cada vez mais sujeita as incertezas decorrentes da natureza íntima da Avaliação das Políticas Públicas, em desenvolvimento, em face da auditoria tradicional, que o caracteriza em geral

As contribuições relativas ao uso de eventos/fóruns para constituição de comunidades de práticas e expressão da inteligência coletiva: o caso do Bibliocontas

Reflete sobre as Comunidades de Prática (CoPs), na perspectiva do conceito de Inteligência Coletiva de Pierre Lèvy. Descreve o ponto de vista de Lèvy, procurando estabelecer um diálogo como conceito de CoPs, criado por Etienne Wenger. Aponta os elementos encontrados nos fóruns virtuais e presenciais realizados pelo do Grupo Bibliocontas, (grupo formado por profissionais da informação que atuam nos Tribunais de Contas brasileiros), que podem contribuir para constituição de uma comunidade de prática. Verifica que os eventos/fóruns são canais integradores para efetivação de uma comunidade de prática, cujo resultado propicia a transformação das pessoas, a formação de identidades e a negociação de significados do fazer profissional. Observa que a construção coletiva de conhecimentos tem sido materializada na forma de diretrizes e ações, que foram ou estão para serem concretizadas pelas instituições dos participantes do grupo em questão, além do resultado da análise dos dados quantitativos, que indica um crescimento constante de troca de mensagens em ambiente virtual e aumento do número de participantes no grupo.

EU Budgetary Responses to the ‘Refugee Crisis’: Reconfiguring the Funding Landscape. CEPS Paper Liberty and Security in Europe No. 93/May 2016

This paper analyses the EU budgetary responses to the ‘refugee crisis’ in Europe. The European Commission has proposed several changes to the EU budget as well as the establishment of new funding instruments. The paper explores what the announced funding consists of, what role it plays in policy-making and what issues it generates. Throughout these budgetary responses the search for flexibility has been dominant, motivated by the need to respond more swiftly to humanitarian and operational needs. In addition, the paper argues that beyond implementation or management, the role of funding is also symbolic and communicative. In light of limited competences that are difficult to exercise, funding represents a powerful tool enabling the Commission to shape policy-making in times of crisis. At the same time, the dominant search for flexibility also challenges established funding rules and procedures. It has furthermore led to reduced space for democratic scrutiny by the European Parliament. More profoundly, EU funding for cooperation with third countries to prevent the inflow of refugees and asylum seekers has monetised questions over the responsibility for these individuals. As the EU–Turkey agreement shows, this has created a self-imposed dependence on third countries, with the risk of potentially insatiable demands for EU funding. This paper questions the proportionality and rule of law compliance of allocating funding for the implementation of this agreement. Moreover, it proposes that the Commission take steps to practically safeguard the humanitarian aid principles in the management structures of the new funding instruments, and it stresses the need for more scrutiny of the reconfigured funding landscape by the European Parliament and the European Court of Auditors.

Capacidades e performance dos Tribunais de Contas no Brasil

O presente estudo visa à análise da relação entre as capacidades, conforme definidas por Brinkerhoff (2010), e a performance das Cortes de Contas brasileiras. As capacidades no atual estudo se referem à quantidade de funcionários de cada Tribunal de Contas, seu orçamento, percentual de servidores do seu quadro efetivo e cumprimento das normas constitucionais quanto a sua formação. A performance foi medida pelas variáveis: “Produtividade”, ou o número de processos julgados ou apreciados pelos Ministros ou Conselheiros; “Iniciativa”, ou seja, quantidade de fiscalizações in loco realizadas; “Valor das multas e débitos imputados”, entendidas como a propensão a punir das Cortes de Contas; e “Grau de rejeição das contas de governo”, que é definida como a razão do número de pareceres prévios rejeitando as contas de governo pelo total de pareceres emitidos. A atual pesquisa parte do estudo de Melo, Pereira e Figueiredo (2009) - que identifica diversas relações entre a estrutura dos Tribunais de Contas e sua atuação - propondo novas variáveis para uma análise mais ampla e real da performance das Cortes de Contas. As hipóteses do estudo foram testadas por meio de regressão estatística utilizando o método de mínimos quadrados. Os dados foram coletados diretamente dos Tribunais de Contas. Os testes realizados confirmaram que a quantidade de recursos humanos de cada Corte influencia positivamente todas as variáveis de performance referidas anteriormente, e que quanto maior o orçamento de cada Tribunal maior sua produtividade, sua iniciativa e o valor das multas e débitos imputados. O presente estudo também comprovou que quanto maior o percentual de servidores do quadro efetivo da Corte de Contas, maior é sua produtividade, o que corrobora as teorias de Evans (2004). A partir dos dados coletados na pesquisa, foi possível verificar que o percentual médio de servidores efetivos nas Corte de Contas é de 69% enquanto nas Cortes Judiciárias esse percentual é de 89%. Isso mostra que há bastante margem para aumento da produtividade dos órgãos de contas. Conclui-se que quanto mais recursos financeiros e humanos disponíveis, e quanto maior o percentual de servidores concursados, mais os Tribunais de Contas são produtivos, sancionadores e proativos.

Os rumos do fundo público no capitalismo contemporâneo: uma análise sobre o financiamento da Política de saúde no estado do Rio Grande do Norte

This work analizes the financing of Health Policies on the state of Rio Grande Do Norte, starting at the presumption that SUS is “Bombarded” by fiscal ajustments, as a neoliberal strategy to face capital crises.The trafectory of the financing of SUS demands the comprehension of two principles which are, in essence, contradictory: the “principle of universatility”, which is caracterized by the uncompromising defence of the fundaments of the Sanitary Reform, and the “principle of containment of social costs”, articulating the macroeconomic policy that has being developed in Brazil since the 1990s and which substantiantes itself on the 2000s.This last defends the reduction of the social costs, the maintanance of primary surplus and the privatization of public social services. Considering these determinations, the objective of this research constitues in bringing a critical reflection sorrounding the financing of the Health Policies on the state of Rio Grande do Norte, on the period from 2004 to 2012.Starting from a bibliografic and documentary research, it sought out to analyze the budget planning forseen on the Budget Guideline Law (LDO) and on the Multiannual Plans (PPA), investigating the reports of the Court of Auditors of the State of RN and gathering information about expenses with health, available on the System of Information About Public Budgeting in Health (SIOPS).The Analises of the data obtained, in light of the theoretic referece chosen, reveals trends in the public budget setting for health on the State of Rio Grande do Norte, which are: a tiny share of investment expenditure on health, when compared to other expenses, the amount used in daily fees and advertising; the high expense in personnel expenses, especially for hiring medical cooperatives;the strong dependence of the state on revenue transferences from the Union; the aplication of resources in actions of other nature considered as health, in exemple of the expenditures undertaken by the budgeting unit Supplying Center S/A (CEASA) on the function of health and subfunction of prophylactic and therapeutic and on the Popular Pharmacy program. Since 2006, expenses refering to Regime Security Servers (RPPA) on the area of health also have being considered as public actions and services in health for constitutional limit ends, beyond the inconsistencies on the PPAs with the actions performed efectively.

The 2008 declaration of independence by the Hong Kong Court and anomalies in the Hong Kong Company Law

Discusses two aspects of Hong Kong law: 1) the judgment of the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal in A Solicitor v The Law Society of Hong Kong on whether Hong Kong courts were bound, post-1997, by pre-1997 House of Lords or Privy Council decisions, by pre-1997 decisions of their own, or by post-1997 overseas decisions from any jurisdiction; and 2) the need for clarification in the Hong Kong Companies Ordinance of whether a company can have a single legal representative, the ultra vires rule and the duties of company directors

Locking away the mysteries of fair basis : Lockwood v Doric in the High Court

This article updates a previous article on the Lockwood v Doric fair basing case in the Full Court of the Federal Court which was recently appealed to the High Court. The High Court's decision provides a new and welcome level of clarity in this difficult area of patent law. With this new clarity we can finally lock away some of the mysteries that have plagued the area for some time. Already, indications are that Lockwood's guidelines are being usefully applied in the Patent Office and Federal Court.

Civil applications in the Magistrates Court are often set down for hearing by a judicial registrar, but there is now some uncertainty on the limitation of this practice

The decision of the District Court of Queensland in Mark Treherne & Associates -v- Murray David Hopkins [2010] QDC 36 will have particular relevance for early career lawyers. This decision raises questions about the limits of the jurisdiction of judicial registrars in the Magistrates Court.

In defence of Victoria's Children's Court : its value and role in the child protection system

Australian child protection systems have been subject to sustained and significant criticism for many decades. As a central part of that system Children’s Courts have been implicated: three recent inquiries into the child protection system in Victoria all criticised the Family Division of the Children’s Court.1 In the resulting debate two diametrically opposed points of view surfaced about the Children’s Court and the role that legal procedures and professionals should play in child protection matters. On one side bodies like the Children’s Court of Victoria, Victoria Legal Aid (‘VLA’), the Law Institute of Victoria (‘LIV’), and the Federation of Community Legal Centres (‘FCLC’) argued that the Children’s Court plays a vital role in child protection and should continue to play that role.2 On the other side a coalition of human service and child protection agencies called for major change including the removal of the Children’s Court from the child protection system. Victoria’s Department of Human Services (‘DHS’) has been critical of the Court3 as have community sector organisations like Anglicare, Berry Street, MacKillop Family Services and the Salvation Army — all agencies the DHS funds to deliver child protection services.4 Victoria’s Child Safety Commissioner has also called for major reform, publicly labelling the Court a ‘lawyers’ playground’ and recommending abolishing the Court’s involvement in child protection completely.

Supreme Court Act 1995 (Qld) s 253 – whether refusal to stay execution of costs is an order “as to costs only”

In Virgtel Ltd v Zabusky [2009] QCA 92 the Queensland Court of Appeal considered the scope of an order “as to costs only” within the meaning of s 253 of the Supreme Court Act 1995 (Qld) (‘the Act”). The Court also declined to accept submissions from one of the parties after oral hearing, and made some useful comments which serve as a reminder to practitioners of their obligations in that regard.

Court finds solicitor in breach of fiduciary duty owed to client but loss not caused by the breach

A solicitor owes fiduciary obligations to his or her client including the obligations of loyalty and disclosure. The Court of Appeal in Mantonella Pty Ltd v Thompson (2009) 255 ALR 367; [2009] QCA 80; BC200902311 recently considered when the fiduciary duty owed by a solicitor to a client is breached and the consequent liability of the solicitor...

The margin of appreciation, domestic irregularity and domestic court rulings in ECHR environmental jurisprudence: Global legal pluralism in action

Global legal pluralism is concerned, inter alia, with the growing multiplicity of normative legal orders and the ways in which these different orders intersect and are accommodated with one another. The different means used for accommodation will have a critical bearing on how individuals fare within them. This article examines the recent environmental jurisprudence of the European Court of Human Rights to explore some of the means of reaching an accommodation between national legal orders and the European Convention. Certain types of accommodation – such as the margin of appreciation given to states by the Court – are well known. In essence, such mechanisms of legal pluralism raise a presumptive barrier which generally works for the state and against the individual rights-bearer. However, the principal focus of the current article is on a less well-known, recent set of pluralistic devices employed by the Court, which typically operate presumptively in the other direction, in favour of the individual. First, the Court looks to instances of breaches of domestic environmental law (albeit not in isolation); and second, it places an emphasis on whether domestic courts have ruled against the relevant activity. Where domestic standards have been breached or national courts have ruled against the state, then, presumptive weight is typically shifted towards the individual.

The Keyes to Reclaiming the Racial History Of the Roberts Court

This article advocates for a fundamental re-understanding about the way that the history of race is understood by the current Supreme Court. Represented by the racial rights opinions of Justice John Roberts that celebrate racial progress, the Supreme Court has equivocated and rendered obsolete the historical experiences of people of color in the United States. This jurisprudence has in turn reified the notion of color-blindness, consigning racial discrimination to a distant and discredited past that has little bearing to how race and inequality is experienced today. The racial history of the Roberts Court is centrally informed by the context and circumstances surrounding Brown v. Board of Education. For the Court, Brown symbolizes all that is wrong with the history of race in the United States - legal segregation, explicit racial discord, and vicious and random acts of violence. Though Roberts Court opinions suggest that some of those vestiges still exits, the bulk of its jurisprudence indicate the opposite. With Brown’s basic factual premises as its point of reference, the Court has consistently argued that the nation has made tremendous strides away from the condition of racial bigotry, intolerance, and inequity. The article accordingly argues that the Roberts Court reliance on Brown to understand racial progress is anachronistic. Especially as the nation’s focus for racial inequality turned national in scope, the same binaries in Brown that had long served to explain the history of race relations in the United States (such as Black-White, North-South, and Urban-Rural) were giving way to massive multicultural demographic and geographic transformations in the United States in the years and decades after World War II. All of the familiar tropes so clear in Brown and its progeny could no longer fully describe the current reality of shifting and transforming patterns of race relations in the United States. In order to reclaim the history of race from the Roberts Court, the article assesses a case that more accurately symbolizes the recent history and current status of race relations today: Keyes v. School District No. 1. This was the first Supreme Court case to confront how the binaries of cases like Brown proved of little probative value in addressing how and in what ways race and racial discrimination was changing in the United States. Thus, understanding Keyesand the history it reflects reveals much about how and in what ways the Roberts Court should rethink its conclusions regarding the history of race relations in the United States for the last 60 years.

Ledger book of a court clerk, 1768-1773

Ledger book of Isaac Rindge, chief clerk of the court of common pleas in New Hampshire, listing charges to various individuals for writs and fines.