A atuação negocial da Advocacia-Geral da União à luz dos princípios da eficiência e da impessoalidadeuma análise da Procuradoria-Geral da União

Resumo

Objective: The main objective of this research is to analyze the negotiation performance of the Attorney General’s Office (Procuradoria Geral da União – PGU/BR) in the consensual resolution of conflicts, in light of the principles of efficiency and impartiality. Based on the evolution of the Public Administration model and the concept of public interest, the aim is to clarify whether the duty of impartiality limits the Office’s involvement in the consensual negotiation of debts. Methodology: The research adopted a qualitative approach, using semi-structured interviews with 20 PGU lawyers who work in the National Union Negotiation Office (Procuradoria Nacional da União de Negociação – PNNE/BR) or in the Regional Negotiation Coordination offices (Coordenações-Regionais de Negociação – CRN/BR). Content analysis method was used to create categories based on the respondents' answers. The secondary data that was used included the quantity of agreements formalized for the payment of Union debts, the amount of money saved, and the funds committed to these agreements. Results: The Attorney General’s Office is undergoing a period of transformation in which the evolution of the administrative model, centered on citizen participation, redefines the purpose of contentious actions to ensure public interest. Field observations suggest that the primary concern of PGU lawyers in negotiation is to safeguard the public interest. Efficiency is pointed out as a reflection of high agreement rates, the swift resolution of disputes, and cost savings. Impartiality and impersonality are principles achieved through normative guidelines and institutional security. However, the harmonization between the principles of efficiency and impartiality in negotiations requires the consolidation of an administration that preserves the virtues of traditional bureaucracy while incorporating elements of managerial administration. Limitations: The research only analyzed the performance of the Attorney General’s Office in negotiations for cases in which the Office is the debtor. The scope of the research excluded agreements related to the collection of tax and non-tax credits and those exclusively related to obligations without direct financial implications. No quantitative correlations were made between the volume of cases involving the Office’s debts and the number of formalized agreements. This quantitative correlation could assess the actual effectiveness of the Office’s consensual public policy or the need for improvement. Practical Contributions: The Attorney General’s Office can benefit from this research by realizing that the harmonization between the principle of efficiency and impartiality depends on the institution's ability to provide security to lawyers in their actions. Social Contributions: Enhancing the negotiation performance of the Attorney General’s Office will benefit citizens and businesses involved in dispute resolution. The consolidation of the consensual paradigm within the Attorney General’s Office can reduce the processing time of cases, lower costs to the public treasury, and increase citizen satisfaction. Originality: There are no studies that address the negotiation performance of the Attorney General’s Office in cases involving Union debts.

Ficha do documento

Tipo

Dissertação

Ano

2023

Instituição

Fundação Getulio Vargas

Fonte

Repositório da FGV

Idioma

Português

Acesso

Acesso aberto

Identificador

oai:repositorio.fgv.br:10438/34840

Temas

Gestão PúblicaPolíticas PúblicasDesenvolvimento RegionalAdministração Pública

Palavras-chave

Administração PúblicaProcuradoria-Geral da UniãoNegociação de ProcessosEficiênciaImpessoalidadeAdvocacia-Geral da União (Brasil)Eficiência (Serviço público)Impessoalidade (Direito)