CONSIDERAÇÕES SOBRE A REPERCUSSÃO GERAL DO RECURSO EXTRAORDINÁRIO 852.475 NOS INQUÉRITOS CIVIS PÚBLICOS

Abstract

This article seeks to analyze the aspects of the general repercussion thesis elaborated by the Supreme Federal Court based on the judgment of Extraordinary Appeal 852.475, which consolidated the interpretation of Article 37, §5 of the Federal Constitution in the sense of the imprescriptibility of actions for reimbursing the treasury when the damage comes from a willful act of administrative improbity. This analysis will be conducted based on the study of the arguments that supported the decision and its jurisprudence background. It will also be studied the possible effects of the aforementioned thesis on the work of the Public Prosecutor, especially in civil investigations aimed at investigating improbity acts and on the position of the Superior Councils when faced with the interpretive impasse of the rule contained in article 37, §5 of Constitution. Finally, there is the controversy about the conflict between the principle of legal certainty and the principle of the supremacy of the public interest, which has not yet been resolved by the general repercussion thesis. Based on these analyzes, it is concluded that the effects of the aforementioned thesis do not substantially affect the civil investigations conducted by the Public Prosecutor's Office, since before the jurisprudence consolidation expressed by the STF, the Superior Councils were already guided by the filing of the civil lawsuit, even though verified the prescription of the sanctions provided for in the Administrative Improbity Law.