| Name: | Description: | Size: | Format: | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1.28 MB | Adobe PDF |
Authors
Advisor(s)
Abstract(s)
A separação de poderes representou uma nova estrutura jurídico-política do Estado e por sua vez influenciou nitidamente o órgão ministerial o qual, de procurador dos interesses do rei no período nobiliárquico, tornou-se o representante dos interesses da sociedade, na era contemporânea. O novo perfil do Ministério Público no Estado democrático de direito não ocorreu ao acaso, ao contrário foi objeto da própria metamorfose social. Neste particular, depreende-se que passados mais de dois séculos para a consolidação gradual dos direitos dos cidadãos, num Estado submetido à lei, cujo poder político restara dividido entre órgãos e pessoas diversas e com a outorga da soberania ao povo, nem por isso pode ser dito que a estabilidade política fora alcançada. Destarte, embora na vigência do Estado de direito e seus consectários, no mundo contemporâneo não se pode deixar de reconhecer que o controle do poder político sempre foi uma das arestas do sistema e há muito não se contém pelo mero controle recíproco entre os poderes clássicos. Por outro lado, embora alçados à proteção constitucional, os direitos fundamentais ainda carecem de efetividade, mormente aqueles de natureza difusa ou coletiva. Neste sentido, a necessidade e a realidade demandaram a criação (e reformulação) de órgãos autônomos para atuação nestes misteres, destacando-se o Ministério Público por sua independência face aos demais poderes, o qual tem sido efetivo protagonista no sistema de freios e contrapesos e na representação do interesse público.
É certo que a instituição ministerial apresenta estruturação e funções diversas nos países democráticos de direito, mas em todos possui atribuições de controle da legalidade. Neste contexto, padrões comuns como os princípios da legalidade, independência, autonomia institucional e funcional, imparcialidade, unidade/indivisibilidade e accountability, ao lado das garantias do acesso democrático ao cargo, estabilidade/vitaliciedade, inamovibilidade, do devido processo legal disciplinar, da adequada remuneração, condições dignas de trabalho, da liberdade de associação etc, constituem deveres não só jurídicos, mas também éticos dos Estados, de estruturar a instituição que representa os interesses da própria sociedade.
Outrossim, como a outorga de princípios, garantias e direitos ao Ministério Público não constituem privilégios, pari passu encontram-se especificadas a accountability, deveres profissionais, pessoais e vedações a serem observados pela instituição e seus membros. Como preconizam o Órgão das Nações Unidas contra Drogas e Crime e a Associação Internacional de Promotores a ‘autonomia não pode existir em detrimento da prestação de contas o que constitui, em síntese, a confirmação de que os poderes do Ministério Público resultam do Estado, que por sua vez, os recebeu do povo.
Por certo que alguns dos princípios e garantias constantes do rol de recomendações das entidades internacionais não são consensuais entre os próprios países (e entre as próprias instituições), seja pela especificidade da sistematização do órgão dentro da estrutura estatal, seja pela resistência oposta pelo poder político em ser fiscalizado e demandado por um órgão com autonomia e independência. Contudo, não são necessárias ‘muchas luces’ para concluir que somente a configuração como órgão constitucional de soberania pode garantir a efetiva atuação do Ministério Público no balanceamento do poder político e na concretização dos direitos fundamentais, demandas latentes há muito, na sociedade hodierna.
The separation of powers represented a new legal-political structure of the state and in turn it influenced significantly the ministerial institution, which, procurator of the king's interests in the nobility period, became the representative of the interests of society in the contemporary age. The new profile of the ministerial institution in the democratic rule of law did not occur by chance; on the contrary, it was the object of a social metamorphosis. In this sense, it is understood that after more than two centuries to the gradual consolidation of the rights of citizens in a state subject to the law, whose political power remained divided between agencies and different people and yet, with the guarantee of the effective sovereignty of the people, even so it cannot be said that political stability was achieved. Despite of the rule of law and its effects in the contemporary world, it is impossible to not to recognize that the control of political power has always been one of the lapses of the theories and it has not been able to mainain itself by mere reciprocal control between classic powers. On the other hand, although the constitutional protection was incresead, fundamental rights still lack effectiveness, especially those of diffuse or collective nature. In this sense, the need and reality demanded the creation (and reformulation) of new autonomous bodies to act on these demands, especially the ministerial institution for its independence from other powers, which has been an effective protagonist in the checks and balances system. It is true that the ministerial institution has structures and various functions in the democratic countries of law, but in all of them, it has the legal control assignments. In this context, common standards like the principles of legality, independence and institutional and functional autonomy, impartiality, unity/indivisibility and accountability, alongside the guarantees of democratic access to the position, stability/tenure, irremovability, the due disciplinary process, adequate remuneration, proper working conditions and freedom of association are not only legal obligations but also ethical duties of the states to structure the institution that represents the interests of society itself. Furthermore, as the granting of principles, guarantees and rights to the ministerial institution are not privileges, ‘pari passu’ are specified accountability, professional and personal duties and prohibitions to be observed by the institution and its members. As recommended by the Board of the United Nations on Drugs and Crime and the International Association of Prosecutors 'autonomy cannot exist at the expense of accountability which is, in synthesis, the confirmation that the powers of the ministerial institution result of the state, which in turn, received by the people. Certainly some of the principles and guarantees included in the recommendations of international entities are not consensual between some countries (and institutions themselves), whether the specificity of the systematization of the institution within the state structure, either by opposing resistance for political power to be supervised and demanded by a body with autonomy and independence. However, it is not necessary ‘muchas luces’ to conclude that only the configuration as a constitutional sovereign authority can ensure the effective operation of the ministerial institution in the balance of political power and the realization of fundamental rights, latent demands for a long time, in the current society.
The separation of powers represented a new legal-political structure of the state and in turn it influenced significantly the ministerial institution, which, procurator of the king's interests in the nobility period, became the representative of the interests of society in the contemporary age. The new profile of the ministerial institution in the democratic rule of law did not occur by chance; on the contrary, it was the object of a social metamorphosis. In this sense, it is understood that after more than two centuries to the gradual consolidation of the rights of citizens in a state subject to the law, whose political power remained divided between agencies and different people and yet, with the guarantee of the effective sovereignty of the people, even so it cannot be said that political stability was achieved. Despite of the rule of law and its effects in the contemporary world, it is impossible to not to recognize that the control of political power has always been one of the lapses of the theories and it has not been able to mainain itself by mere reciprocal control between classic powers. On the other hand, although the constitutional protection was incresead, fundamental rights still lack effectiveness, especially those of diffuse or collective nature. In this sense, the need and reality demanded the creation (and reformulation) of new autonomous bodies to act on these demands, especially the ministerial institution for its independence from other powers, which has been an effective protagonist in the checks and balances system. It is true that the ministerial institution has structures and various functions in the democratic countries of law, but in all of them, it has the legal control assignments. In this context, common standards like the principles of legality, independence and institutional and functional autonomy, impartiality, unity/indivisibility and accountability, alongside the guarantees of democratic access to the position, stability/tenure, irremovability, the due disciplinary process, adequate remuneration, proper working conditions and freedom of association are not only legal obligations but also ethical duties of the states to structure the institution that represents the interests of society itself. Furthermore, as the granting of principles, guarantees and rights to the ministerial institution are not privileges, ‘pari passu’ are specified accountability, professional and personal duties and prohibitions to be observed by the institution and its members. As recommended by the Board of the United Nations on Drugs and Crime and the International Association of Prosecutors 'autonomy cannot exist at the expense of accountability which is, in synthesis, the confirmation that the powers of the ministerial institution result of the state, which in turn, received by the people. Certainly some of the principles and guarantees included in the recommendations of international entities are not consensual between some countries (and institutions themselves), whether the specificity of the systematization of the institution within the state structure, either by opposing resistance for political power to be supervised and demanded by a body with autonomy and independence. However, it is not necessary ‘muchas luces’ to conclude that only the configuration as a constitutional sovereign authority can ensure the effective operation of the ministerial institution in the balance of political power and the realization of fundamental rights, latent demands for a long time, in the current society.
Description
Keywords
Ministério Público Estado de direito Democracia Poder político Interesse público Teses de mestrado - 2018