Between ombudsman and the General Ombudsman of the Union from law no. 13,460/2017: considerations for the strengthening of ombudsman offices in Brazil
It seeks to analyze comparatively the Swedish ombudsman figure and its variations, especially in Europe, and the Brazilian ombudsman offices, having as paradigm the General Ombudsman Office of the Union from Law No. 13,460/2017. The problem is directly related to the need to know the origins and cha...
| Autores: | , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2022 |
| País: | Brasil |
| Institución: | Faculdade Meridional (IMED) |
| Repositorio: | Revista Brasileira de Direito |
| Idioma: | portugués |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:ojs.imed1.tempsite.ws:article/4774 |
| Acceso en línea: | https://seer.atitus.edu.br/index.php/revistadedireito/article/view/4774 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Ombudsman; Brazilian ombudsman; Ombudsman-general of the Union; Control of Public Administration Direito Administrativo; Direito Constitucional Ombudsman; Ouvidorias; Ouvidoria-Geral da União; Controle da Administração Pública |
| Sumario: | It seeks to analyze comparatively the Swedish ombudsman figure and its variations, especially in Europe, and the Brazilian ombudsman offices, having as paradigm the General Ombudsman Office of the Union from Law No. 13,460/2017. The problem is directly related to the need to know the origins and characteristics of the ombudsman originated in Sweden, its expansion around the world, the discussion process about its insertion in Brazil and the capture of its functions by ombudsman offices, to indicate points for improvement of such institutions. The deductive approach is used, with bibliographic and documentary research techniques. The conclusion is that the ombudsman, in the Swedish archetype, is an independent institution and, therefore, robust in the protection of rights and monitoring of compliance with the law. The debate for the implementation, in Brazil, of the Ombudsman, preserving the main characteristics of the Scandinavian example, was unsuccessful, with the absorption of functions by the Public Prosecutor’s Office and Ombudsman’s Offices. In contrasting the peculiarities of the ombudsman and the Ombudsman of the Union, it is noticeable distinctions that affect in quantitative and qualitative terms the performance of the Ombudsman in the protection of rights and the monitoring of public management in compliance with the law, to avoid maladministration. |
|---|