Widespread competence to institute lawsuits is inherent to the federal state, says CGU; organ studies mechanisms to mitigate conflicts

The Chief Minister of the Comptroller General of the Union (CGU), Jorge Hage, said in July that companies will have to get used to the system of application of the Anti-Corruption Law (12.846 / 13), which gives competence to organs of all public administration to institute proceedings. The speech was addressed to lawyers from large corporations gathered at the 2014 Latin America Ethics Summit, in São Paulo.

"We share your concerns," said Hage, acknowledging the possibility that some of the thousands of agencies in the federal, state and municipal administrations could misuse the standard. “But [the dispersed competence] is a consequence of living in a federal state. We have to live with this multiplicity of agents. It would be impossible to centralize law enforcement at the federal level. ”

The fears of the private sector in relation to widespread competence range from the possibility of agencies using the law to extort money from companies under the threat of initiating lawsuits, to the overlapping of competences between agencies in the application of the standard. An example of this would be the investigation of bribery directed at a municipal agent, responsible for works financed with federal resources. In theory, the administrative proceeding could be initiated by the Union and the municipality.

Hage said the CGU is looking at mechanisms to mitigate this type of conflict. The agency also studies channels of dialogue between what the minister called “different punitive regimes”, such as the Federal Audit Court, the Securities Commission and Cade. In addition, CGU analyzes ways of harmonizing legal frameworks, such as the General Law on Tenders and Improbity, at points of possible conflict with Law 12.846 / 13.

The minister again said that the norm is an advance in the fight against corruption, by covering gaps in other laws and by providing unprecedented punishment in the patrimony of companies that commit illicit acts in Brazil and abroad (another novelty in the text). He also said that the instruments of administrative process and strict liability are not new in Brazil and were chosen because they are the most effective means against impunity.