The future of Law nº 12,846/2013: three issues to be improved over the next 10 years
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.36428/revistadacgu.v16i29.708Keywords:
brazilian anti-corruption act, grand corruption, sanction, consensus, leniencyAbstract
During the first decade that Law nº 12.846/2013 has been in force, important results have been achieved at both the federal and sub-national levels. However, despite the improvements to the Brazilian anti-corruption system, future legislative reforms could still advance the design of the legal institutes brought in by the law. Without examining the entire system of incentives produced by the legislation, this paper aims to analyze three inconsistencies in the law, shedding light on: (i) the incongruity between the type of corruption identified in international research as the most typical in Brazil and some of the legislative options adopted by the law; (ii) the necessary association of effective instruments of consensus to the corporate liability system, considering the side effects that can arise from applying tough sanctions; (iii) the imperative improvement of settlements regimes, aiming to create adequate incentives for corporate cooperation, especially in less serious cases. This paper concludes that some of the legislator’s choices do not seem compatible with Brazil’s main anti-corruption challenge, which is grand corruption. In addition, it points out that consensual instruments still need to be refined to prevent punishing of offenders from leading to negative externalities that are detrimental to society. Finally, it advocates two measures to potentially increase incentives for corporate collaboration through leniency agreements, which are the involvement of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, as well as the increase of benefits in less severe cases, in the light of what has been happening in the United States with the expansion of the new Corporate Enforcement Policy to all cases in the criminal division. To achieve its objectives, this paper uses as its methodology the study of national and foreign literature, notably legal and political science literature, as well as conventional tools and reasoning from the economic analysis of law.
Downloads
References
ARLEN, Jennifer. The potential promise and perils of introducing deferred prosecution agreements outside the U.S. In: MAKINWA, Abiola; SØREIDE, Tina. Negotiated Settlements in Bribery Cases: A Principled Approach. Northampton: Edward Elgar, 2020.
CARVALHO, Victor Aguiar de. Corrupção Empresarial e Administração Pública: diagnóstico e estratégias de enfrentamento. Belo Horizonte: Fórum, 2022.
CUÉLLAR, Mariano-Florentino; STEPHENSON, Matthew C. Taming Systemic Corruption: The American Experience and its Implications for Contemporary Debates. QoG Working Paper Series, n. 6, set. 2020.
CYRINO, André; MENDONÇA, José Vicente Santos de. A lei anticorrupção como lei nacional? In: CYRINO, André; MIGUEIS, Anna Carolina; PIMENTEL, Fernanda Morgan (Coord). Direito Administrativo e Corrupção. Belo Horizonte: Fórum, 2020.
KARPOFF, Jonatham; LEE, D. Scott; MARTIN, Gerald S. Foreign Bribery: Incentives and Enforcement, p. 29. Disponível em: <https://ssrn.com/abstract=1573222>. Acesso em: 09 set. 2023.
LATINOBARÓMETRO. Informe 2018. Disponível em: <https://www.latinobarometro.org/latdocs/ INFORME_2018_LATINOBAROMETRO.pdf>. Acesso em: 09 set. 2023.
LATINOBARÓMETRO. Informe 2021. Disponível em: < https://www.latinobarometro.org/latContents.jsp>. Acesso em: 09 set. 2023.
LUZ, Reinaldo Diogo; SPAGNOLO, Giancarlo. Leniency, collusion, corruption, and whistleblowing. Journal of Competition Law & Economics, vol. 13, n. 4, p.729-766, 2017.
MARTINEZ, Ana Paula. Repressão a cartéis: interface entre Direito Administrativo e Direito Penal. São Paulo: Singular, 2013.
MCADAMS, Richard H.; ULEN, Thomas S. Behavioral criminal law and economics. In: GAROUPA, Nuno (Ed.) Criminal Law and Economics. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2009.
MOREIRA, Egon Bockmann. Tribunais de Contas podem controlar acordos de leniência? Gazeta do Povo. Curitiba: 13 jul. 2018. Disponível em: <https://www.gazetadopovo.com.br/justica/colunistas/egon-bockmann-moreira/tribunais-de-contas-podem-controlar-acordos-de-leniencia-77we8fvgzumzr9nykivxoond3/>. Acesso em: 09 set. 2023.
MOREIRA, Egon Bockmann; CAGGIANO, Heloísa Conrado. O controle da corrupção e a Administração Pública: o dever de negociar como regra. In: CYRINO, André; MIGUEIS, Anna Carolina; PIMENTEL, Fernanda Morgan (Coord). Direito Administrativo e Corrupção. Belo Horizonte: Fórum, 2020.
MUNGIU-PIPPIDI, Alina. The Quest for Good Governance: How Societies Develop Control of Corruption. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015.
PALMA, Juliana Bonacorsi. Sanção e acordo na Administração Pública. São Paulo: Malheiros, 2015.
PALMA, Juliana Bonacorsi. Regulação e autoridade: o poder sancionador na regulação. In: MEDAUAR, Odete; SCHIRATO, Vitor Rhein (Org.). Poder de polícia na atualidade. Belo Horizonte: Fórum, 2014.
PIMENTA, Raquel de Mattos. A construção dos acordos de leniência da lei anticorrupção. São Paulo: Blucher, 2020.
ROSE-ACKERMAN, Susan. Corruption and Government - Causes, Consequences and Reform. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
ROSE-ACKERMAN, Susan (Ed.). International Handbook on the Economics of Corruption. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar Publishing Limited, 2006.
STEPHENSON, Matthew C. Corruption as a Self-Reinforcing “Trap”: implications for reform strategy. QoG Working Paper Series, n. 10, jun. 2019.
SØREIDE, Tina. Corruption and Criminal Justice. Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2016.
TAYLOR, Matthew M. Alcançando a Accountability: uma abordagem para o planejamento e implementação de estratégias anticorrupção. Revista da CGU, v. 11, n. 20, p. 1311-1330, 2019.
TSAO, Leo R.; KAHN, Daniel S.; SOLTES, Eugene F. Corporate Criminal Investigations and Prosecutions. Frederick: Aspen Publishing, 2023
TRANSPARÊNCIA INTERNACIONAL. Barômetro Global da Corrupção: América Latina e Caribe 2019. Disponível em: <https://barometro.transparenciainternacional.org.br/>. Acesso em: 09 set. 2023.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Revista da CGU
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
The Revista da CGU follows the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY), which allows the use and sharing of published works with mandatory indication of authors and sources. Contents published until 2019 have generic permission for use and sharing with mandatory indication of authorship and source.
We highlight some essential and non-exhaustive points related:
- The submission of the proposal implies a commitment not to submit it to another journal and authorizes if approved, its publication.
- The submission of the proposal also implies that the author(s) agrees with the publication, without resulting in remuneration, reimbursement, or compensation of any kind.
- The published texts are the responsibility of the authors and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the journal.
- Responsibility for any plagiarism is the responsibility of the author(s).
- The person responsible for the submission declares, under the penalties of the Law, that the information on the authorship of the work is complete and correct.
Also highlighted are the items related to our Editorial Policies, in particular on the Focus and Scope, Publication Ethics, Peer Review Process, and Open Access Policy.
