REGIME JURÍDICO ÚNICO DOS SERVIDORES PÚBLICOS COM ÊNFASE NA ESTABILIDADE

Abstract

The present work aims to carry out an analysis to verify whether Constitutional Amendment 32/2020 is materially constitutional or unconstitutional according to the principle of prohibition of retrogression. Initially, the work has brought about the Single Legal System for Public Servants, which in fact was affirmed in the Federal Constitution of 1988, however, before that, there was a lot of struggle, in the legal history of administrative law in this sense, to achieve this aforementioned affirmation. Soon after, there was a period when the government changed its view on the legal regime, wanting to impose a more managerial administration, which was a period called "administrative reform" in which Constitutional Amendment 19/1998 was approved in which there is a change in the regime single legal framework for a mixed legal regime. And finally, until reaching the current regime, Constitutional Amendment 19/1998 suffered a Direct Action of Unconstitutionality ADI 21/35 which declared Constitutional Amendment 19/1998 formally unconstitutional, so that the mixed legal regime ceased to apply and returned to single legal regime. Continuing, the Proposal for Constitutional Amendment 32/2020 that is currently being processed in Congress is explained, bringing the main changes that it intends to make in the legal system if approved. These are very different changes, one of the main ones being the end of stability for most public offices. And finally, the principle of the prohibition of retrogression is conceptualized, its historical origin. The principle of good public administration is also conceptualized, concluding that this cannot go back as it is a fundamental right. And within this line of reasoning, it is understood that stability is one of the hard cores of this good administration, being one of the most important legal institutes to guarantee, in fact, that public administration does not recede, returning to the state of patrimonialism. In view of all this, it is also concluded that Constitutional Amendment 32/2020 is materially unconstitutional according to the principle of prohibition of retrogression.