How the voice of congress shapes the text

We decided to look at the constitutional text, where it supports a decision made by the public agent on duty to submit the other party to the supremacy of the state, when signing contractual instruments with third sector institutions or also called Civil Society Organizations (CSOs). Well then, before going any further on this blank page, it is necessary to point out that we are in the field of implementing the terms of partnership supported by Law No. 13.019 of July 31, 2014, as amended by Law No. 13.204 of December 14, 2015.

This legal instrument is a civilizing milestone for the Administration’s dealings with the third sector, and it is not mere sophistry to use such a term, because before this moment NGOs were routinely treated as entities that sought to broaden the interpretation of philanthropy legislation with a bias towards their own benefit, forgetting the constitutive purpose for which it was instituted. But, returning to the topic that inspires us and leaving this timeframe behind, we see promising times for a sector that will take on greater strength in 2023 with the installation of the National Council for Promotion and Collaboration (CONFOCO). We reveal this because, although states such as Bahia, São Paulo, among others, had the installation of their national pair, it had been denied until December 2023. The composition of this space for negotiations and equity has as its core to analyze the behavior of the federative entities (state and municipalities) in the behavior of the implementation of the legislation, you notice that the parity and installation of the instance is carried out by the Government in its three spheres.

Accept the text issued and the citizen’s commitment to the law.

Let’s start by reading ipsis litteris of the legislation we propose to observe, go to Law No. 13.204/2015 and read Article No. 2-A.

We are highlighting part of article 2 of Law No. 13.204/2015, which points to the object, but before going into the so-called object, it is important to understand the degree of perfectionism of the legislator in the expression of the act, since it defines the competence of the Public Administration in proposing public policy, since it indicates the design of the sectoral act as the guiding axis of the agreement with the third sector. Let’s see, there is no room for interpretation, since it is the responsibility of the executing body (government) to design the public policy, the object. This view effectively rules out the action of copying acts designed by higher authorities, although not in their entirety, because there is a natural reflection of the legislation, the pyramidal formation – Kelsen’s pyramid – inducing, in its form designed for the form of execution.

This minimal design means there is no overlap

However, it is up to the Administration, in the sectoral acts or ordinances, to construct the object of the execution of the terms of partnership, because the doing, the executing is up to the CSOs called in for this purpose. You will notice from this reading that the act drawn up by the social public policy department must include a vision of territoriality in the minimum design, since this will allow it to leverage a regulation and discipline the form and needs it seeks to overcome when delivering the object to be executed. This minimum design ensures that there is no overlap, no reworking by one department or another or, even more critically, that another department (body) carries out the duties defined in the internal regulations of the administrations on duty. We could come up with other examples, but the aim is to achieve a minimum concept of what attributions the legislator has designed for each of the parties and thus move forward in a unified, equitable and constructive way in the task of designing a socio-territorial intervention by the executing (supervisory) body that will change the citizen’s reality in a positive way. On the one hand, and on the other hand, give honest parameters (that seek to define the object, objective, goals and instruments of execution of the partnership in advance) that are easily accepted by the inspection commission and the inspector, as well as when the internal or external control body is called upon, they know that they will be asked, and there is no room for interpretation of what, how and where the execution agreed between the body and the CSO took place by means of the contractual instrument that defined the partnership.

The natural subjection of institutions to the legal framework

It is worth considering, after these lines, that there is a need to clarify, more and more, the behavior of the legislator when using law 13.204/2015, because there are different interpretations of who, how and where the design of the object should occur and, with this, naturally, define the roles of each of the actors, State and Third Sector, in one of the sectors of greatest progress in Public Administration. The legislator based his actions on the principles of Administration, and there is no room for illusion or interpretation outside these frameworks: transparency in the application of public resources, it is only fair that the reading of the PPA, LDO and PLO be the tools that induce the spending of public resources, thus considering that there is a national goal, as well as a local one to be overcome.

In this regard, legality is a basic principle of the Administration and is the object of constant attention by the public agent when developing any administrative act. Added to this is legitimacy, a principle that has modernly been incorporated into the administrative framework, but which has been observed since before, since it says that acts carried out by public agents or in their capacity as such must be carried out by those who have the competence. Furthermore, the principle of impersonality is relevant and must guide our construction. In order for citizens to be aware of this, broad call instruments such as collaboration and development notices are drawn up, where the execution of the object with a greater guarantee is the goal to be sought. Public morality differs from that of other people, because the principle of morality here is that of common morality, which together with probity are the bastions of the Administration.

Public morality differs from other people, because the principle of morality here is that of common morality

Of course, this chain is based on the principle of publicity, which reaches everyone equally, since in order to be valid, the Administration must legitimize each act through this procedure. Let’s look at another foundation, the principle of economicity. It’s only fair that the law should provide agility and, along with it, economy, as long as it preserves all the expedients that leverage the legislator’s thinking of putting the commanded party on an equal footing, in this case, the CSO that has the competence, legitimacy, morality and uses impersonality, economicity, efficiency and effectiveness to fulfill its vocation before society: To serve the community within its territory with a social product and service that over the years it has developed as a banner to positively change the universe around it.