When talking about punishments, Criminal Law comes into play, which is closely linked to Administrative Sanctions Law. These branches were created because, if the power to punish were exercised by the general population, without rules, there would only be retribution for the harm caused through the suffering of the offender.
The right to punish, jus puniendi, must be exercised in compliance with the conditions and limits of the guarantees and principles arising from the laws. This sanctioning prerogative of the State is a right that does not aim to avenge or punish.
Furthermore, the power-duty to punish must preserve the dignity of the human person email database australia and individual and collective rights, so that political or social factors do not prevail during the application of the sanction.
One should not look at the author himself, but rather at the act committed, with respect for the constitutional principles of legality, full defense, adversarial system, reasonableness, proportionality, presumption of innocence and motivation.
In this case, it is imperative that the dosage of sanctions be respected. Law 8,666/1993 and Article 7 of Law 10,520/2002 establish that the penalty must be dosed according to the degree of gravity of the offense committed. As already established by doctrine and case law, the principle of proportionality is the unavoidable criterion for the sanctioning act.
The analysis of this sieve subjects the act to three tests of legitimacy, considered sub-principles of proportionality: regarding its adequacy, regarding its necessity and regarding its proportionality in the strict sense.
Although the Federal Court of Auditors – TCU has issued several rulings guiding managers to apply sanctions to contractors who are out of step with the legal system and the contract, caution is needed to ensure that there is no violation of the constitutional principles of reasonableness and proportionality.