[MP DEBATE] Requirement of Specific Intent in Admin Impropriety Law
The debate focuses on the requirement of specific intent in the conduct of public agents to hold them accountable for administrative impropriety.
00:00:01 [MP DEBATE] Specific intent in the new Administrative Impropriety Law. The discussion focuses on the requirement of specific intent in the conduct of public agents to hold them accountable for administrative impropriety.
⭐ The video discusses the changes in the law of administrative misconduct and the requirement of specific intent, known as 'dolo específico', for public officials to be held accountable.
💡 The new law aims to provide greater protection to public officials by making it more difficult to prove specific intent, which includes knowledge of the illegal nature of their actions and a voluntary and conscious decision to engage in misconduct.
🔎 There is a debate regarding the terminology used, with some arguing that 'dolo específico' is not an accurate term, but rather a form of 'dolo malo', which refers to a higher level of intent with knowledge of wrongdoing.
00:17:54 [MP DEBATE] Specific intent in the new Law of Administrative Impropriety. The debate revolves around the concept of specific intent and its application in cases of administrative impropriety. There is a discussion about the interpretation of the law and its impact on the responsibility of public officials. The need for proportionality and consistency in the application of the law is also raised.
📚 The video discusses the concept of specific intent in the new Law of Administrative Impropriety and questions its validity.
⚖️ The speaker argues that the notion of specific intent is paradoxical and that it should be replaced with a more comprehensive understanding of internal and transcendental tendencies.
🔍 The new law requires specific intent in all cases of administrative impropriety specified in Article 11, indicating a stricter standard compared to criminal law.
00:35:49 In this YouTube video, the debate is focused on the specific intent in the new Administrative Improbity Law. The speakers discuss the potential impact and consequences of the changes in the law and the challenges in proving specific intent in administrative misconduct cases.
The behavior that was previously considered as improbity is no longer categorized as such.
The removal of certain degrees of guilt in the new law raises questions about how individuals will be sanctioned for serious mistakes.
There is a need to convert actions of improbity into actions for reimbursement of damages to avoid losing the case.
00:53:43 The debate discusses the specific intent in the new Law of Administrative Impropriety, highlighting the importance of context, agent's actions, and admission in proving intent.
📚 The concept of intent cannot be located physically and is not part of the physical world.
🧠 Understanding someone's intentions through neuronal synapses is not possible without language and linguistic agreements.
⚖️ To prove intent in cases of administrative misconduct, context, the agent's actions, and confession are important indicators.
01:11:38 [MP DEBATE] Specific intent in the new Law of Administrative Improbity. The debate discusses the need to prove specific intent in cases of administrative misconduct and the difficulty in doing so when there is no clear benefit obtained. The speakers highlight the importance of holding public officials accountable for inefficiencies and failures in their duties.
The new law aims to punish illicit enrichment and offenses against public administration principles.
The difference between administrative law and criminal law is that administrative law focuses on protecting principles of public administration.
The requirement of specific intent in proving misconduct is debated, with some arguing for a normative attributive interpretation.
01:29:33 In a debate about the specific intent in the new Law of Administrative Improbity, the speakers discuss the impact of the law on society and the need for improved investigative techniques. They also mention the importance of knowledge of illegality and the role of legal opinions in proving intent.
📚 The video discusses the specific liability in the new Law of Administrative Improbity and the impact of the changes on society.
🔍 The concept of 'dolo' (conscious intent) and its requirement for proving wrongdoing in administrative misconduct cases is explored.
🔑 The importance of proper legal advice, ethical decision-making, and the need for informed administrators in preventing and addressing administrative misconduct is emphasized.
01:47:28 MP DEBATE on specific purpose in the new Administrative Improbity Law. The debate focuses on the importance of sophisticated investigation and criminal action, the role of technology in gathering evidence, and the need to prioritize major corruption cases.
🔑 The video discusses the importance of removing the idea of prioritizing cases of major corruption and focusing on improving the investigation and criminal action against corruption.
🔎 The use of new technology, such as access to cell phone records and interception of phone calls, has become crucial in investigating and proving corruption cases.
⚖️ The concept of 'dolo' and its application in the law of administrative misconduct and other sanctioning fields were debated, highlighting the need for a proportional and consistent approach.
Want to deep dive into this video?
