ID: 15239
Autoria:
Beatriz Marques de Souza Wahrlich.
Fonte:
Revista de Administração Pública, v. 14, n. 2, p. 5-37, Abril-Junho, 1980. 33 página(s).
Tipo de documento: Artigo (Português)
Ver Resumo
During the last fifteen years, in Brazil, federal State enterprises have extraordinarily increased, in number and in importance. At the root of such a growth is the contemporary phenomenon of enhancement and deepening of State intervention in the economic domain, although a series of other factors, examined herein, also secondarily contributed to it. The Brazilian Constitution now in force ratifies the thesis it is preferentially incumbent upon priva te enterprises, encouraged and supported by the State, to organize and exploit economic activities, the State itself organizing and exploiting such activities only to supplement the action of private initiative. On the other hand, the same Constitution indirectly enhances this power of intervention, when permitting also the establishment of State enterprises in areas unable to be effectively developed within a regime of competition and of freedom of initiative. The pattern generally followed by State enterprises in Brazil is that of the joint-stock companies, the shares partially underwritten by the State and partially by private citizens. In this case, the concerns are called "mixed companies". Enterprises are exceptionally incorporated solely with capital from State funds and then are called "public enterprises". The entities are sectorially under the jurisdiction of the Ministry comprising the subject of their primary function. Ministerial supervision is, in principle, both programatic and financial, and is complemented by performance auditing and by financial auditing, still within the sphere of the Executive Power. In fact, the financial is the predominant, if not the only, aspect to be considered, and even thus financial control conforms to a procedural attitude, rather than to one of finality (it is procedure-oriented, not goal-oriented). It should be noted that the lack of an effective programatic control, aswell as of performance auditing, is not the result of a non-existent clear cut definition of attributions, nor of an inadequate organizational framework of the Executive Power. On the contrary, each Ministry has its proper units specifically entrusted with exercising normative and coordinative action over State enterprises, and is provided with several different instruments of control. What is lacking, however, is the correct operationalization of extant attributions and mechanisms.
