Lei das Agências : An Analysis of Draft Law on Regulatory Agencies
Since 2013, a new legislation was being drafted by the Senate of Brazil, in response to the perception that the Agencies often lack financial, administrative and decision making autonomy, are subject to capture by both overt and tacit political int...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Report |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2017
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/240821513331551540/Lei-das-agências-an-analysis-of-draft-law-on-regulatory-agencies http://hdl.handle.net/10986/29056 |
| Summary: | Since 2013, a new legislation was being
drafted by the Senate of Brazil, in response to the
perception that the Agencies often lack financial,
administrative and decision making autonomy, are subject to
capture by both overt and tacit political interference, with
appointees lacking the necessary skills and independence. In
infrastructure, regulatory uncertainty and the resort to the
court of law in matters that should normally be decided by
the agencies and accepted by affected parties is
particularly harmful when government faces excess (and
growing) demand for infrastructure services. After being
discussed and approved in two key Senate commissions, the
draft law (DL) was approved unanimously by the Senate
Special Commission on National Development with no need to
go to the floor. The DL provides the agencies with
considerable formal autonomy, being no coincidence that this
is made explicit at the outset of the legislation (Article
3). While the DL provides substantial autonomy to the
agencies, it also defines the mechanisms for external
control and accountability in its second chapter. The
fundamental reason for the support of the DL is the high
degree of autonomy conferred on the agencies, guaranteeing
independence of political interests, technical excellence,
and greater transparency and accountability. Finally, the DL
strongly encourages inter-agency cooperation, partly in
response to a recurrent criticism regarding barriers facing
firms when dealing with different government agencies both
national and subnational. |
|---|