Descrição
The notion of inalienability of public interest has traditionally served to justify the obligation of the public advocate, in claims filed against the State, uncritically
exhausted the means of opposition proceedings. This work aims to demonstrate the unsustainability of this paradigm of thoughtless procedural resistance, revealing the fragility of its theoretical foundations and the increasing adverse
effects of its practice. It will be demonstrated that, often, it is not the judicial contesting that performs the best public interest. There will be a particular analysis of how certain bureaucratic disfunctions have been functioned as an
instrument of manutency of the traditional profile of public advocates's performance. Finally, will be presented and analysed institutional improvements that would eliminate or reduce the excesses that still mark the position of the
Executive Branch as judicial defendant