Impersonality in Administrative Acts

This page is a translation of the original Portuguese text, provided for convenience. It deals with Brazilian law. If there is any discrepancy, the Portuguese version prevails. Read the original in Portuguese

The principle of impersonality is one of the pillars of Brazilian Administrative Law, expressly set out in Article 37 of the Federal Constitution. It requires the public administration to act neutrally, without favoring or harming any citizen for personal reasons, so that the public interest prevails over private interests.

Understanding this principle is essential for anyone who deals with the public administration, whether as a public employee, a lawyer, or a citizen seeking to enforce their rights. This article examines how impersonality works in administrative practice, its legal implications, and the mechanisms that protect you when the principle is violated.

What the principle of impersonality is

The principle of impersonality requires every administrative act to be carried out solely in the public interest. Public officials may not use their positions to benefit or harm specific people. It is a constitutional guarantee that obliges the public administration to treat everyone equally, without discrimination or undue preference.

In administrative-law scholarship, impersonality has two core dimensions. The first concerns public purpose: every administrative act must pursue a collective interest, never an official’s personal goal. The second concerns attribution: acts are attributed to the agency or entity, not to the individual official who carries them out.

Celso Antônio Bandeira de Mello teaches that impersonality expresses the idea that the administration must treat all citizens without discrimination, whether favorable or harmful, and that persecution and favoritism are prohibited. Hely Lopes Meirelles, for his part, ties the principle to the public purpose that must guide all administrative activity.

Constitutional and legal basis

Article 37, caput, of the 1988 Federal Constitution provides that the direct and indirect public administration of any branch of the Union, the States, the Federal District, and the Municipalities must obey the principles of legality, impersonality, morality, publicity, and efficiency. Together, these five principles make up the acronym LIMPE, which is widely used in the study of Administrative Law.

Impersonality ensures that public power serves the community, not the personal interests of those who hold positions in the administration.

Beyond the constitutional text, Law No. 9.784/1999, which governs administrative procedure at the federal level, reinforces impersonality by requiring objectivity in serving the public interest and prohibiting the personal promotion of officials or authorities. Law No. 14.133/2021 (the New Public Procurement Law) also gives concrete effect to this principle by setting strict rules for public contracting.

Practical applications of impersonality

In the day-to-day work of the public administration, the principle of impersonality shows up in many concrete situations that directly affect people’s lives.

In public service examinations, impersonality requires that public employees be selected by objective, merit-based criteria, without favoring candidates because of personal or political ties. Any irregularity in this process can be challenged in court.

In public procurement and administrative contracts, the principle prevents the administration from steering a contract toward particular companies. Competition must be broad, and the bidding rules must allow as many interested parties as possible to take part.

In the provision of public services, such as service at INSS (Brazil’s National Social Security Institute) offices, public hospitals, and schools, impersonality requires that all citizens receive equal treatment, subject to legal priorities such as those set out in the Statute of the Elderly and in accessibility legislation.

If you notice discriminatory treatment by a public agency, you should file a report through the agency’s ombudsman channels and, if necessary, seek specialized legal advice to protect your rights.

Impersonality and the ban on personal promotion

One important aspect of impersonality is the prohibition on the personal promotion of public officials. Article 37, paragraph 1, of the Federal Constitution provides that publicity for the acts, programs, public works, services, and campaigns of public agencies must be educational, informational, or aimed at social guidance. It may not include names, symbols, or images that amount to personal promotion of authorities or public employees.

This rule is frequently debated in the courts. Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court has ruled on several occasions that associating public works with the name of a government official violates the principle of impersonality. The consequence is an obligation to remove the signs or promotional materials, and possible liability for administrative misconduct (improbidade administrativa).

At the municipal level, it is common to see public works and social programs tied to the names of mayors or city council members. Besides violating the Constitution, this conduct can amount to an act of administrative misconduct under Law No. 8.429/1992, as amended by Law No. 14.230/2021.

Consequences of violating the principle

Violating the principle of impersonality can have several legal consequences for the public official and for the administration.

An administrative act carried out for an improper purpose (misuse of authority) is considered void. It can be annulled by the administration itself (self-review, or autotutela) or by the courts. Summary Precedent (Súmula) 473 of the STF (Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court) consolidates the understanding that the administration may annul its own acts when they are tainted by defects that make them unlawful.

A public official who acts in violation of impersonality may be held liable for administrative misconduct, which carries the sanctions set out in Law No. 8.429/1992. These include loss of public office, suspension of political rights, a civil fine, and a ban on contracting with the government.

In addition, depending on the circumstances of the case, the violation may amount to the crime of dereliction of duty (prevaricação, Article 319 of the Penal Code) or the crime of administrative advocacy (improperly using one’s office to advance a private interest before the administration, Article 321 of the Penal Code). Each situation is analyzed individually to identify the best legal path.

How to protect your rights

When you identify a violation of the principle of impersonality, several legal tools are available to seek correction of the act and to hold those involved accountable.

A popular action (ação popular), provided for in Article 5, item LXXIII, of the Federal Constitution, allows any citizen to file a lawsuit to annul an act that harms public assets. A writ of mandamus (mandado de segurança) is available when a public authority’s act violates a clear and undisputed right. A public civil action (ação civil pública) may be filed by the Public Prosecutor’s Office (Ministério Público) or by other parties with standing.

If you have been harmed by biased administrative acts, you should consult a lawyer who specializes in Administrative Law to assess the situation and recommend the most appropriate legal measure.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is the difference between impersonality and impartiality?

Although related, the two concepts differ in important ways. Impersonality is a constitutional principle directed at the public administration. It requires administrative acts to serve the public interest without favoring or harming specific people. Impartiality, by contrast, is a broader duty that also applies to the Judiciary, and it refers to the absence of personal bias or preference in decision-making. In Administrative Law, both concepts work together to ensure fair treatment of citizens.

What should you do when a public employee treats citizens unequally?

When there is unjustified unequal treatment, you should file a complaint with the agency’s ombudsman and document the situation with dates, names, and a description of the facts. If the matter is not resolved administratively, you can file a lawsuit, such as a writ of mandamus, to secure equal treatment. It is advisable to seek legal assistance to evaluate the best strategy.

Does putting a mayor’s name on a public work violate impersonality?

Yes. This practice violates Article 37, paragraph 1, of the Federal Constitution, which prohibits the personal promotion of public officials in government works, services, and campaigns. Brazil’s Supreme Federal Court has well-established case law holding this conduct unconstitutional. Besides voiding the publicity, the official may be held liable for administrative misconduct, with the sanctions set out in Law No. 8.429/1992.

As informações deste artigo são de caráter informativo e não substituem consulta jurídica individualizada. Cada caso possui particularidades que exigem análise específica.