The procedural reflections of the judgment of direct action of unconstitutionality 5,941 in participation in public tenders due to default

Abstract

This article analyzes the procedural consequences resulting from the judgment of Direct Action of Unconstitutionality (ADI) 5.941, handed down by the Federal Supreme Court (STF), with emphasis on the application of atypical coercive measures in the civil enforcement process, especially the prohibition of participation in public examinations by defaulting debtors. The objective of the study is to understand how the Supreme Court's decision has impacted jurisprudence and forensic practice, considering the constitutional limits imposed on judicial action. Regarding the methods used, a qualitative approach was adopted, through bibliographic and documentary research, with analysis of specialized doctrine, current legislation and recent jurisprudence of the Courts of Justice of the Northern Region of Brazil. The work was structured based on three specific objectives: the contextualization of typical and atypical coercive measures; the description of the legal theses debated in ADI 5.941; and the investigation of the practical impacts of the STF decision on the Northern regional courts of Brazil. The study demonstrated that, although the STF declared the constitutionality of article 139, IV, of the CPC/2015, the effective application of atypical measures is still restricted, with the suspension of the driver's license being the most frequent and the prohibition of participating in public examinations still not being used. It is concluded that the consolidation of ADI 5.941 in judicial practice depends on greater jurisprudential maturity and a balance between the search for effective enforcement and the preservation of the debtor's fundamental rights.