Combating corruption. Consensualism. Leniency agreement. Revision. Administrative Sanctioning Law.
Combating corruption. Consensualism. Leniency agreement. Revision. Administrative Sanctioning Law.
This doctoral thesis aims to understand to what extent anticorruption leniency agreements may be revised in light of factual changes that occur during their execution, based on an analysis of their legal nature. The research assumes as its main hypothesis that the limits of subjective and objective alterations in these agreements are intrinsically linked to the legal classification that situates them within the framework of Administrative Sanctioning Law. A qualitative approach is adopted, grounded in the examination of judicial decisions and models of leniency agreements already executed, in order to identify and distinguish the main forms of modification of their terms, namely: (i) annulment, (ii) termination, and (iii) renegotiation. The study contributes to the enhancement of consensual mechanisms in the fight against corruption, offering theoretical and practical insights for the development of legal guidelines concerning the possibility and limits of revising leniency agreements, particularly considering the current regulatory gap on this issue.