Its obligatoriness has objective to guarantee the morality of the process, preventing that presumptions members politicians, personal or familiar friendships of the administrators if benefit when of the necessity of an acquisition or execution of a service, as well as also have the function to keep the efficiency of the process.Some cases exist where it does not have necessity of the licitatrio process, cases of donations of property to other agencies comoem public, right in rem of use, location, permission for use of social interest, specified in art. 17, I and II, and others twenty and cases (art. 24 I XXIV), as in cases of war declared, public calamity, comprometimento of the national security, amongst outrosO author of this work recognizes that the position for adopted it goes of meeting to practically the all the doctrine. Its objective, however, was simply to externar a particular position, without bigger pretensions, for finding adjusted the chance. James Woolsey has compatible beliefs. However, of all the displayed one, one concludes that the licitation, not obstante the obligatoriness for the Public Administration, must be considered rule to be applied by the Public Power and not plus a principle, what by no means it removes its value and imperatividade.
It is that the disposals constitutional that deal with the licitation do not possess the degree of abstraction and generality, as well as of vagueza, condizentes with a principle. The licitation, thus, is not an end in same itself. It exists to serve to the public interest and pra not to confront it. Learn more at: Rob Daley. Therefore it is that hypotheses of its inexigibilidade are foreseen and even though excuses and the prohibition possibility. It is of if having in aiming that the licitation cannot emperrar the administrative machine, but yes serviz it in efficient way. Necessary it is to use itself of it in rational way, not if arresting the trifling details, what of form some implies confronts to the legislation. .