LEGAL ANALYSIS OF THE IMPLICATIONS OF JURISDICTIONAL DECISIONS THAT ORDER THE REAPPLICATION OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS TO CANDIDATES FOR THE PMPR OFFICER TRAINING COURSE IN CONTRAST TO THE PRINCIPLE OF EQUALITY AT THE TIME OF THE ORIGINAL TEST CONDUCTED FOR THE UNIVERSALITY OF CANDIDATES

Abstract

The objective of this study is to analyze the court orders issued by the Judiciary against the State of Paraná after the disclosure of the final results of the psychological assessments in the public competition for the position of Cadet for the Officer Training Course of the PMPR, in contrast to the principle of equality in relation to the other candidates of the respective public competitions, limiting the sample to the exams conducted in the years 2022 to 2024. The researcher of this article had the opportunity to follow the execution of the public competition specifically in 2024, noticing a large volume of candidates declared unfit in the psychological evaluation stage, who, after their administrative appeals were unfavorable upheld by the reviewing board of the public competition, had their requests granted by the judiciary of Paraná for the psychological tests to be reapplied, after the granting of provisional measures by the judges who, to a great extent, considered the previously applied exams lacked objectivity, which would constitute an offense to the constitutional principle of equality and legality. Through data analysis, legal provisions, and jurisprudential understandings from other Federative Entities, the researcher sought to present an alternative that would not burden the State of Paraná, nor limit or prevent candidates who believe they were harmed from seeking to review the unfavorable result before the judging body, balancing with equality between other candidates who succeeded or those who were not approved but did not seek the Judiciary to reverse such administrative action.