| Basic information | Substance of the ruling | Accessibility of the case and further relevant links | |||||||
| Date | Name of the case (or case number) | The body delivering the decision | Keywords, topic | Executive part | Brief summary | Full text | Page at the website of the issuing court | Page in other databases | Unofficial materials, press communications |
| 06. 04. 2022 | No. 946/MG | Supreme Court of Brazil | Vaccination | Claim upheld | The legislature of the municipality of Uberlandia has passed an Act stating that no person may be prevented from entering, staying or visiting any public or private property unless they have been vaccinated against COVID-19. This Act also prohibited compulsory vaccination. A political party ("Rede de Sostenbilidade") has filed an action to suspend this Act. According to the Plaintiff, several constitutional principles have been violated by this law, such as life and health, and the special protection of children, adolescents and the elderly. The Supreme Court suspended the Act. According to the Court decisions on health issues should be guided by the principles of prevention and precaution. | https://portal.stf.jus.br/processos/downloadPeca.asp?id=15350591340&ext=.pdf | https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-federal-supreme-court-no-946mg-2022-04-06 | https://www.covid19litigation.org/news/2022/05/brazil-supreme-federal-tribunal-suspends-legislation-lifting-compulsory-vaccination | |
| 28. 03. 2022 | No. 947 | Federal Supreme Court | Vaccination, Children, Fake news | Claim rejected | The Plaintiff was the Green Political Party who requested to order the mandatory vaccination of children. The Court emphasized that there are an existing relevant constitutional grounds to support the mandatory nature of vaccination since it is a governmental action that can contribute significantly to collective immunity or, if accelerated, can save lives, prevent the progression of diseases, and protect, primarily, the most vulnerable. It emphasizes that there are no doubts about the defense of the right to health and its protection through norms issued by all the federation entities. In the specific case, it only reiterated its jurisprudence and the international commitments assumed by Brazil. For these reasons, it rejected the claim because it lost the objective. | https://portal.stf.jus.br/processos/downloadPeca.asp?id=15350426613&ext=.pdf | https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-federal-supreme-court-no-947-2022-03-28 |
https://portal.stf.jus.br/noticias/verNoticiaDetalhe.asp?idConteudo=482316&ori=1; https://ayresbritto.adv.br/adpf-947/; https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/stf/1387259293; https://www.conjur.com.br/2022-fev-23/partido-verde-aciona-stf-permitir-vacinacao-infantil-escolas; https://apamagis.org.br/partido-verde-aciona-stf-para-permitir-vacinacao-infantil-nas-escolas/; https://blogdoedisonsilva.com.br/2022/02/stf-e-acionado-pelo-partido-verde-para-que-a-vacinacao-infantil-ocorra-nas-escolas-publicas/ |
|
| 14. 02. 2022 | Utela Provisória na Reclamação Constitucional 51.644 Bahia | Supreme Court of Brazil | Vaccination | Claim upheld. | The state of Bahia has filed a constitutional action against a decision. This decision allowed an unvaccinated military police officer to work and receive his salary. Although a state decree requires public employees to be vaccinated. According to the Court, the decision was in contrast to the approach taken in previous constitutional court cases, where the mandatory vaccination against Covid-19 and its constitutionality were established. So the Supreme Court suspended the decision. | https://www.stf.jus.br/arquivo/cms/noticiaNoticiaStf/anexo/RCL51644.pdf | https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-federal-supreme-court-utela-provisoria-na-reclamacao-constitucional-51644-bahia | ||
| 02. 02. 2022 | ADPF 709 | Supreme Court of Brazil | Indigenous peoples' rights; Property | Claim upheld | The Supreme Court has heard on an action for annulment of two administrative acts which, during the Covid-19 pandemic, prohibited an organisation's territorial protection activities in unauthorised indigenous territories. The Applicant argued that these acts were contrary to the norms for the protection of the rights of indigenous peoples and the case-law/jurisprudence of the Federal Supreme Court. The Supreme Court granted the claims to suspend the administrative acts. The Court analyzed the repeated attempt to undermine the protection measures determined by the Court concerning the indigenous population within the framework of Covid-19. For the Court, the suspension of territorial protection manifested in the administrative acts of the "Fundação Nacional do Índio (Funai)", would open ways for third parties to transit across indigenous lands, which would cause a risk to the health of the communities, not only in terms of Covid-19 but also of other infectious and contagious diseases. | https://www.conjur.com.br/dl/barroso-manda-funai-proteger-terras.pdf | https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-federal-supreme-court-adpf-709-2022-02-02 | ||
| 25. 01. 2022 | Tutela Provisória Incidental Petição No. 2643/2022 ADI 6.421 | Federal Supreme Court | Healthcare management, vaccination | Claim partially upheld | A political party filed a special request and a private judicial review against the technical note 2/2022-SCTIE/MS of the Secretariat of Science, Technology, Innovation and Strategic Inputs of the Ministry of Health which advocated the use of unproven drugs for the treatment of COVID-19. The Supreme Court requested information from the Ministry of Health. | https://www.conjur.com.br/dl/rosa-rede.pdf | https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-federal-supreme-court-tutela-provisoria-incidental-peticao-no-26432022-adi-6421 | ||
| 30. 12. 2021 | ADPF 929/DF | Supreme Court of Brazil | Right to health, Vaccination, Access to health services | Claim upheld | The National Confederation of Metalworkers filed a particular constitutional review against an administrative act ("Secretaria Extaordinária de Enfrentamento à Covid-19"(Secovid/MS). This administrative act has decided to hold a public consultation on the vaccination of children aged between five and eleven against Covid-19 from 23 December 2021 to 2 January 2022. According to the Plaintiff, the Executive Branch wanted to postpone the vaccination of the population aged between five and eleven, using the consultation as an excuse. The action therefore sought annulment of the administrative act ordering the public consultation. In addition, the action sought compulsory vaccination of children and adolescents. The Supreme Court ordered the President of the Republic and the Minister of Health to provide information on the law that ordered a public consultation on the vaccination of children aged between five and eleven against Covid-19. | https://portal.stf.jus.br/processos/downloadPeca.asp?id=15349328999&ext=.pdf | https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-federal-supreme-court-adpf-929df-2021-12-30 | https://www.scielo.br/j/ld/a/M4Kj4DJCtLQpyFdSgdWRLWd/?lang=pt | |
| 14. 12. 2021 | ADPF 913/DF | Supreme Court of Brazil | Vaccination, freedom of movement | Claim partially upheld | The political party "Rede Sustentabilidade" has filed a judicial review requesting an injunction. The aim is to investigate the actions and omissions of the federal government in relation to the conditions of entry of foreign nationals to Brazil in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic. The Applicant claimed the infringement of the right to life and health of Brazilians. The Applicant's argument was that the "Portaria Interministerial No. 658/2021" governing the case did not require proof of vaccination and quarantine for travellers to enter the country. The Supreme Court partially granted the request of the political party. It held that it was necessary to require proof of vaccination against Covid-19 and held that its production could be refused only on medical grounds. | https://www.conjur.com.br/dl/voto-barroso-vacinas-virtual.pdf | https://www.stf.jus.br/arquivo/cms/noticiaNoticiaStf/anexo/ADPF913MC.pdf | https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-federal-supreme-court-adpf-913df-2021-12-14 |
https://portal.stf.jus.br/noticias/verNoticiaDetalhe.asp?idConteudo=478164&ori=1; https://www.tjrj.jus.br/web/portal-conhecimento/noticias/noticia/-/visualizar-conteudo/5736540/53788931; https://www.conjur.com.br/2021-dez-11/barroso-determina-comprovante-vacinacao-viajantes; https://www.conjur.com.br/2021-dez-15/plenario-virtual-barroso-mantem-exigencia-vacina-viajantes; https://sindisaude.com.br/2022/08/stf-determina-exigencia-de-passaporte-da-vacina-para-entrar-no-pais-2/; https://www.diariodepernambuco.com.br/noticia/brasil/2021/12/ministro-exige-comprovante-de-vacina-para-entrar-no-pais.html; https://paranaportal.uol.com.br/politica/barroso-exigencia-comprovante-de-vacina-viajantes-no-brasil |
| 01. 12. 2021 | ADPF 828/DF | Supreme Court of Brazil | Right to property | Claim partially upheld | A political party and other NGOs have filed a judicial review. The aim was to suspend evictions and displacements due to the health crisis and worsening socio-economic conditions. In October 2021, a legislation was adopted, suspending until 31 December 2021 the removal, alienation and eviction orders for urban properties. Since the epidemic has not ended, the plaintiffs have again asked the court to extend the law for one year and to extend the scope of the Act to the dispossession of rural properties. It was partial in that it did not extend the validity of the claim for one more year but only for several months, until March 2022. It also extended the scope of the Act to rural areas. Court established that the pandemic had not yet come to an end in the international context by December 2021, especially with the new wave and the omicron variant. For this reason, it determined that particular caution by the authorities was necessary. In its analysis, the Court appealed to the legislator to extend suspension of eviction and dispossession orders, and estimated three months-time to be prudent. There was no reasonable justification, according to the Court, not to protect people in vulnerable situations in the countryside, particularly considering reported cases of violent evictions in rural areas. The Act created a disproportionate distinction and insufficiently protected people living in rural areas, a distortion that had to be corrected by judicial means. | https://www.conjur.com.br/dl/adpf-despejos.pdf |
https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-federal-supreme-court-adpf-828df-2021-12-01; https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/busca?q=adpf+828; https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/stf/1376096380/inteiro-teor-1376096396 |
https://www.demarest.com.br/en/real-estate-newsletter-no-2/; https://www.conjur.com.br/2022-nov-08/mesquitaevon-sohsten-rito-nao-aplica-todas-desocupacoes; https://www.migalhas.com.br/depeso/382515/o-que-nos-espera-apos-a-adpf-828-o-cenario-dos-despejos-no-brasil; https://site.mppr.mp.br/direito/Noticia/STF-estabelece-requisitos-para-despejos-coletivos-ADPF-828; https://www.mstbrazil.org/news/all?page=5; https://ibdfam.org.br/noticias/9519/STF:%20Barroso%20estende%20at%C3%A9%2030%20de%20junho%20suspens%C3%A3o%20de%20despejos%20e%20desocupa%Cpejos%20e%20desocupa%C3%A7%C3%B5es; https://www.brasildefato.com.br/2022/04/04/plenario-do-stf-julga-extensao-de-prazo-para-proibicao-de-despejos-a-partir-desta-terca; https://www.brasildefato.com.br/2022/04/01/por-que-a-decisao-do-stf-e-um-marco-na-luta-pelo-direito-a-terra-e-a-moradia; https://www.brasildefatodf.com.br/2022/03/30/apos-mobilizacao-familias-sem-terra-e-sem-teto-garantem-prorrogacao-da-adpf-828; https://rioonwatch.org/?p=72060 |
|
| 12. 11. 2021 | ADPF 898 | Supreme Court of Brazil | Labour law | Claim upheld | In the same action, four political parties filed four particular constitutional review against an administrative decision. The decision was issued by the Ministry of Labor and Social Security and it prevented the employer from checking the vaccination of its employees for the purpose of recruiting or maintaining them in employment. According to the four political parties, this decision should be suspended. The Plaintiffs's argument was that the measure was unconstitutional from a formal point of view, as it restricted the employer's autonomy in labour relations, and from a substantive point of view, as it infringed the right to life, health and safety at work. For the Court, the lack of vaccination has interfered with other rights such as the right to health, life, and non-discrimination of employees. In this sense, it has reiterated the legitimacy of mandatory vaccination in Brazil, a legitimacy already affirmed in the jurisprudence. It also has clarified that this suspension does not apply to persons who have a medical condition that prevent them from being vaccinated. | https://stf.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/1316387834/medida-cautelar-na-arguicao-de-descumprimento-de-preceito-fundamental-adpf-898-df-0063967-9520211000000/inteiro-teor-1316387848 | https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-supreme-federal-court-adpf-898-2021-11-12 |
https://fpsv.adv.br/publicacao/suspende-dispositivos-portaria-620/; https://www.marcosmartins.adv.br/portaria-620-21-do-ministerio-do-trabalho-e-seus-desdobramentos-na-justica-do-trabalho/; https://jus.com.br/artigos/94549/a-inconstitucionalidade-de-portaria-n-620-de-1-de-novembro-de-2021-do-ministerio-do-trabalho-e-previdencia-social; https://www.urbanovitalino.com.br/portaria-no-620-2021-do-ministerio-do-trabalho-proibe-a-demissao-por-justa-causa-ou-recusa-na-admissao-de-trabalhadores-nao-vacinados-contra-a-covid-19/ |
|
| 11. 10. 2021 | ADPF 756 | Supreme Court of Brazil | Vaccination; Children's rights | Claim upheld | The Ministry of Health has issued a Technical Note on vaccination against Covid-19 for children and adolescents aged 12 to 17 years. According to this Technical Note, vaccination is limited to children and adolescents who have comorbidities, permanent deficiencies or who are deprived of their liberty. The Applicants (five political parties) therefore requested urgent protection against the Federal Government. The Applicants claimed that this restriction violates the provisions of the brazilian National Immunisation Plan. The Supreme Court granted the petition. The Court ordered the Federal Government to modify the conditions set out in the Technical Note and to emphasise the importance of vaccination in this age group. For the Court, after analyzing the Note and the rules that support the technical and scientific arguments on the vaccination of children and adolescents, it has determined that the Ministry of Health made an untimely and, apparently, wrong decision, which, if maintained, could promote undesirable setbacks in the fight against the COVID-19 pandemic. In this sense, the Court has reiterated the competence of the federative entities to promote the immunization of children and adolescents from the age of 12 years. |
https://jurisprudencia.stf.jus.br/pages/search/sjur458049/false; https://www.conjur.com.br/dl/vacinacao-universidade-mec.pdf |
https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-federal-supreme-court-adpf-756-2021-10-11; https://pesquisa.bvsalud.org/portal/resource/pt/biblio-1292221; |
https://www.redalyc.org/journal/6002/600266295018/html/; https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8233022/; https://www.oabsp.org.br/comissoes2010/gestoes2/2019-2021/pessoas-deficiencia/noticias/nota-comissao-especial-de-direitos-das-pessoas-com-deficiencia-e-comissao-de-direito-do-terceiro-setor-adpf-nb0-785-df; https://jusdecisum.com.br/stf-confirma-competencia-de-estados-df-e-municipios-para-vacinar-adolescentes-acima-de-12-anos/; https://www.cnm.org.br/comunicacao/noticias/stf-confirma-competencia-de-municipios-distrito-federal-e-estados-para-vacinar-adolescentes-acima-de-12-anos; https://www.semana7.com.br/justica/justica-determina-exigencia-do-passaporte-da-vacina-pela-ufmt/53677 |
|
| 30. 09. 2021 | Medida Cautelar na Suspensão de Tutela Provisória 824 RJ | Supreme Court of Brazil | Vaccination; Scope of powers | Claim upheld | The Municipality of Rio de Janeiro has submitted a request to suspend a decision. This decision (tutela provisória) issued by the Court of Justice of Rio de Janeiro, and a a municipal decree was terminated by this decision. This Decree introduced proof of vaccination against Covid-19 as a mandatory requirement for access to certain establishments ("passaporte de vacinação"), such as cinemas, theatres, and sports facilities. The justification for the suspension of the decision concerned respect for the autonomy of the federal entities. This autonomy was related to the legislative power to adopt protection and prevention measures against Covid-19. The Supreme Court agreed with the arguments of the municipality and restored the effectiveness of the Decree. | https://www.covid19litigation.org/sites/default/files/node-case/2021-11/brazilsupreme-federal-courtseptember-30th-2021.pdf |
https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/stf/1296086952; https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-brazilian-supreme-federal-court-medida-cautelar-na-suspensao-de-tutela-provisoria |
https://contaiffer.com.br/parecer-juridico-comprovante-de-vacinacao-o-habeas-corpus-do-tjrj-e-a-decisao-ministro-fux-do-stf/; https://g1.globo.com/politica/noticia/2021/09/30/fux-restabelece-decreto-do-municipio-do-rio-que-exige-passaporte-de-vacinacao-da-covid-19.ghtml; https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/artigos/a-discussao-sobre-o-passe-sanitario-na-cidade-do-rio-de-janeiro-diante-de-um-caso-concreto/1291219727;
|
|
| 23. 09. 2021 | ADI 6.622/DF | Supreme Court of Brazil | Right to self-determination; Freedom of religion; Vaccination | Claim partially upheld | The Articulação dos Povos Indígenas do Brasil (Apib) and a Brazilian political party have filed a direct action for unconstitutionality with the Federal Supreme Court, and called for an injunction to prevent people from entering or staying permanently in areas where isolated indigenous peoples live. This case relates to an Act (14.021/2020) which provided for social protection measures to prevent the spread of Covid-19. This Act prevented any person from entering and staying in areas where isolated indigenous peoples live. But this prohibition did not apply to religious missions entering or already staying in these places. According to the Plaintiffs, indigenous populations are highly susceptible to infectious and contagious diseases; and that these indigenous peoples have a right to self-determination to remain isolated. It found that the possibility of entry into the indigenous territories at the time of Covid-19 (based on the right to life and health) was unconstitutional. However, the presence of missionaries who were already there before Covid-19 came into being is not unconstitutional. | https://stf.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/1299995556/medida-cautelar-na-acao-direta-de-inconstitucionalidade-adi-6622-df-0110537-7620201000000/inteiro-teor-1299995582 | https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-supreme-federal-court-adi-6622df-2021-09-23 |
https://ds.saudeindigena.icict.fiocruz.br/bitstream/bvs/4738/1/governo%20defende%20presen%C3%A7a%20de%20mission%C3%A1rios%20em%20%C3%A1reas%20de%20indios%20isolados.pdf; https://www.conjur.com.br/2020-dez-10/adi-tenta-impedir-missoes-religiosas-areas-indigenas-isolados; https://agenciabrasil.ebc.com.br/radioagencia-nacional/direitos-humanos/audio/2023-04/mais-de-200-terras-indigenas-aguardam-demarcacao-em-todo-o-brasil; https://cimi.org.br/2021/08/indigenas-vao-a-brasilia-reivindicar-direitos-e-acompanhar-julgamento-que-define-futuro-dos-povos/ |
|
| 08. 09. 2021 | ADI 6751 | Supreme Court of Brazil | Political rights; Legislative process | Claim rejected | A Brazilian political party has filed a direct action of unconstitutionality against a Resolution. This resolution provided for the procedure of the provisional measures taken in the National Congress, specifically in the Chamber of Deputies and the Federal Senate during the pandemic COVID-19. According to the political party, these provisions are contrary to the Constitution, the due legislative process and the political representation of minorities. The Supreme Court found that the Resolution is legitimate and meets the minimum constitutional requirements for the exercise of parliamentary power. The Court therefore held that there was no constitutional violation. | https://jurisprudencia.stf.jus.br/pages/search/sjur452361/false |
https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-supreme-federal-court-adi-6751-2021-09-08;
https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/stf/1280990430/inteiro-teor-1280990491 |
https://www.buscadordizerodireito.com.br/jurisprudencia/detalhes/a883bbca3f8bc8814ff676cb0e91829a; |
|
| 30. 08. 2021 | Ação Cível Originária 3.518 Distrito Federal. Min. R. L. | Supreme Court of Brazil | Vaccination, Equality | Claim upheld | The State filed an action before the Supreme Court because the National Vaccination Plan has established guidelines for the distribution of vaccines, but these guidelines for the distribution plan of vaccines in the state of São Paulo have suddenly changed. The new distribution criteria did not include a transitional rule to ensure the delivery of the vaccines needed to administer the second dose and thus complete the vaccination programme. The Supreme Court ordered the federal government to provide the State of São Paulo with the necessary vaccines to complete the vaccination of the population that has already received the first dose. It had also assessed the cased based on the fact that before any changes in the national vaccination policy the federal entities should be promptly and previously informed. | https://www.covid19litigation.org/sites/default/files/node-case/2021-11/brazilsupreme-federal-court30-august-2021.pdf | https://www.stf.jus.br/arquivo/cms/noticiaNoticiaStf/anexo/ACO35181.pdf |
https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-brazilian-supreme-federal-court-acao-civel-originaria-3518-distrito-federal-min-r; https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/stf/1344841444/inteiro-teor-1344841456 |
https://apesp.org.br/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/newletter02-08-22.html |
| 13. 07. 2021 | Reclamação Constitucional 48385 | Supreme Court of Brazil | Vaccination | Claim upheld | A citizen applied to the judiciary to be vaccinated against COVID-19 using the Pfizer/Cominarty vaccine because of her health condition, despite not being in the age group defined in the Initial Immunisation Plan, as she was only 15 years old. in the first instance, the Minas Gerais state court ordered early guardianship for the beneficiary to receive the vaccination. Subsequently, the Municipality of Belo Horizonte appealed, arguing that the individual decision did not respect the case law consolidated by the Court. The Supreme Court has emphasized that the sensitive issue of the case cannot be ignored (the right to health and life of the adolescent girl). The judge's reasoning took into account the adolescent's health risk and the need to update federal measures. | https://jurisprudencia.stf.jus.br/pages/search/despacho1220775/false | https://www.migalhas.com.br/arquivos/2021/7/5EFBDAB9AE0ABF_rcl48385.pdf |
https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-supreme-federal-court-reclamacao-constitucional-48385-2021-07-13; https://portaltj.tjrj.jus.br/documents/5736540/7232834/BOLETIMCOVID-19-EDICAO-21.pdf |
https://www.coad.com.br/home/noticias-detalhe/107637/apos-decisao-do-stf-jovens-com-comorbidade-entram-em-grupo-prioritario-de-vacinacao-contra-a-covid-19 |
| 14. 06. 2021 | Ação Direta de Inconstitucionalidade (ADI) 6.493 Paraíba | Supreme Court of Brazil | Scope of powers | Claim upheld | The Supreme Court reviewed the constitutionality of an Act, based on a lawsuit filed by the national Union of healthcare service providers. In particular, this Act prohibits the denial of health services to persons infected or suspected of being infected with the Covid-19 virus, if there were contracts with a lack of contractual validity with the operators of private state health plans. The Supreme Court declared the state Act unconstitutional. The majority of the Court has maintained that the state Act infringes upon the exclusive competence of the Union to legislate on private, commercial, and insurance matters. Further, the Court has emphasized that issues of lack of contractual validity in healthcare matters are already regulated by a piece of legislation. The Court has also observed that the provisions of the State Law interferes in the contractual relations between healthcare operators and users, generating a financial and material impact on their ability to provide the service. According to the Court, although the pandemic has given rise to various challenges, a duty exists to respect the constitutional competence. | https://www.covid19litigation.org/sites/default/files/node-case/2021-11/brazil-constitutionalsupreme-court14-june-2021.pdf |
https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/stf/1238155727/inteiro-teor-1238155781 |
https://informativos.trilhante.com.br/julgados/stf-adi-6493-pb; https://www.editoraroncarati.com.br/v2/Diario-Oficial/Diario-Oficial/ACAO-DIRETA-DE-INCONSTITUCIONALIDADE-6-493-ADI-DOU-DE-20-10-2021.html; https://www.bheringcabral.adv.br/2021/10/01/acao-direta-de-inconstitucionalidade-6493-pb-e-o-debate-sobre-a-possibilidade-da-carencia-nos-contratos-de-planos-de-saude-no-periodo-da-pandemia-do-covid-19/; https://ferreiralimapompei.com.br/noticias/pb-nao-pode-proibir-plano-de-negar-atendimento-de-covid-19-em-razao-de-carencia/ |
|
| 08. 06. 2021 | ADPF 849/DF | Supreme Court of Brazil | Scope of powers | Claim rejected | In Brazil, political parties, trade union organizations have filed a lawsuit to control the decisions to allow a sporting event (tournament) to take place. Before all this, Argentina and Colombia had withdrawn to be venues to a soccer tournament (Copa América 2021). The actions sought a declaration from the Supreme Court that Brazil could not host the international tournament due to the worsening of the COVID-19 epidemic. According to the Plaintiffs, hosting the tournament would involve the movement of citizens and foreigners, which would facilitate the spread of the virus. The Court found that the Plaintiffs excluded official acts of governors and mayors. In this sense, the Court dismissed the action. | https://stf.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/1288306641/setima-tutela-provisoria-incidental-na-arguicao-de-descumprimento-de-preceito-fundamental-adpf-756-df-0106680-2220201000000/inteiro-teor-1288306648 | https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-supreme-federal-court-adpf-849df-2021-06-08 |
https://portal.stf.jus.br/noticias/verNoticiaDetalhe.asp?idConteudo=467411&ori=1%EF%BB%BF; https://www.diap.org.br/index.php/noticias/noticias/90513-confederacao-de-metalurgicos-pede-suspensao-da-copa-america-no-brasil; https://www.nenoticias.com.br/3-ministros-do-stf-votam-a-favor-da-copa-america-no-brasil/; https://g1.globo.com/politica/noticia/2021/06/10/maioria-do-stf-rejeita-acoes-contra-copa-america-decisao-permite-realizacao-do-torneio.ghtml; https://www.diarioconstitucional.cl/2021/06/13/tribunal-supremo-de-brasil-rechazo-acciones-destinadas-a-impugnar-la-decision-del-gobierno-federal-de-albergar-la-copa-america-2021/; https://cnnespanol.cnn.com/2021/06/08/tribunal-brasil-suspender-copa-america-trax/; https://elcomercio.pe/mundo/latinoamerica/copa-america-brasil-2021-supremo-tribunal-federal-stf-decide-el-jueves-si-se-juega-el-torneo-conmebol-noticia/; https://brasil.elpais.com/esportes/2021-06-10/stf-julga-realizacao-da-copa-america-no-brasil.html; https://www.telam.com.ar/notas/202106/557034-supremo-tribunal-federal-de-brasil-decide-futuro-de-copa-america-coronavirus-bolsonaro-futbol.html |
|
| 31. 05. 2021 | Ação Direta de Inconstitucionalidade 6.445 Pará. Min. M. A. | Supreme Court of Brazil | Right to education; legislative competence | Claim upheld | The national association of educational establishments filed a direct action against an Act n . 9,065/2020 (which was enacted in the State of Pará). This Act established a specific reduction in monthly payments in the private education network during the Covid-19 crisis. The Plaintiff claimed that the Act was incompatible with the Federal Constitution. The formal defect was that the Union has the competence to legislate on civil law issues. Furthermore, the Act was contrary to the constitutional provision on free private initiative in education. The Supreme Court of Brazil held that although the case concerns consumer protection issues that can be regulated at the state level, the case conflicts with a federal law that regulates this issue. |
https://www.covid19litigation.org/sites/default/files/node-case/2021-11/brazilsupreme-federal-courtmay-31st-2021.pdf; https://redir.stf.jus.br/paginadorpub/paginador.jsp?docTP=TP&docID=756784338 |
https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-brazilian-supreme-federal-court-acao-direta-de-inconstitucionalidade-6445-para | ||
| 31. 05. 2021 | ADI 6588 | Supreme Court of Brazil | Energy services | Claim rejected | The legislative assembly of the State of Amazonas has passed a law that prohibits utility water and energy providers from shutting down residential services for non-payment in situations of extreme social (Covid-19) severity. Against this the Brazilian Association of Electric Power Distributors filed a direct action of unconstitutionality. according to them, these normative provisions would have infringed the exclusive competence of the Union to legislate, as provided for in the 1988 Federal Constitution. The Supreme Court found the actions to be inadmissible. According to the Supreme Court, these laws were enacted to protect consumers during the pandemic. | https://jurisprudencia.stf.jus.br/pages/search/sjur450643/false |
https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-supreme-federal-court-adi-6588-2021-05-31; https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/stf/1262048881/inteiro-teor-1262048976 |
https://portal.stf.jus.br/noticias/verNoticiaDetalhe.asp?idConteudo=467047&ori=1; https://www.camarabn.sc.gov.br/imprensa/noticias/0/16/0/1852 |
|
| 23. 04. 2021 | Medida Cautelar na Reclamação Constitucional 46.980 Bahía. | Supreme Court of Brazil | Right to property | Claim upheld | To obtain integration of the possession of the Agricultural Complex with an area of 84 hectares, a citizen filed a possessory action. Through Possession Action (in the first instance) a judge in the State of Bahia ruled that the indigenous community must leave the area immediately. The indigenous community has therefore lodged a constitutional complaint with the Federal Supreme Court. The Supreme Court accepted the claims and granted the suspension of the effects of Possessory Action. The Court reiterated the vulnerability of the indigenous people. According to its understanding and scientific studies, these communities' immune systems are weaker since they are not accustomed to immunization processes. Based on this understanding, the Court considered that maintaining the process of possession proceedings, in the hypothesis they opt to reintegrate a possession (as in this case), would aggravate the situation of the indigenous people. This would manifest itself in possible agglomerations of people on the roads, a lack of humanitarian assistance, and the absence of minimum hygiene and social isolation conditions. | https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-brazilian-supreme-federal-court-medida-cautelar-na-reclamacao-constitucional |
https://portal.stf.jus.br/noticias/verNoticiaDetalhe.asp?idConteudo=464871&ori=1; https://g1.globo.com/ba/bahia/noticia/2021/04/27/stf-suspende-reintegracao-de-posse-em-area-dentro-da-comunidade-indigena-tupinamba-de-olivenca-no-sul-da-bahia.ghtml; https://apiboficial.org/2021/04/28/vitoria-stf-suspende-desocupacao-de-terra-da-comunidade-indigena-tupinamba/; https://racismoambiental.net.br/2021/04/27/stf-suspende-reintegracao-de-posse-em-area-dentro-da-comunidade-indigena-tupinamba-de-olivenca-no-sul-da-bahia/ |
||
| 19. 04. 2021 | ADFP 664 | Supreme Court of Brazil | Right to health, Scope of powers | Claim upheld | The Governor of the State of Espírito Santo has filed a particular judicial review to challenge the decisions of the labour courts. These rulings ensured the freezing, blocking of the value of accounts held by the executive branch. The objective was linked to the execution of public utility contracts related to public health. For the applicant, these decisions restricted public resources from the Public Health Fund, which should have been used immediately in the health sector, in the context of the health emergencies. The Supreme Court ruled that the action was admissible and declared unconstitutional the decisions of the Labour Court to freeze the assets of the Espírito Santo State Public Health Fund. According to the Supreme Court, the decisions of the labour courts usurped the powers of the legislature and the executive by facilitating the transfer of public funds from one category of the state budget to another for a different purpose. | https://stf.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/1202548230/arguicao-de-descumprimento-de-preceito-fundamental-adpf-664-es-0088856-5020201000000/inteiro-teor-1202548245 | https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-supreme-federal-court-adfp-664-2021-04-19 |
https://portal.stf.jus.br/noticias/verNoticiaDetalhe.asp?idConteudo=464510&ori=1; https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/stf/1202548230; https://informativos.trilhante.com.br/julgados/stf-adpf-664-es; https://pge.es.gov.br/Not%C3%ADcia/stf-cassa-decisao-que-bloqueava-verbas-do-fundo-estadual-de-saude |
|
| 05. 04. 2021 | Arguição de Descumprimento de Preceito Fundamental 811/SP | Supreme Court of Brazil | Rights to freedom of religion | Claim rejected | The state government of São Paulo has issued a decree banning the holding of church services, masses and other collective religious activities. The political party PSD has therefore petitioned the Court for a judicial review of the decree. According to the political party, this measure restricts the free exercise of religion. For the Plaintiffs, the only way to prohibit the exercise of these freedoms is to impose a "state of emergency" based on the Constitution, but this has not been done. The Supreme Court held that the action ('ADPF') is inadmissible. Closing churches and places of worship is not unconstitutional. The measure is consistent with health data of relevance to Covid-19. | https://stf.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/1190170941/medida-cautelar-na-arguicao-de-descumprimento-de-preceito-fundamental-adpf-811-sp-0050295-2020211000000/inteiro-teor-1190170949 | https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-federal-supreme-court-arguicao-de-descumprimento-de-preceito-fundamental-811sp |
https://www.conjur.com.br/2021-jun-25/stf-publica-decisao-permitiu-restricao-cultos-presenciais, https://seminariodeintegracao.ucam-campos.br/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Religiao-Politicas-Publicas-e-Pandemia-08102021.pdf, https://anajure.org.br/nota-sobre-o-julgamento-da-adpf-811-relativa-a-suspensao-das-atividades-religiosas-presenciais/, https://www.escavador.com/jurisprudencia/decisoes/7592279/adpf-811-stf-sp-arguicao-de-descumprimento-de-preceito-fundamental-adpf-811, https://www.revista.direitofranca.br/index.php/icfdf/article/view/1257, https://www.brasildefato.com.br/2021/04/07/stf-suspende-julgamento-sobre-abertura-de-igrejas-durante-a-pandemia |
|
| 22. 03. 2021 | Segundo Ag.Reg. na Execução Penal 4 Distrito Federal | Supreme Court of Brazil | Right to health, Prison law | Claim rejected | The case is related to the division of competences. There was a habeas corpus decision of the Minas Gerais Court of Justice on the authorisation of house arrest of a citizen in connection with pandemic COVID-19. The decision has been appealed by the Prosecutor General's Office. The house arrest was maintained. The Supreme Court found that it was a form of protection against Covid-19 and amounted to a measure taken jointly by the executive and the judiciary. | https://stf.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/1194263945/segundo-agreg-na-execucao-penal-ep-4-df-9993979-8920131000000/inteiro-teor-1194263948 | https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-federal-supreme-court-segundo-agreg-na-execucao-penal-4-distrito-federal-2021-03 | ||
| 01. 03. 2021 | ADPF 754-DF | Supreme Court of Brazil | Vaccination; Scope of powers of public authorities, Right to health | Claim partially upheld | The Plaintiff was a political party who brought an action before the Supreme Court in the exercise of a particular constitutional review. This action was concerning the organization of priority categories in the vaccination scheme for the country and the management of the public procurement of vaccines. According to the action, the supply of vaccines available in the country continued to be lower than the public demand. The Supreme Court has upheld the claim related to the arrangement of an adequate vaccination scheme. However, the Court maintained that allowing public procurement of vaccines would constitute an unjustified interference by the judiciary in the sphere of the executive. | https://redir.stf.jus.br/paginadorpub/paginador.jsp?docTP=TP&docID=755295024 | https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-brazilian-supreme-federal-court-adpf-754-df-2021-03-01 |
https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/stf/1178802113/inteiro-teor-1178802119; https://portal.stf.jus.br/noticias/verNoticiaDetalhe.asp?idConteudo=459014&ori=1, |
|
| 21. 12. 2020 | ADPF 661 MC-REF / DF | Supreme Court of Brazil | Political rights, Due process | Claim upheld | A political party has gone to court through a special constitutional review. The aim was to review two acts of the Chamber of the Legislature which had established the peculiarities of the legislative procedure during the pandemic. According to the applicant, the acts were contrary to due legislative process and the separation of powers. The Supreme Court upheld the claim. The Court established the specific criteria of proper legislative control and called on the legislative body to establish its rules in this respect. | https://stf.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/1190998730/referendo-na-medida-cautelar-na-arguicao-de-descumprimento-de-preceito-fundamental-adpf-661-df-0088692-8520201000000/inteiro-teor-1190998732 | https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-federal-supreme-court-adpf-661-mc-ref-df-2020-12-21 |
https://portal.stf.jus.br/textos/verTexto.asp?servico=bibliotecaConsultaProdutoBibliotecaPastaFachin&pagina=pasta_arquivos_minsitro_fachin; https://www.conjur.com.br/dl/voto-barroso-vacinas-virtual.pdf; https://www.estrategiaconcursos.com.br/blog/informativo-stf-974-comentado/ |
|
| 17. 12. 2020 | ADI 6.586/DF | Supreme Court of Brazil | Right to health, Right to private life, Vaccination | Claim partially upheld | The Ministry of Health cannot have exclusive competence to decide on the mandatory nature of vaccination. The Plaintiffs argued that states and cities also have the authority to adopt other measures to prevent and combat the spread of pandemic COVID-19, including the decision on mandatory measures. Vaccination always requires the consent of the user. However, indirect measures can be introduced to facilitate vaccination, such as restrictions on certain activities or access to certain places. In order to be able to implement these indirect mandatory measures, it is of paramount importance that the legislation is dealing with the restriction is in place. Furthermore, such measures must be (i) based on scientific evidence and pertinent strategic analysis, (ii) accompanied by extensive information on the effectiveness, safety, and contraindications of immunizers, (iii) respect human dignity and the fundamental rights of people; (iv) meet the criteria of reasonableness and proportionality, and (v) the vaccines must be distributed universally and free of charge. | https://www.stf.jus.br/arquivo/cms/noticiaNoticiaStf/anexo/ADI6586vacinaobrigatoriedade.pdf | https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-federal-supreme-court-adi-6586df-2020-12-17 |
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8233022/; https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/busca?q=adi+6586; https://www.jusbrasil.com.br/jurisprudencia/stf/1190322031; https://www.migalhas.com.br/depeso/349342/condominio-pode-exigir-a-obrigatoriedade-da-vacina-contra-a-covid-19; https://ibdfam.org.br/noticias/8076/; https://lexatlas-c19.org/compulsory-but-not-forced-vaccination-is-constitutional-says-brazilian-supreme-federal-tribunal/; https://www.cadernos.prodisa.fiocruz.br/index.php/cadernos/article/view/762; |
|
| 25. 08. 2020 | Hélio Schwartsman v. Minister of Justice and Public Security, HC 607921 | Supreme Court of Brazil | Freedom of press, Criminal Defamation | Claim upheld | The reason for the investigation against the journalist was that the journalist had written an article in which he described the benefits of the President's death. The article was written soon after the President tested positive for Covid-19. The Minister of Justice ordered the Federal Police to open an investigation against the journalist for possible violations of the National Security Act. Investigation against a journalist suspended by the Supreme Court. The Court suspended the investigation because it considered that the journalist's alleged conduct did not meet the requirement of the National Security Act for an actual or potential violation of territorial integrity, sovereignty or democracy. | https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Schwartsman-.pdf |
https://globalfreedomofexpression.columbia.edu/cases/helio-schwartsman-v-minister-of-justice-and-public-security/; |
||
| 18. 08. 2020 | ADPF 635 MC/RJ | Federal Supreme Court of Brazil | Freedom of movement, Private life | Claim partially upheld | Helicopters were used as instruments of slaughter, violating the right to life and dignity of the inhabitants. So the use of helicopters in police operations, although legally allowed, has been carried out with a "war logic". The principle of reasonableness has been applied in the use of police helicopter force in the favelas, weighing the right to life and dignity of the residents. | https://www.covid19litigation.org/case-index/brazil-federal-supreme-court-adpf-635-mcrj-2020-08-18 |
https://www.conectas.org/en/noticias/adpf-favelas-case-understand-in-5-points-the-case-in-the-supreme-court-to-reduce-police-lethality-in-rio-de-janeiro/; https://rioonwatch.org/?p=60813; https://rioonwatch.org/?p=66012; https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/international-review-of-the-red-cross/article/abs/is-rio-de-janeiro-preparing-for-war-combating-organized-crime-versus-noninternational-armed-conflict/ACCC4EB94822FF2A4B057D9639702EB1; https://iser.org.br/en/noticia/adpf-635-e-caso-favela-nova-brasilia-o-descumprimento-da-sentenca-e-decisoes/ |
||
