The Chief Justice of STF Dias Toffoli denied the continuation of Security Suspension 5.362 \/ PI, proposed by the Municipality of Teresina, against a monocratic decision handed down in the case of an interlocutory appeal, pending before the Court of Justice of the State of Piau\u00ed, considering that the regional decision \u201cis not able to generate the alleged risks of damage to the public-administrative order, but rather to prevent them\u201d.<\/p>\n
The specific case involved, at its origin, Municipal Decree n\u00ba 19.450 \/ 2020, which determined \u201cthe suspension of the operation of all commercial, service and industrial establishments, as well as construction activities\u201d, with exceptions, among which \u201cthe manufacture of non-alcoholic beverages \u201d, giving rise to the insurrection of an industry in the beverage sector through an interlocutory appeal, in which it argues that federal legislation (Decree n\u00ba 10.282 \/ 2020) when defining public services and essential activities, which must have protected the exercise and functioning, made no distinction between alcoholic and non-alcoholic beverages, dealing only with \u201cfood and beverages\u201d (art. 3, XII), in the same way as the state legislation (Decree n\u00ba 18.902 \/ 2020) when referring to \u201c food products \u201d(art. 1, \u00a7 1, I).<\/p>\n
The regional decision authorized \u201cthe full functioning of industrial activities\u201d of the aggravating legal entity, the latter being obliged to comply with the measures established by State Decree n\u00ba 18.902 \/ 2020, observing the absence of distinction between alcoholic and non-alcoholic drinks in federal legislation, which it is not for the Municipality to \u201cestablish restrictions not foreseen in the federal decree\u201d and the risks of the crisis generated by the pandemic being amplified by the discontinuity of industrial activity and the shortage of the local market.<\/p>\n
The Municipality of Teresina therefore claimed that such a decision \u201cviolates the Federal Constitution, in particular the right to health (art. 6, CF \/ 88), and the constitutional competence of the Municipalities to legislate on public health, (art. 23 , II, CF \/ 88), legislate on matters of local law and supplement federal and state legislation as appropriate, causing serious risks of injury to order and public health \u201d, claiming, in these terms, the suspension of the injunction.<\/p>\n
In this sense, Minister Dias Toffoli recognized the STF’s competence to consider the suspension request for discussing possible \u201clegality of the imposition of restrictions on the right of full operation of the interested company and the right to come and go of citizens and residents in the requesting municipality\u201d , considering that it is not feasible to accept the request from the Municipality of Teresina, in view of the lack of support in ANVISA’s technical and reasoned recommendation to impose such a restriction, according to the STF Minister Minister, \u201cthe simple existence of the pandemic that now plagues the world, serve as a justification for that \u201d.<\/p>\n
Furthermore, in the decision of the Safety Suspension, the need for Public Administration action at all levels was expressly consigned, through \u201ccoordinated and duly planned actions by the competent entities and bodies, and based on proven scientific information and data\u201d , thus avoiding isolated decisions with the \u201cpotential to cause disorganization in the public administration as a whole, even acting contrary to the intended one\u201d.<\/p>\n
By: Wilson Sales Belchior<\/p>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
The Chief Justice of STF Dias Toffoli denied the continuation of Security Suspension 5.362 \/ PI, proposed by the Municipality of Teresina, against a monocratic decision handed down in the case of an interlocutory appeal, pending before the Court of Justice of the State of Piau\u00ed, considering that the regional decision \u201cis not able to […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":1557,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[14],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1556","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-advocacia-nos-tribunais-superiores"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\n