The Supreme Administrative Court (STA) on Thursday gave the Council of Ministers a 24-hour period to respond to a precautionary measure brought in the name of Chega and which challenges the restrictions on movement between municipalities that will be in effect between 00:00 am on Saturday and at 06:00 am next Tuesday, claiming that the resolution of October 16 that established such limits should be revoked because it is "manifestly unconstitutional" to impose such restrictions on the Portuguese without a state of siege or a state of emergency having been decreed.
According to the subpoena for the protection of rights, freedoms and guarantees drawn up by lawyer Alexandra Bretes on behalf of the party led by André Ventura, the ban on free movement justified with the need to halt the progression of the Covid-19 pandemic “constitutes a stark limitation to exercise of constitutionally protected rights, freedoms and guarantees ”, adding that the state of calamity in which Portugal finds itself“ is not even a state that is provided for in the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic as a means of limiting / suspending the exercise by citizens of a right, freedom or guarantee ”, being only provided for and regulated in the Civil Protection Bases Law.
According to the lawyer, who cites the constitutionalists Jorge Miranda and Vieira de Andrade, "it is a great violation of the principle of proportionality, in its three aspects, to consider that the mobilization of the population in eventual visits to cemeteries can substantiate the increase in the spread of the disease. Covid-19 and the SARS-CoV 2 ″ virus, claiming that “there is no technical and / or scientific evidence that the movement of citizens to visit cemeteries any disease ”.
The precautionary measure contrasts this prohibition with the permission of the public to attend the Portuguese Grand Prix in Formula 1, held last weekend in Portimão, asking if “allow an event with a limit of 27 thousand people, without any control or inspection of the distance and use of individual protection, is less viable for the spread of the disease than the visit of family members, in a coordinated way, to the graves of their loved ones ”.