Minister requires proof of vaccination to enter the country
Minister Luís Roberto Barroso, of the Federal Supreme Court, ruled that proof of vaccination for a traveler arriving in Brazil from abroad can only be dispensed for medical reasons, if the traveler comes from a country where there is proven to be no vaccine available or for humanitarian reasons exceptional.
Barroso partially granted injunction requested by the Sustainability Network party in the allegation of non-compliance with a fundamental precept (ADPF) 913 . The minister asked that the decision be sent to referendum in an extraordinary session of the virtual plenary of the Court.
In the decision, he understood that there is urgency for the topic due to the increase in travel in the coming period and the risk of Brazil becoming an anti-vaccine destination.
"The daily entry of thousands of travelers into the country, the approach of the end of the year festivities, pre-carnival events and the carnival itself, capable of attracting large numbers of tourists, and the threat of promoting anti-vaccine tourism, given the imprecision of the rules that require its proof, constitute an unequivocal imminent risk, which authorizes the granting of the injunction.”
In action, the Network asked the federal government to adopt measures recommended by the National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa) to enter the country in order to contain the spread of covid-19.
After the action, the government issued Interministerial Ordinance 611/2021 , which required, for foreigners arriving in Brazil, proof of vaccination or, alternatively, a five-day quarantine followed by a negative test for the virus before being allowed circulation in national territory.
When analyzing the case, the minister recalled that the Federal Supreme Court has a constitutional obligation to protect the fundamental rights to life and health. “There are already more than 600 thousand lives lost and denial attitudes still persist”, added Barroso. He recalled the various decisions already taken by the STF during the pandemic, such as the one that stipulated mandatory vaccination with the possibility of imposing restrictions on those who refuse.
For the minister, the interministerial ordinance partially meets the recommendations of Anvisa in relation to travelers, but the text "presents ambiguities and inaccuracies that can give rise to divergent interpretations, to the detriment of the constitutional rights to life and health in question."
He added that allowing the free choice between proof of vaccine and quarantine followed by a test "creates a situation of absolute lack of control and the consequent ineffectiveness of the norm".
Barroso decided that the ordinance on travelers arriving in Brazil must be interpreted in accordance with technical notes 112 and 113/2021 , issued by Anvisa, and taking into account that the replacement of proof of vaccination by the quarantine alternative only applies: 1- travelers considered ineligible for vaccination, according to current medical criteria; 2- that come from countries where, demonstrably, there was no available vaccination with a wide range; 3-for exceptional humanitarian reasons.
* With information from the Federal Supreme Court
Text translated using artificial intelligence.
