Bolsonaro Could Decide on Isolation, Says Prosecutor General

RIO DE JANEIRO, BRAZIL – President Jair Bolsonaro has the right to decide on the “opportune moment” for greater or lesser social distancing in tackling the novel coronavirus, says Augusto Aras, the Prosecutor General.

In a statement, Aras asserts that, since the world is going through an “unprecedented crisis,” filled with “uncertainties,” it is currently impossible to accurately assess whether the strategy of limiting the circulation of people is effective in preventing the spread of Covid-19.

Claiming concern over the impact of quarantine on GDP and employment, Bolsonaro has been waging a tug-of-war with governors throughout the country since March. Last week, in a meeting with Health Minister Luiz Henrique Mandetta, he even said the economy is going to “fold” this year because of the pandemic.

“The uncertainties surrounding the fight, in all countries, against the Covid-19 epidemic do not allow for a safe judgment as to whether a greater or lesser measure of social isolation is right or wrong, as they depend on several scenarios that are not only factually unstable but geographically distinct, considering Brazil’s continental dimension,” Aras wrote.

According to the Prosecutor General, it is up to the Executive to define the most appropriate degree of social isolation, taking into account both the health system and the economy.

On Sunday, Bolsonaro said on Twitter that for any disproportionate action, the “reaction is also strong”. “In addition to the virus, now we also have unemployment, the result of ‘close everything’ and ‘stay at home’, or even ‘I’ll arrest you'”, wrote the president, in reference to the governor of São Paulo, João Doria. Considered a potential presidential candidate in 2022, Doria has threatened to enforce harsher measures – such as fines and even imprisonment – should the population not respect social isolation.

The Office of the Prosecutor General’s (PGR) opinion should be forwarded today to the Federal Supreme Court (STF). However, the Court has been signaling that it will not endorse measures that conflict with the World Health Organization’s (WHO) recommendations, which advocates limiting the circulation of people to prevent the spread of the virus.

Last month, Justice Luís Roberto Barroso banned the federal government from launching any campaign along the lines of “Brazil can’t stop” that suggests that the population should return to work.

Aras’ position, however, clashes head-on with Barroso’s understanding. According to the Supreme Court justice, social distancing is not a political decision of the President, but rather a “technical issue” that is needed to ensure the population’s welfare – an opinion that has also been advocated by the majority of governors.

While Barroso “closes the door” to any measure from the Planalto Palace that could jeopardize isolation, Aras leaves the prospect open to the President, on the grounds that the scenario is unstable and that it is up to Bolsonaro to assess the measures that are truly necessary, considering his team’s technical and scientific guidelines.

“The decisions taken by government bodies on a greater or lesser social isolation as a tool to fight the Covid-19 epidemic take into account scientific progress, which efforts have been adding new data daily to be considered, and depend on factual scenarios that are constantly changing,” the Prosecutor said.

Rejection

Named to the position by Bolsonaro, the Prosecutor General expressed his views in lawsuits brought by the Rede Sustentabilidade party and the Metalworkers National Confederation (CNTM), which called on the Supreme Court to oppose the campaign “Brazil can’t stop”.

Aras argued for the dismissal of the lawsuits for a number of reasons, pointing out that the existence of the advertising piece, which has already been taken off the air, had not been proved.

The Prosecutor also claims that the matter is already being addressed in lawsuits before the Federal Courts of São Paulo, Rio, and the Federal District, so there are other legal means to settle the controversy.

Source: O Estado de S. Paulo.

This article was drafted with automated assistance and reviewed before publication. How we use AI · Report an error