[ad_1]
An association from Barcelos has filed a lawsuit to try to end the mandatory use of masks, claiming that it is an unconstitutional imposition and that it violates rights, freedoms and fundamental guarantees, but the court rejected it “outright.”
Call for summons for the protection of rights, freedoms and guarantees, the action was filed, in the Administrative and Fiscal Court of Braga, by the Plantel Peculiar association, being requested by the General Directorate of Health, the Ministry of Health and the Portuguese State.
He asked those entities to eliminate, within 24 hours, all mandatory use of masks, whether for adults or children and in closed spaces or not, and that the guidelines and legislation on the subject be considered null and void in Portugal . illegal and unconstitutional.
The association alleges, from the outset, that the imposition of the use of masks is unconstitutional, since it is done by decree-law, without prior authorization from the Assembly of the Republic, but the court says that it is only the Constitutional Court that declares the laws unconstitutional. rules with force. mandatory general.
In its action, the association invokes the opinion of several constitutionalists, in addition to reproducing opinions about the lack of any scientific support that demonstrates the effectiveness of the use of masks or visors in the fight against covid-19.
It even says that, given the number of deaths registered by covid-19, it is not possible to speak of any pandemic in Portugal.
“Independent studies say that the mandatory use of masks does not protect us from anything, on the contrary, they point to harmful effects on health derived from their use throughout the day,” Paulo Oliveira, director of Plantel Peculiar, told Lusa today.
For Paulo Oliveira, the imposition of the use of a mask “has to do, solely and exclusively, with economic interests.”
For the association, the imposition of the use of masks or visors calls into question various rights, freedoms and fundamental guarantees, for violation of the dignity of the human person, of a free and just society, of the State of Democratic Law, of social democracy and cultural, democratic legality and the Constitution.
The moral and physical integrity of people, the prohibition of cruel, degrading or inhuman treatment, the right to personal identity, the development of personality, family life, a human and healthy living environment and legal protection against any way. discrimination.
The court flatly rejected the action, by order of September 8, to which Lusa had access today, in which he emphasizes that “the simple imposition of the obligation to wear a mask does not constitute a violation of any right, freedom or fundamental guarantee” . .
“It corresponds, in fact, to the simple imposition of a duty of social order, derived from reasons of public health, which are generally known,” he says.
For the court, the association is limited to “collecting” rights, principles and statements of the constitutional text, without even realizing them, as well as without specifying to what extent they have been, or may leave, injured by the imposition of the use of a mask or visor in law enforcement.
In other cases, the court order also reads, the association invokes rights and principles in relation to which “no harm or threat of harm is foreseen, in view of the alleged imposition of the use of masks or visors.”
Paulo Oliveira said that the court’s decision will be “duly analyzed,” after which the association will decide whether to proceed with the appeal.
The covid-19 pandemic has already claimed at least 929,391 deaths and more than 29.3 million cases of infection in 196 countries and territories, according to a report by the French agency AFP.
In Portugal, 1,875 people died from 65,021 confirmed cases of infection, according to the most recent bulletin from the Directorate General of Health.
[ad_2]
