Need to present the document had been suspended by an injunction in the state court
the president of Federal Supreme Court (STF), Luiz Fux, accepted the request of the City Hall of Rio de Janeiro and re-established the full effectiveness of the decree that instituted the “vaccination passport” in the city. It became mandatory for citizens to present the certificate that they had received at least one dose of vaccine against Covid-19 to attend some commercial establishments, such as gyms, cinemas, stadiums and theaters. However, the decree had been suspended this Wednesday, 29, by decision of the judge of the Court of Justice of Rio de Janeiro (TJ-RJ) Paulo Rangel, who issued an injunction in response to the request of a retiree who alleged that her freedom to circulate in the city was being restricted.
The Municipal Attorney General (PGM) appealed to the STF to overturn the injunction. Upon accepting the request, Fux did not analyze the legality of the vaccination passport, but justified that previous Supreme Court decisions guaranteed the local government the possibility of establishing measures to combat the dissemination of the coronavirus. “It is not up to the judge to pronounce on the merits itself of what is discussed in the original case, as this issue may be opportunely assessed by the Supreme Court in its own appeal. As this is a normative act issued in the exercise of legitimate competence of the municipality, as already recognized by the plenary of this Court, supported by technical and scientific data, and in the absence of patent disproportionality or unreasonableness in its content, recognition of the plausibility of the argument of the applicant, in order to favor the local initiative in this preliminary judgment”, he stated.
Thus, the vaccination passport is once again required in certain places. The decision also suspends an injunction that released the Military Club and the Naval Club of Rio de Janeiro from requesting proof of vaccination from their members. On Wednesday, two conflicting decisions had been rendered by the TJ-RJ on the case: one suspended the passport obligation and the other denied the suspension. As the decree was suspended, the PGM appealed alleging that the decision “manifested a risk to public health” and “violated the principles of social solidarity and the supremacy of the public interest”.