Impact | Negative
Civicus Rating | Obstructed
The Supreme Court ruled again on the government measures that restrict the rights of citizens in the context of pandemic, arguing that any suspension or limitation of rights is a competence of the Legislative Assembly. It did so through the annulment of Decree 32 of July 29 that defined a phased plan for economic reopening and defined health protocols with restrictions on movement and the right of peaceful assembly. Via a concurring opinion, Judge Aldo Cámer Camillot presented hypothetical examples to show the difference between regulating, suspending or limiting a right. The highest court also declared that executive decrees of this nature are unconstitutional and, therefore, lack legal weight. Despite the decision, the rule in question will be in force until August 24, so that both government and Assembly have a period of time to discuss the administration of quarantine in the country. It is not the first time that the Court has called for an agreement between the two branches. Otherwise, it would legally entail the lifting of restrictions on movement. See previous news: CSG 8, CSG 7, CSG 6.