Barroso suspends court decision that ordered content to be removed from Estadão

Minister Luís Roberto Barroso, president of the Federal Supreme Court (STF), suspended the decision of the Court of Justice of Piauí (TJ-PI) that determined the removal of the report from the newspaper “The state of Sao Paulo” about a decision that ordered the arrest of a federal deputy for non-payment of child support, in addition to imposing a fine of R$500 for every hour that the report remained on the air.

The newspaper filed a lawsuit (Complaint – RCL 64896) based on Claim of Non-Compliance with Fundamental Precept (ADPF) 130, in which the STF overturned the Press Law and decided that censorship was unconstitutional. Estadão argued that the report, published on its news portal, only reported a court decision that ordered the arrest of federal deputy Jadyel Silva Alencar, due to the failure to pay full child support for his two minor children.

The first instance denied the parliamentarian’s request to remove the content, but the TJ understood that the dissemination of any information that could compromise the image of the person involved and the fundamental rights of minors was prohibited.

For the minister, the TJ’s decision “unjustifiably restricts the free circulation of ideas and causes widespread damage to the legal system that needs to be repaired as quickly as necessary”. Barroso stressed that “the honor and image of the offended party is not being belittled”, but rather stating that it is possible to file subsequent retraction and reparation actions without this resulting in restrictions on the free circulation of ideas. He also highlighted that “the news portal itself offered space to exercise the right to reply”.

“For a long time, the Federal Supreme Court (STF) has recognized the preferential character of freedom of expression in the Brazilian Constitution, as it is an essential element for (i) the manifestation of human personality, (ii) democracy, for providing free movement of information, ideas and opinions and (iii) the record of the history and culture of a people. This means that, in situations of conflict with other rights, the removal of this guarantee constitutes an exceptional measure, with the burden of argument being attributed to those who support the opposite right”, declared Barroso.

The minister also highlighted that “the STF attributes transcendent efficacy to the determining reasons for the decision given in ADPF 130, recognizing the possibility of directly filing a constitutional complaint to ensure freedom of expression”. “There are numerous precedents in accepting requests of this nature”, stated the minister when responding to the press vehicle’s request.