Andalusia: The TSJA denies the Board the confinement of a town in Granada for not considering it "justified"

The Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of Andalusia (TSJA) has concluded not to support the request of the Ministry of Health and Families of the Board to confine the municipality of Montefrío (Granada). The magistrates do not consider “justified” or “proportionate” the perimeter closure of the town for seven days. This is what the regional executive was referring to when it criticized the Government of Sánchez for the premature end of the state of alarm, which would leave the autonomous communities “Naked” and “handcuffed” when making decisions to contain the spread of the virus.Montefrío, with just 5,000 inhabitants, was the only municipality in the province of Granada for which the Junta de Andalucía had requested this last May 8 exceptional measure due to its high incidence rate. But the TSJA does not ratify the order and sees “other less harmful measures” and with the same purpose. It should be remembered that the end of the state of alarm leaves the limitation of fundamental freedoms in the hands of the Justice. Only an Organic Law can endorse this type of decision and the autonomies lack powers to do so. The court, meeting in plenary session, therefore considers that the restrictions of fundamental rights cannot be carried out “indiscriminately and massively” and that the norm that should protect This restriction, the Public Health Law, “refers to specific and determined persons.” 10% of those immunized In a car, to which Europa Press has had access and against which it is possible to challenge before the Supreme Court, the TSJA considers that “it is being imposing an indiscriminate restriction of a fundamental right, to the extent that it affects even those citizens who have already been vaccinated.”It cannot be considered proportionate or justified to place citizens who are fully immunized on a level of legal equivalence,” they emphasize. Montefrío has 10% of its neighbors already vaccinated with both doses. Along with this, it points out that the precept “suffers from an imprecise wording.” And in the hypothesis that the norm admits different interpretations, “the one that is more favorable to the exercise of fundamental rights should be chosen.” The order has been deliberated by the twelve magistrates that make up the Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the TSJA with headquarters in Granada and against it a private vote has been announced.