Challenge to quarantine

Madeiran court to rule on habeas corpus

Vila Gale, where quarantine is undertaken

The Diario reports that Miguel Albuquerque, the President of the Regional Government, has guaranteed that the mandatory quarantine in hotels for those arriving in Madeira does not violate any constitutional right. And he recalls that quarantines are defined by national law, that of Civil Protection, approved by the Assembly of the Republic.

Albuquerque has already heard of the request for habeas corpus submitted to the Court by a young Madeiran woman, who arrived at Madeira Airport recently, but refused to be placed in mandatory quarantine.

“So far, we have had the quarantine measures that have proved to be correct. Because we were able to contain the import of the virus, we were able to monitor the infected potentials ”, he said.

One new case in Madeira

Miguel Albuquerque announced that the Region had yesterday, after 25 days without cases, a case of infection from a passenger who was in quarantine at the Dom Pedro Hotel in Machico, He made the point that they had come from the central region of the mainland – “and if these measures are called into question, we cannot control the situation ”, he explains. The 91st case in the Region understood to be a male, aged 20-29 years, with no report of symptoms.

On May 31 a Madeiran woman made a request for habeas corpus in order not comply with the mandatory quarantine at the Vila Galé hotel, in Santa Cruz (photo). The news was advanced by Funchal Notícias, which states that the measure was presented in the Criminal Investigation Court of the Judicial Court of the District of Madeira.

The same online newspaper indicates that the young woman is 25 years old and has a law degree from the Faculty of Law of the University of Porto. On the basis of the habeas corpus request, the young woman claims that the quarantine is “arbitrary” and that the Regional Government does not have the power to decree compulsory isolation.

The request is accompanied by the decision handed down by the Pre-Trial Chamber of the Ponta Delgada Court, in the Azores, which recently considered mandatory quarantines on the islands to be illegal – reported here.

The President of the Regional Government says it is necessary to see what will be the decision that will be taken by the Madeiran Court. “The argument that the rights, freedoms and guarantees of movement are at stake is not consistent from my point of view. Because in a state of emergency or in a calamity, as is happening, there is something that needs to be understood: the measures that the Regional Health Authority takes, within the framework of the Civil Protection Law, aim not to restrict these rights, but to take preventive actions within the scope of Public Health ”.

Power to enact quarantines

Miguel Albequerque, speaking about quarantine

Albuquerque recalls that the Region continues to have powers, within the framework of regional public authority, to enact quarantines.

“The measure we took at the airport aims, in the first place, to protect the health of the population of Madeira and Porto Santo. And secondly, it aims to protect the health of people who come from countries where there are vehicles for active transmission. It must be remembered that 25 days ago we had no case of an infected person in Madeira and that today a new case, imported, came from a person who came from outside and was in quarantine. It is a value that we cannot question: life ”, he stresses.

According to Miguel Albuquerque, there is no violation of constitutional law “a person being confined to a hotel, with all the conditions, so as not to put their health, that of their families and the entire population at risk”.

1 thought on “Challenge to quarantine”

  1. Please correct me if I am wrong but the fact of the matter is, the persons human rights may be have been violated

    https://www.echr.coe.int/Documents/Convention_ENG.pdf

    The only acceptable reason for lawful detention: Article 5, Section 1c

    “the lawful detention of persons for the prevention of the
    spreading of infectious diseases, of persons of unsound
    mind, alcoholics or drug addicts or vagrants;”

    A precedent has in set in the Azores which the Judge HAS to take into account. The woman in question informed the authorities that she would voluntarily self isolate for the requested 14 day period in her own home

    Now, it seems to me that a can of worms is about to be opened due to this situation which could of been avoided if the authorities had respected the persons rights and allowed them to isolate in their own home, while implementing regular supervision and support

    The learned person in question, after said enforced detention then has the right to require compensation from the authority that placed her in that detention. The precedent set in the Azores seems to confirm that article 5, section 1c cannot be applied to persons without confirmation of infection beforehand

    So where does that leave us?

    1. The Judge would destroy their career and standing if they were to bow to the regional authority and not uphold the law

    2. Everyone detained unlawfully can now require compensation from the regional authority which includes those detained in any of the designated quarantine hotels

    3. EVERY person residing in Camara De Lobos would be able to request compensation from the regional authority due to their unlawful detention and restrictions of liberty and free movement

    Ignorance of the law is no excuse, this applies to ALL persons no matter their standing

    What an absolute waste of time and effort this has turned out to be… a true palava

    Reply

Leave a comment

Translate »