The Fourth Section of the Contentious-Administrative Chamber of the Superior Court of Justice of the Valencian Community (TSJCV) has authorized the measures contained in the resolution of the Conselleria de Sanidad Universal of May 19 that affect fundamental rights, for the period between May 24 and June 7, including delaying the curfew at 1:00 a.m.
These measures consist of limiting, with exceptions, the movement of people between 1 a.m. and 6 a.m., limiting groupings or family or social gatherings to a maximum number of 10 people , both in public and private spaces, and the reduction to 75% of the capacity in places of worship.
The order, notified this Saturday and which has the private vote of a magistrate who disagrees with the majority of members of the section, reiterates some of the legal reasoning set forth in the previous resolutions of October 27, 2020 and May 7, 2021 , has informed the TSJCV in a statement.
The Chamber determines that the proposed measures comply with the judgments of suitability, necessity and proportionality and find sufficient regulatory coverage in Organic Law 3/1986, on Special Measures in Public Health Matters.
On the contrary, it does not appreciate that its conclusions may be contradictory or incompatible with the pronouncement that the Contentious Chamber of the Supreme Court has advanced this Friday in relation to the appeal of cassation filed by the Government of the Canary Islands against the order of the Supreme Court of said autonomous community that denied the ratification of perimeter confinements on the islands.
The Fourth Section of the TSJCV argues that the so-called curfew ” is much more effective than the other existing measures to try to prevent the nightlife activity known as bottle”, and this is reflected in a report by the National Police Unit attached to the Valencian Community contributed to the cars.
Likewise, the Court maintains that the measures proposed by the Generalitat Valenciana are “proportionate” and are “aimed at a more intelligent transition, seeking a progressive de-escalation focused on the short term.”
In this way, he points out, “the extension of the start of the mobility time limitation will also allow the extension of the closing hours of other establishments, particularly the hotel and restaurant industry .”
Ultimately, in the opinion of the Chamber, the new measures continue to advance in the de-escalation process and are balanced by deriving from them more benefits for the general interest containment of the pandemic than damage to other assets or securities in conflict.
However, the order clarifies that the authorization granted in this resolution, which can be appealed in cassation before the Supreme Court, does not anticipate the assessment that the Chamber may make in the future on subsequent situations, “especially if the good situation of the accumulated incidence data, and especially taking into account the good vaccination rate “.