Refuge, Border Closing and Unconstitutional State of Fairs: A Study from Original Civil Action n. 3.121

• Autor(a) principal: Karolini Burg, Amanda
• Data de Publicação: 2022
• Outros Autores: Castilho Gomes, Nestor, Stelzer, Joana, das Neves Gonçalves, Everton
• Tipo de documento: Artigo
• Idioma: por
• Título da fonte: Revista Direito GV
• Texto Completo: https://periodicos.fgv.br/revdireitogv/article/view/85607
• topic: Human rights; Unconstitutional State of Fairs; Post-positivism; Refugees; Supreme Federal Court; Direitos humanos; Estado de Coisas Inconstitucional; Pós-positivismo; Refugiados; Supremo Tribunal Federal

This paper aims to verify the legality of the legal bases used by the State of Roraima in the Original Civil Action n. 3.121, whose requests consist of “preventing the disordered migratory flow from producing more devastating effects on Brazilian’s society, specifically in the State of Roraima”, and that the Federal Union “temporarily close the Brazil-Venezuela border” or “be compelled to limit the entry of Venezuelan refugees”. The case files are analyzed, as well as the applicability of the theoretical-dogmatic discourses used, especially the references to post-positivism and Unconstitutional State of Fairs. The conclusion is that the requests for closure of borders and limitation of the number of refugees must be dismissed, because they directly violate international human rights obligations committed by Brazil, especially those for the protection of refugees (ex vi of the Geneva Convention of 1951 concerning to the Status of Refugees and article 1, item III and article 7 of Law n. 9.474/1997). It is also noted that references to post-positivism and Unconstitutional State of Fairs are made rhetorically, to legitimize the adoption of an activist stance by the Judicial Power. Regarding the methodology, it is a pure, qualitative and descriptive research. The approach method is critical inductive, with systematic interpretation and documentary technical procedures.