The proportionality of measures to contain the pandemic of COVID-19: an empirical analysis of Brazil
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17058/rdunisc.vi66.17534Abstract
The paper seeks to answer, from empirical research with a qualitative approach, if there was proportionality in the adoption of measures to combat the pandemic of COVID-19 in Brazil in the years 2020 and 2021. It was assumed that the measures were proportional, as advocated by Carvalho Filho (2020) in the theoretical field. Using the indirect data collected, the measures were analyzed by the deductive method in the way that the higher the number of daily deaths, the more justifiable would be the adoption of restrictive measures to a greater extent; conversely, their adoption even with a low number of deaths could be considered abuse of power by the State. To this end, the work was based on studies on the essential core of the right to health by Duarte (2020) and on emergency powers by Ginsburg and Versteeg (2020), in addition to research and recommendations in the health field. It was concluded that there was disproportionality in the adoption of the measures, once the most restrictive to individual rights measures were prioritized over able to combat the pandemic and least restrictive measures.