Rapporteur of the case, Dino voted to maintain 500 meters distance, but a score is 4 to 2 to have no limits; Judgment has the potential to impact urbanism
The (Supreme Federal Court) resumed, on Friday (12.Jun.2025), the virtual judgment of ADI (direct unconstitutionality action), which disputes the end of the law that required telecommunications operators to share towers installed within 500 meters.
The action was proposed by the (Brazilian Association of Infrastructure for Telecommunications). Minister Flávio Dino, rapporteur of the case, granted an injunction restoring the obligation. Here’s (PDF – 115 kB) of the report.
Understand
In the 2000s, with the popularization of cell phones in Brazil, cities began to live with a phenomenon nicknamed “Torres Palite”: companies installed their own disordered structures, often side by side, to ensure coverage in urban areas. This generated visual pollution and discomfort for residents.
To face this problem, it was sanctioned in 2009, which established a series of technical rules, including the minimum distance of 500 meters between towers. The justification, at the time, was linked to unfounded concern with the effects of electromagnetic radiation, but in practice the measure contributed to urban order and the efficiency in the use of existing infrastructure.
In 2021, in the Jair Bolsonaro government, this limit was revoked with the approval of the. The change was inserted via rapporteur amendment in the processing of MP 1018, which originally dealt with the exemption of taxes on satellite internet. The change was classified by critics such as a jabuti, because it was not related to the original theme of the provisional measure.
With this, the Abintel, which brings together companies owned by the Torres, entered the ADI 7708, arguing that the revocation had a vice of origin and would have negative effects on urban, environmental planning and the expansion of 5G.
Processing
In response, Minister Flávio Dino granted an injunction restoring the limit and obligation to share towers.
However, the score so far is 4 votes contrary to the revocation of the law and 2 votes in favor.
Minister Dias Toffoli accompanied the rapporteur’s vote. Already the president of the Supreme Court, Minister Luís Roberto Barroso, opened divergence and voted against the injunction, defending the constitutionality of revocation. Ministers Gilmar Mendes and Cristiano Zanin followed Barroso.
The trial was resumed after the request for a view of Minister Alexandre de Moraes, who has not yet voted.
Arguments favorable to revocation
The process divides the telecommunications sector, with divergences between mobile operators and companies owners of Torres infrastructure.
Representing the operators, Connexis defends the elimination of minimal spacing. To power360, the president of the entity, Marcos Ferrari, stressed that the revocation brought important advances.
According to him, before the change, the market was dominated by few companies, which held about 80% of the infrastructure. With the elimination of the minimum spacing rule, the competition increased significantly, reflecting on the drop in contract prices to almost 90%.
Stutz also explained that 5G technology requires a much larger density of antennas compared to 4G, which makes it unfeasible to apply the old 500 -meter spacing rule between towers.
“5G is a technology that requires more antennas than 4G, 4 to 5 times more antennas”, declared.
In addition, he said that infrastructure sharing is always the first option of operators because it is more efficient and economical. However, when sharing is not possible, the installation of new towers should be allowed to ensure network expansion.
For him, the previous legislation, according to him, created an outdated technical and legal barrier, which does not follow the evolution of telecommunications technologies.
The previous legislation, according to him, created an outdated technical and legal barrier, which does not follow the evolution of telecommunications technologies. With the revocation, the market became more competitive, directly benefiting consumers with more options and better prices.
Contrary arguments
The president of the openness, Luciano Stutz, highlighted the Poder360 that the injunction that maintains the minimum spacing rule of 500 meters between towers is critical to the urban organization and the efficiency of the telecommunications sector.
“The most straightforward consequence is that tomorrow can start a bunch of tower on the tower side,” he said. He pointed out that this represents an urban setback and can turn towers into “public enemies,” similar to the rejection that posts and wires generate in cities.
See images of mobile antennas in cities in Brazil
290 Floriano Lima Street, Arinos/MG
290 Floriano Lima Street, Arinos/MG
Rua Alyrio Hugne de Matos, 33, Cuiabá, Mato Grosso
Rua Alyrio Hugne de Matos, 33, Cuiabá, Mato Grosso
Conceição da Barra/ES
Conceição da Barra/ES
Rua Parigot de Souza, Terra Roxa/PR
Rua Parigot de Souza, Terra Roxa/PR
In addition to the aesthetic issue, the president of him points out that the measure can delay the advance of 5G coverage in the country. The construction of unnecessary towers close to each other represents a waste of financial and natural resources, as each tower costs about R $ 500 thousand to be built.
“When you put money to lift a tower on the side of the other, you are leaving in locations without coverage, especially in rural areas, peripheries and small villages that do not yet have a cell phone signal,” explica Stutz.
Another important point pointed out by it is the environmental impact associated with excessive use of steel and concrete in the construction of these structures.
He also questions the arguments presented by the operators against the distance rule. According to Stutz, many of these antennas can be installed in alternative locations, such as tops or facades of buildings and poles, which are not affected by the 500 meter rule, valid only for towers.
In addition, it cites data from UN (International Telecommunications Union), UN organ, which indicates that the 5g sign of a 40 -meter tower can reach up to 1.5 kilometer, making it unnecessary to build very close towers. “The technical arguments used to justify revocation are fallacious and do not match the reality of technology,” he concludes.
