The temporary exemption from tolls in areas affected by the Kristin depression, in a calamity scenario, raised an issue that goes beyond the immediate emergency and touches on a sensitive point in the Portuguese legal system. The Government’s decision to suspend charging on several road sections was justified by the need to mitigate the impacts of the catastrophe, but it exposed a legal void that, according to experts, remains to be clarified.
The measure covered segments of the A8, A14, A17 and A19 motorways, in territories particularly affected by bad weather. However, the suspension was not automatic and only came into effect around a week after the storm, lasting until midnight on February 10th.
This delay and the way in which the decision was communicated reignited the debate about the legal framework for tolls in disaster situations.
The legal basis used by the Government
According to Notícias ao Minuto, the Government supported the decision in the Basic Civil Protection Law, which allows the adoption of exceptional measures to protect people, goods and infrastructure in contexts of catastrophe. This law provides for the possibility of implementing urgent actions aimed at reducing risks and facilitating movement in affected areas.
Even so, the legislation does not contain an express rule that directly regulates the suspension of tolls on concessioned highways. It is precisely here that the legal problem highlighted by experts arises.
“It should be clearer in the law”
Speaking to Notícias ao Minuto, lawyer José Carlos Godinho Rocha considers that the Government’s actions are legitimate, but emphasizes that the legal framework should be more explicit. According to the jurist, the Civil Protection Basic Law gives political and administrative legitimacy to the decision, but does not resolve all the legal issues involved.
The expert recalls that motorway concessionaires operate under long-term contracts, with rigid and highly detailed clauses. In these contracts, he explains, prolonged suspensions of collections due to natural calamities are unlikely to be foreseen. For the lawyer, this gap should be filled by law, avoiding future doubts and ensuring greater transparency for citizens.
And if the road is conditioned, the user may not pay?
Another recurring doubt concerns the rights of drivers in situations where the road is deteriorated or is the only viable alternative. On this point, José Carlos Godinho Rocha is clear: even if the driver considers the charge unfair, payment must be made at the time of the ticket.
According to the lawyer, the challenge can only occur later, through a complaint or administrative challenge. Before the exemption was decreed, driving on one of these motorways without a Via Verde identifier was not a solution to avoid payment, as the charge would later be sent to the address of the vehicle owner.
Tolls, concessions and duty of collaboration
The jurist also emphasizes that, in calamity scenarios, there is a duty for concessionaires to collaborate with the State, even if this duty is not formulated as a direct legal obligation. This is, as he explains, a principle arising from the spirit of the Basic Civil Protection Law and the need to protect the public interest.
According to the same source, the Government can impose this type of measures, especially when urgent actions are involved to mitigate serious impacts on circulation and road safety. However, the absence of clear rules increases the risk of legal conflicts if these suspensions are prolonged over time.
Degraded roads and the right to compensation
In addition to the issue of tolls, the lawyer recalls that drivers who suffer damage to their vehicles due to the poor condition of the roads may be entitled to compensation. This right exists whether the road is protected by a concessionaire or is under the responsibility of an authority.
According to José Carlos Godinho Rocha, the law provides for the responsibility of road management entities when they do not guarantee adequate circulation conditions. The process involves documenting the damage, identifying the person responsible for the road and submitting the respective claim.
A discussion that goes beyond the storm
The Kristin depression episode brought to the center of the debate an issue that tends to recur whenever extreme phenomena occur. For experts, recent experience shows that the legal framework for tolls in disaster scenarios remains too dependent on ad hoc decisions.
As the lawyer interviewed by , the Government’s actions were legitimate and understandable, but the issue requires a clearer legislative response. Otherwise, each new storm will continue to raise the same questions, both for citizens and the entities involved.
Also read:
