Mayor of São Paulo spoke out after the Federal Court revoked decision that paralyzed Aneel’s administrative process against the concessionaire
The mayor of São Paulo, Ricardo Nunes (MDB), said this Wednesday (25) that the decision of the Federal Court on the administrative proceeding of the National Electric Energy Agency (Aneel) against Enel “reestablishes the public interest”. Earlier, judge Pollyana Kelly Maciel Medeiros Martis Alves revoked a provisional decision which paralyzed the regulator’s analysis of the case and rejected the concessionaire’s main request.
“This is an example that we will not accept bad services for the population,” said Nunes.
The legal process was initiated by Enel itselfwhich tried to block Aneel’s investigation. The company claimed that the regulatory agency had disrespected your right to defenseas the general director would have voted for expiry – breach of contract – before the end of the term for the delivery of the company’s defense. The concessionaire also complained about the inclusion of power supply failures during a “December 2025 extreme weather event,” stating that it would be a improper inclusion in the process.
When analyzing the case, the judge concluded that the procedure at Aneel occurred without any irregularity. She explained that the agency operates collegiately and that the director general’s isolated vote represented only one “individual conviction” in a debate stage, and not a final decision e definitive capable of harming the company at that moment.
“The grounds that supported it are not confirmed in light of the information provided by the enforcement authority. The administrative process was processed regularly, with full contradiction and inconclusive instruction at the date of the filing for reasons inherent to the regular functioning of the collegiate — not due to the suppression of guarantees”, states the document.
The judge also denied the idea that Enel was prevented from defending itself. According to the document, the concessionaire actively participated in the process. The company submitted your documents on time – until February 26th -, received new opportunities to comment on subsequent technical reports and held several meetings with the agency’s teams.
“ENEL SP actively participated in the process, presented statements, legal opinions and technical documents, and had full access to the technical notes produced”, said the judge in the decision.
Climate events
The inclusion of Enel’s performance in the December 2025 storms was also considered legal by Justice. Aneel’s process sought to investigate precisely the company’s ability to respond to severe weather events.
“The event of December 2025 does not constitute a new autonomous fact capable of requiring the establishment of its own procedure: it is a parameter for verifying the effectiveness of the corrective measures adopted within the scope of the same inspection process, falling within the logic of the safeguard period provided for in article 38, §3, of Law No. 8,987/1995”, states the decision.
For the judge, evaluating the concessionaire’s recovery plan without observing how it reacted to a new real storm would be transforming inspection into a simple “analysis of statements of intent”. The climactic episode, therefore, was not an unfair “surprise” for the company, but a practice test required.
A São Paulo City Hallo State Government ea São Paulo Public Services Regulatory Agency (Arsesp) tried to join the lawsuit as interested parties, but the requests were denied. The judge explained that the specific type of case opened by Enel is restricted e does not allow third parties to enter that do not have a direct legal link with the legality of the Aneel procedure that was being judged.
