André Kosters / Lusa
The judges consider that Social Security’s refusal to waive the payment of costs to citizens with lower incomes violates the law on access to rights and the principle of proportionality.
The Constitutional Court declared unconstitutional rules that allowed Social Security demand payment of legal costs in installments when this burden would place citizens with income below the minimum wage.
At stake are three rules of the law on access to law and a regulatory provision that guided the assessment of economic insufficiency. According to the court, the application of these rules violated the fundamental right of access to justice, enshrined in the Constitution, by imposing burdens that compromise a dignified existence.
The decision is the result of a request from the Public Ministry, following several cases in which citizens saw refused legal aid in the form of exemption from payment of costs, and they are only allowed to pay in installments.
In one of the cases analyzed, a citizen with a partially garnished pension of around 1000 euros would be left with a monthly income below the minimum wage after paying an installment of 60 euros. The payment would extend over more than three years. The court considered that such a situation placed the applicant in a position of unequal access to the courts, says the .
The court emphasized that access to justice does not necessarily imply complete free provision, recognizing that the legislator can set costs. However, these charges must respect principles of proportionality and reasonableness, ensuring that they do not exclude citizens with limited resources.
The legal aid regime, administered by the Ministries of Justice and Labor, is intended precisely to protect those who do not have economic capacity to cover legal expenses. In 2024, the system represented more than 50 million euros in costs, mainly lawyer fees.
The Ministry of Justice has already reacted, stating that it is analyzing the impact of the decision and considering possible legislative changes to adapt the regime to constitutional jurisprudence.
