MASP is in danger.
Who says the Public Prosecutor's Office wants to halt construction next to Brazil's most famous museum?
Fernando Porfírio_247 – A shadow threatens the São Paulo Museum of Art. And the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office wants to prevent the construction of a 19-story building next to the MASP, a protected historical site at the federal, state, and municipal levels. The Prosecutor's Office believes that the construction will harm the visibility of a historical landmark.
The Public Prosecutor's Office in São Paulo has already rolled up its sleeves and appealed to the Federal Regional Court of the 3rd Region to reverse the Federal Court's decision that denied the suspension of construction of the Paulista Corporate building, by the construction and real estate company Gafisa.
“The visibility of the location where MASP is situated is essential to the listed building itself, located in an area whose vocation has always been that of a viewpoint, since the inauguration of Avenida Paulista. This characteristic cannot be disregarded and treated as a minor element, especially since this point was completely ignored by the competent authorities,” argues federal prosecutor Adriana Zawada.
She emphasizes that the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office (MPF) is not satisfied with the Federal Court's decision to dismiss the public civil action filed by the MPF to suspend construction of the building. In the appeal, the public prosecutor stresses that the permits granted for the construction are illegal.
In March of last year, the Federal Public Prosecutor's Office (MPF) had recommended to the developer that the construction be completely halted until the project under execution was approved by IPHAN (National Institute of Historic and Artistic Heritage). IPHAN ended up authorizing the work, but after a technical analysis of all the reports that supported the authorizations and the characteristics of the project, the MPF filed a precautionary action.
The Public Prosecutor's Office sought the annulment of the permits granted, as well as compelling the construction company Gafisa to demolish the building, with a daily fine of R$ 320 for non-compliance. The request was denied by the court, both in the preliminary injunction and in the final judgment.
The Federal Public Prosecutor's Office also emphasized in its appeal that the public administration must act in defense of the listed property, which has collective value, and not in the exclusively private interest of building, including through expropriation, if necessary, in accordance with the Federal Constitution.
He argued that the loss of physical visibility is measurable, and not merely a subjective assessment, as maintained by Judge Clécio Braschi of the 8th Federal Civil Court, who denied the injunction and dismissed the lawsuit.