Fachin rejects action that sought to remove identification ‘0303’ from telemarketing calls

Minister Edson Fachin, of the Federal Supreme Court, rejected a lawsuit in which telecommunications companies questioned the use of code 0303 to allow consumers to identify telemarketing calls.

Since June, calls to offer products or services must be made with this numbering standardized by determination of Anatel (National Telecommunications Agency).

According to Fachin, in a decision this Tuesday (23), the authors of the request do not have the legitimacy to file this type of action with the court.

In addition to pointing out this formal issue in order not to proceed with the case, the minister confirmed Anatel’s regulatory competence for such an initiative and said that it aimed to resolve a significant volume of consumer complaints regarding “abusive calls”.

The Supreme Court was sued by means of an ADI (direct action of unconstitutionality) filed by the Brazilian Teleservices Association, by the National Federation for the Installation and Maintenance of Telecommunications and Computer Network Infrastructure and by the National Federation of Workers in Telecommunications Companies and Operators of Telephone tables.

The minister stated that the two federations are secondary union entities. There is jurisprudence in the court according to which only confederations are entitled to propose ADIs.

As for the association, said the magistrate, no documents were presented proving its national scope.

As for the merits of the controversy, Fachin said that the action would not be appropriate because the situation portrayed does not constitute an offense against the Constitution.

The plaintiffs alleged that Anatel had extrapolated its normative power.

The regulatory agency, in turn, defended the rule edited by it in the case file and stated that the act is part of an initiative aimed at improving the service provision model.

He also stated that the act was a reaction to the significant volume of complaints received from consumers and that there is “evidence that a large part of the use of random, invalid, unattributed numbering, or attributed to third parties, may be associated with robotic systems of active telemarketing “.

It also sustained the plaintiffs’ lack of legitimacy, on the grounds that they are not telemarketing service providers, but call center companies.

Fachin did not identify any incompatibility between Anatel’s rule and the legislation and other regulations in force in the country.

“The creation of regulatory agencies in Brazil stems from the adoption of a new model of public service in which private entities are in charge of their direct execution”, stated Fachin. “The Public Administration is responsible for managing and regulating the provision of services, using the constitutional principles that guide Brazilian administrative law,” he said.