The Supreme Federal Court (STF) ruled on Wednesday that protective measures provided for in the Lei Maria da Penha (Law 11.340/2006) may be granted in any case of gender‑based violence against women, not only when the aggression occurs within a domestic, familial or intimate relationship.
The decision, reached unanimously under the general repercussion regime, establishes that the decisive factor for granting protection is the existence of violence motivated by gender, not the bond between victim and aggressor or the place where the violence took place. Consequently, all lower courts must follow this interpretation.
The court specified that situations such as stalking, harassment and political violence against women can now trigger the protective measures envisaged by the law, which include removing the aggressor from the victim’s residence, banning approach or contact, and other restrictions intended to prevent further aggression.
In urgent cases, a judge who lacks jurisdiction over the substantive matter must still examine the request for protection and may grant it provisionally. The case must then be immediately forwarded to the competent court or, where available, to a specialized domestic‑violence court for ratification or modification of the measure. This procedural rule aims to prevent jurisdictional debates from leaving a woman unprotected in an emergency.
The STF also affirmed that, in situations of imminent threat or gender‑based violence, police officers may issue protective measures when authorised by law – an understanding previously recognised in the court’s judgment on ADI 6.138.
Finally, the ruling explicitly extends the law’s scope to political violence against women, defined in the Electoral Code as conduct aimed at harassing, constraining, humiliating, persecuting or threatening a female candidate or office‑holder through contempt or discrimination based on her sex, colour, race or ethnicity, with the goal of impairing her campaign or mandate. In such instances, jurisdiction resides with the Electoral Justice.
Summarising the decision, the STF set four guiding parameters for nationwide application: protective measures may be used against any form of gender‑based violence; they must be assessed even by a judge lacking competence when there is imminent risk; they also cover cases of political violence; and, in legally prescribed urgent situations, they may be determined by police authorities.
Minister Cármen Lúcia commented during the session, stating, "Não há aqui uma relação de afeto. Quem ama não mata. O feminicídio é praticado, assassinato de mulher é praticado por uma questão de poder. O homem acha que tem o poder de vida e morte contra nós e mata. Ponto. Tem nada com relação de afeto, nem a Lei Maria da Penha e nenhuma lei."
The ruling marks a significant enlargement of the protective framework established by the Maria da Penha Law, bringing Brazil’s legal response to gender‑based violence closer to international standards that recognise violence against women as a human‑rights violation irrespective of the context in which it occurs.