The Brazilian court ruled that it is illegal to sell agrochemicals over the Internet without agronomic prescriptions. The court decision reached the “Mercado Livre” portal, which began its activities in Argentina and is currently considered one of the largest direct buying and selling sites in Brazil, with a turnover of approximately US$4 billion in the country last year, according to expert projections.<\/p>\n
IBAMA (Brazilian Institute for the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources) had already fined the owner of Mercado Livre brand, Ebazar.com.br, for the sale of inputs that were not in compliance with legal requirements. The notification ordered the removal of ads from illegally sold products.<\/p>\n
The determination, however, was not met by the company within the timeframe, claiming that it was only a “mere intermediary” of the business and did not directly market the products. Mercado Livre even reached an injunction with a lower court judge to keep the agrochemical ads running. This provisional decision was reversed in the Federal Court on the request of the Federal Attorney General’s Office (AGU).<\/p>\n
Appellate judge V\u00e2nia Hack de Almeida of the Federal Court ruled that “the infraction established by Ibama stems from the use of this provider as a way to circumvent environmental legislation and provide for the acquisition of any pesticide without the proper presentation of a prescription, prescribed by a legally qualified professional, which directly confronts Article 13 of Federal Law 7.802\/1989”. <\/p>\n
Federal prosecutor Jo\u00e3o Paulo Bohler maintained, “Faced with the facts, the indiscriminate sale of pesticides, the verification that the products are transported with a declaration of contents different from the reality and in the face of risks to the health of the population and the environment, there was no other alternative to Ibama other than the application of the precautionary measure of laying an embargo on this activity, that is, the sale of pesticides without proper agronomic revenue. This is not in any way a prior censorship of the ads, but a precaution against irregular sales.”<\/p>\n
The prosecutors maintained that the sale of agrochemicals in the free market is in disagreement with requirements of federal agencies responsible for the health, environment and agriculture sectors. According to the prosecutors, trade in this type of product should be done only by revenue signed by an agronomist or forestry engineer, at risk of harm to the environment and human health.<\/p>\n
Due to this, the justice decided that the company should rather be held responsible for the trade of agrochemicals among its users. In addition, he understood that the potential risks extend to people who carry the substance, since the product is not identified as a pesticide in the packaging and can cause problems, for example, to the employees of the Post Office.<\/p>\n
“An attempt was made to conceal the actual contents of the order, since in the content declaration there was the description, ‘Car Shampoo Detergent’, with the sender as an individual. IBAMA has no other way to stop the risk, but through an embargo on the activity. There is no way to monitor all the products on a daily basis to detect irregularities and request their removal off the virtual shelf,” argued AGU.<\/p>\n
Source: AgroNews<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"