As dificuldades de acesso a avaliação social e perícia-médica do Sistema Previdenciário enfrentadas pelos residentes do município de São Paulo de Olivença do estado do Amazonas e a efetivação dos direitos sociais

Abstract

This dissertation examines the effectiveness of social security and social assistance rights in the municipality of São Paulo de Olivença, located in the Alto Solimões region of Amazonas, in light of the constitutional duty of sufficient protection and the theory of structural vulnerability. Starting from the normative centrality of social security in the 1988 Constitution, the study investigates whether the institutional model adopted for delivering services by the National Social Security Institute (INSS)—specifically through the *PREVBARCO* river-based unit and remote medical assessments (*teleperícia*)—is materially adequate to ensure the local population's "existential minimum." The research employs a legal-dogmatic approach combined with quantitative-descriptive empirical investigation, analyzing official data from 2024 to 2025. The results reveal significant variations in benefit approval and denial rates, as well as a concentration of in-person service delivery within a limited annual timeframe—circumstances that raise questions regarding the structural sufficiency of the implemented public policy. The theoretical framework is grounded in Ingo Wolfgang Sarlet’s theory of fundamental rights, Daniel Sarmento’s reflections on the judicial protection of social rights, Carolina Senra’s formulation of the principle prohibiting insufficient protection, Robert Alexy’s theory of proportionality, and—centrally—the concept of structural vulnerability developed by Maurilio Casas Maia and Hermes Zaneti Jr. within the microsystem for the protection of vulnerable groups. It is argued that in contexts of multidimensional territorial vulnerability—characterized by geographic isolation, an informal economy, reliance on subsistence-level benefits, and limited technological infrastructure—material equality requires compensatory institutional arrangements. Procedural neutrality, when applied indiscriminately to structurally unequal territories, tends to perpetuate exclusion. The study concludes that the constitutional duty of sufficient protection mandates a differentiated administrative organization capable of overcoming territorial, temporal, and procedural barriers; failure to do so risks compromising the essential core of the fundamental right to social security.