As many as “half a dozen deputies” ask for a parliamentary hearing of the Attorney General of the Republic, Lucília Gago, and speak of the “hypocrisy and lack of courage” of the party, of the PSD “out of fear, strategy, tactics” not dare to face “who wants to burn the party”, the decision has been made: Lucília Gago, on the initiative of the PSD, will not be called to clarify in the Assembly of the Republic.
“In the coming days” the “disclosure” of the searches carried out by the PJ at the home of the former president, Rui Rio, and at the party’s headquarters will be sent to the Supreme Court of the Prosecutor’s Office “so that the full scope and full adherence to the rules of these diligences”.
There is a “natural little” in the responses that the PGR sent to the PSD, following the letter from the general secretary, Hugo Soares, motivating this move that puts an end to the “initiative” of the PSD in this process for the time being.
Saying that “I just took note and sent our concerns to the process” was not enough for the PSD, who had already heard the PGR at SIC, claiming that “it does not send processes, does not define investigative strategies or their times or their modes (…) Consequently, this process, like the others, has holders, magistrates responsible for the investigation who will obviously follow a line and put it into practice”.
On that day, Lucília Gago explained that the PSD letter would be “subject to monitoring and analysis” and, if necessary, would be “subject to appropriate management measures.”
The ‘no, I don’t know if they deserve it, of course’, consideration he made about the social-democratic arguments, was now reflected in the ‘note’ and in the sending of the letter to the ‘process’ . That is, the “adequate” rating, PSD source tells DN, was in “self-management” mode.
“We’re not going to accept that anyone can have elements [do partido apreendidos nas buscas] which it can use to determine the party’s political action,” warned Luís Montenegro.
By “not wanting to tackle serious matters in an irresponsible way”, and avoiding what Marcelo also does not want – “a war” between politicians and the judiciary – the PSD leadership sidesteps the “little” of Lucília Gago by introducing the CSMP anything they consider “disproportionate and beyond the scope of the mandate”, such as, for example, the confiscation of electronic equipment such as mobile phones or computer cloning to the distribution of human resources between the parliamentary group and the functioning of the party.
If the hearing went ahead, “it would set a precedent” because an investigation was at stake, still secret from justice – which would limit the PGR’s explanation – involving politicians “the feeling would be that there is some kind of war,” he warned Marcelo, the Portuguese “could lose confidence if they are convinced that there are institutions that go too far in their ways, such as that there are institutions that seem to want to escape control, surveillance or see themselves embroiled in squabbles over the limits of their powers”.
In this way, the “criteria of legality and objectivity” and the “exclusive submission of the magistrates” of the MP in this case “to the directives, orders and instructions provided for by law” will necessarily have to be judged by those who have the duty , provided for in law and in the constitution, to “assess professional merit and take disciplinary action” against prosecutors.
And whether in the disciplinary section, in the permanent section, in the assessment of merit or in the plenary session of the CSMP, Lucília Gago “will always” be involved and therefore “also responsible”, as president, “in every decision”. That is, the PSD “obligates”, in this way, the Attorney General of the Republic to “intervene”, by virtue of functions, in the case of searches of the headquarters of the PSD and the residences of Rui Rio and Hugo Carneiro.
Regarding the intention of the PS to submit a proposal to clarify the legislation, Luís Montenegro, after Marcelo proposed a reflection on the party financing law, assures that the PSD will not “run to sponsor legislative changes” for the not finding “any reason” leading the party to “take any position based on states of mind or one’s personal agendas” – Augusto Santos Silva, for example, who spoke “on live crime”, argues that the PGR has “a duty to publicly inform citizens inform”.
There is still, to clarify, a legal difference. Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa understands that there is a “grey area” in current legislation. Ana Catarina Mendes, Deputy Minister of Parliamentary Affairs, said in an interview with Público that “both the Law on the Financing of Parties and the Law on the functioning of the AR are clear (…) I don’t see any gray area”.
Source: DN
