The president of the republic declined to comment on the “specific case” of Pedro Nuno Santos on Saturday, reiterating that if there are incompatibilities, they should be stopped, but he does not rule out a successive inspection of the law that the regime would impose on the regime. exercising political functions.
Speaking to journalists during a visit to the historic center of Nicosia, in Cyprus, Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa was asked about the case involving the Minister of Infrastructure and Housing, Pedro Nuno Santos, who, according to a report in the digital newspaper Observador a company with the father that benefited from a government contract by direct agreement.
In response, Marcelo said: “never” speaks of “concrete cases”, and reiterates that, in “abstract cases”, “if the law defines certain rules on incompatibilities, and there are situations covered by these rules, the incompatibility must cease”.
“However, there are other situations – I don’t know if this is not the case – where there are no incompatibilities, because the law stipulates certain percentages of capital held in companies celebrating government procurement: if this percentage is not reached, or if it reaches a certain value in the contract, then the law doesn’t apply,” he said.
In the case of Pedro Nuno Santos, the head of state believed that “it is necessary to see what happens, if so, if not [se aplicou a lei]so that there are no generalizations”.
“I think one is a statement of principle, and the other is the application of principles to concrete cases. And often you start applying the principles to specific cases and then you see what the law says,” he said.
Asked if he had any doubts about its constitutionality when he received the current law in 2019, Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa replied that he saw “no reason to lift preventive surveillance at the time, and then no one”.
“At the time, everyone was very pleased with the solution they had found, because it responded to an effective concern for ethics and political morality,” he recalls.
However, the head of state stressed that “it is possible at any time to appeal to the Constitutional Court”.
“At the time it was the consensus – which seemed sensible to me – not to refer this matter to the Constitutional Court. But, as you know, it is a question that can be asked at any time in connection with law,” he said.
When asked whether he intends to bring about the successive inspection of the law, Marcelo replied: “It is a question that can be appreciated. I have not thought of it”.
“I have to see, it’s probably different laws and the combination of different laws, we’ll have to see. You know, there’s another very important thing, which is this: A president has to supervise what is dominant at all times,” he said.
According to the head of state, “dominant legal sentiment has changed a lot in Portugal over the past 40 years, 30 years, 20 years”, with realities previously recognized as “constitutionally and ethically unacceptable” and no longer so.
“There is an evolutionary interpretation of the constitution and of reality. That is why there are behaviors that Portuguese society peacefully accepted at the beginning of democracy and that it no longer accepts today.
Marcelo believed that “this measurement of reality” belongs not only to the President of the Republic, but also to the Constitutional Court.
“The Constitutional Court has revised positions in its case law in some cases, namely more demanding or stricter than it was at the beginning of democracy,” he stressed.
The Ministry of Infrastructure and Housing has today clarified that Pedro Nuno Santos is not in a situation of incompatibility in the Temacal case, relying on advice from the Public Prosecutor’s Office Advisory Board as to why the government had in 2019 requested.
President rules out cases in government that question the regular functioning of institutions
The president of the republic ruled out that the succession of controversial cases involving members of the government casts doubt on the normal functioning of the institutions, defending that their dissemination is “democracy at work”.
Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa was asked whether he believes that the current sequence of cases affecting the government could lead to a situation that jeopardizes the normal functioning of the institutions, similar to what happened in 2004, when former president Jorge Sampaio decided the Assembly of the Republic.
“I hope not,” the president replied, recalling that when Jorge Sampaio dissolved parliament, he had become convinced that there were “internal problems in the functioning of the government that affect the normal functioning of the institutions”.
“They weren’t exactly specific cases that involved the relationship with society, or the relationship between government officials, but it was the way the government works. (…) It was a different situation than what we’re talking about here. : What we are talking about is that there are a series of specific points related to supposedly pre-existing situations, before the government, (…) that are now being put forward,” he said.
When asked whether “it does not cross his mind” to dissolve the Assembly of the Republic, Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa therefore emphasized that “a President of the Republic must be a factor of weight and common sense”.
“Therefore, although he does not neglect his role as guardian of the Constitution and the law, the last thing he starts doing is scenarios about his behavior. (…) Sometimes he himself becomes a factor of instability,” he emphasized.
Marcelo stressed that a president “at all times appreciates the stability and regular functioning of the institutions, but that this will not be a factor of instability or irregular functioning of the institutions”.
When asked whether he does not believe that the sequence of affairs in government could jeopardize citizens’ trust in the democratic regime, the head of state replied that democracy “is above this issue”.
“The question is whether governments or oppositions wear out more: If things are massively proven against governments, it’s the governments; if it turns out to be unfounded, it’s the oppositions,” he said.
But according to the president, “democracy always wins, because this was not possible in a dictatorship”.
Source: DN
