15 questions, 15 answers and no shortage of the topic of the day: the resignation of Marta Temido. And here Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa, who responded to students from, among others, the PSD Summer University, which takes place in Castelo de Vide, did not hesitate: “I have a preference for the way the SNS is managed, always in the public area, more autonomous, more independent from the Ministry of Health, as the classic form of direct dependence has shown limits in its effectiveness”.
If, in the case of the day, the president of the republic answered with a serious face when asked about his “policy of benevolence and excessive compassion for the present government,” he couldn’t help but smile. “It’s a question that has accompanied me for the past few years,” he said immediately. And shortly after, returning to a serious stance, he explained that a “president, who comes from a party, is not a spokesperson for that party, but a replacement for the party, be it the government or the opposition.”
Is there any kindness or sympathy for the government of António Costa? “These are decisions that are determined by the understanding of what a president of the republic should do,” he clarified, then set his historical path in Belém, leading him to a conclusion: what he decided “was understood by the people when they voted “in the local, European and legislative. In short, it is the “popular will, the current situation, the existence of alternatives” that determine the action in the name of the “dominant opinion in Portuguese society”.
Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa understands that “not someone, because he has a religion, because he belongs to a party, because he belongs to a club, because he has an affinity with an institution, which is not on top of the assessment of the collective interest in a particular moment, according to your view [seja ela] right or wrong”.
And in that way, he assured, “in cases of very deep division, I have drawn attention to various legislative initiatives that they should be reconsidered in Parliament or dealt with in the Constitutional Court, as I understood that they were legal aspects that were of questionable constitutionality or because they were politically, as formulated, internally contradictory to what the dominant opinion in Portuguese society thought”.
And the next question was not necessary. “Did that choice coincide with my personal choice?” He asked and replied, “In different circumstances, there was a concurrence of the result of what my appreciation was and what would result if I affirmed my personal belief. I will continue in this way.”
The idea that he will not change was reinforced minutes later when asked about “the constant appearances”, if this exposure “cannot harm his influential magistracy”.
“Everyone should be as he is. I was chosen as he was and re-elected as he was and am. Change would be a disaster, it was not meat or fish. [Pode] go good, go bad… but that’s what i am. I am like a teacher: present, close by, seeking clarification, at risk of exposing himself. I’m not sorry, I’ve avoided many crises,” he replied.
Among the various questions asked, there were two where Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa was particularly astute: TAP and life imprisonment.
As to whether “Portugal should continue to subsidize TAP and why”, the President of the Republic began by saying that “there are no absolute answers to this, the answers depend on the historic moment, to immediately ask: “The question is: what are the alternatives? Is there a better alternative?”
And there isn’t, he explained. “We pay TAP and that’s why it has to be” [o governo] demanding in TAP’s recovery strategy, because it is a European commitment, because it costs the Portuguese a lot of money and because it has a reason to exist, because we are convinced that there is no alternative. Because if there was a better alternative, the alternative should be preferred.” And can there be? Nobody asked the question, it was Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa himself who opened the door to a deal that was “almost closed, an agreement European”.
“It may be that this hypothesis is being reborn [referência à Lufthansa], it can be, if the restructuring is done well and produces good results. At the moment, no other alternatives are known, there are no European or non-European companies offering to take care of TAP.” But if there is, the President of the Republic has a personal inclination: a “preferably European” his company.
On the “death penalty” or “life imprisonment”, Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa was short and direct: “No, it’s the answer”, that goes to the simplest, not weighing everything else”.
And here he underlined the coincidence that sometimes exists: “My personal opinion coincides with the prevailing legal, political and social sentiment. No, that’s the answer.”
Source: DN
