The Liberal Initiative (IL) on Wednesday ruled that the Portuguese Republic Information System Oversight Board (CFSIRP) is “unable to continue in office” and asked to hear its members in parliament.
Speaking to journalists in the Assembly of the Republic, the Liberal Initiative’s parliamentary leader, Rodrigo Saraiva, said that the SIRP oversight board “is unable to continue its duties and should therefore be removed from office”.
The deputy believed there had been a “manifest breach of the duties of impartiality, impartiality and independence” by the CFSIRP in assessing the performance of the SIS in retrieving the computer of the former assistant to the Minister of State. Infrastructure.
Rodrigo Saraiva also indicated that “the Liberal Initiative will today submit a request to the 1st Committee to hear the members of the SIRP oversight board”.
The information system law of the Portuguese Republic states that “the dismissal of members of the Supervisory Board is based on the apparent violation of the duties of independence, impartiality and discretion”.
“It is the task of the Assembly of the Republic to examine the obstacles and to decide on the dismissal, after an opinion delivered by the competent committee for constitutional affairs, rights, freedoms and guarantees after hearing the member, by two third majority of the delegates present, not less than the absolute majority of the delegates in terms of effectiveness,” he added.
Action by the SIRP oversight board has contributed “to increase doubt and uncertainty”
The parliamentary group of the Liberal Initiative (IL) had already urgently requested that the members of the SIRP supervisory board be heard. The request was made to Fernando Negrão (PSD), chairman of the parliamentary committee on constitutional affairs, rights, freedoms and guarantees, which is responsible for “issuing an opinion on the dismissal of CFSIRP members”.
In the application, IL alleges a “manifest violation of the duties of independence and impartiality” to request to hear the members of the SIRP Supervisory Board, chaired by Constança Urbano de Sousa (PS), following statements by Frederico Pinheiro, former deputy minister of Infrastructures, João Galamba, in the TAP Commission of Inquiry.
In the May 18 request, IL recalls that the CFSIRP stated in a statement that there was no evidence to support that SIS had taken “‘any police action in recovering the computer in question'” or that any illegal action had taken place. , “referring to the recovery of Frederico Pinheiro’s professional computer on the night of April 26, 2023 by an agent of the SIS (Security Information Service)”.
Such a conclusion of the CFSIRP, the IL group believes, “was obtained without any respect for the most basic general principles of law, namely without the CFSIRP proceeding to the hearing of Frederico Pinheiro, the main target of the actions of the SIS, with indicating a lack of zeal and pride in pursuing oversight of intelligence activities”.
IL recalls that Frederico Pinheiro, “in statements before the Parliamentary Commission of Inquiry into the Political Custody of TAP Management, believes that he was coerced and intimidated by the SIS agent responsible for recovering the computer on the night of 26 April 2023”.
In this sense, the party led by Rui Rocha points out that the CFSIRP’s action “did not contribute to restoring the public’s rapid confidence in the legality of the SIS’s action, but on the contrary contributed to increasing the doubt and the uncertainty” that exists to this day. , “lack of knowledge about the legal basis on which that particular SIS operation was based”.
In the light of these arguments, IL considers “that there is a serious breach of the special duties to which the CFSIRP members are bound, as they do not contribute to the proper application of the said framework law”, which concerns, for example, the performance of their duties “with the independence, impartiality and sense of mission inherent in the duties they perform”.
The Liberals also refer to the fact that, “given that both the SIRP and the CFSIRP refuse to make explicit the same legal basis, in light of the public and almost unanimous opinion that it does not exist, one cannot help but conclude that the conclusion of the CFSIRP was hasty and unfounded, with the aim of condoning an illegal activity and not, since it was responsible for impartially and independently inspecting the activity of the services”.
Source: DN
