The Braga Criminal Court began, today, the trial of a construction company from Amares and its two owners for committing the crime of disobedience, for not having complied with two embargoes from the Braga City Council, on two works that were taking place in this municipality.
The judge heard the two defendants, who again said that, at the time of the events, they were no longer the owners, and that they had not acted with intent.
He also heard, as a witness, the councilor for Urbanism João Rodrigues, who highlighted that the department he heads has nothing against the defendants or businessmen in the construction and real estate sector, but reiterated that the Municipality embargoed the two works in question because the law requires it.
The indictment says that MartiForte – Imobiliária e a Construção Unipessoal, Lda, and its managers, Alberto JF and José AF, continued the works after, in April and November 2020, they were notified that they were embargoed for not having license or because they are not respecting the approved licensing permit.
The firm was building six single-family homes on Rua do Outeiro in Adaúfe and carrying out works on a corner of Avenida Imaculada Conceição, in Braga.
The embargo, decided by that councilor, forced the suspension of the works, making it impossible for them to continue for a period of nine months, and Alberto JF was personally notified of this and warned that the managers would incur a crime of disobedience. However, the defendants did not respect the order, as was confirmed on June 22 by the inspection services.
Permit issued, but new non-compliance
Then, on September 10, the license or permit for works was issued, but shortly afterwards, the services detected a new non-compliance with the approved permit, which gave rise to a new embargo, which was communicated to the businessman in November.
Despite this, and in January 2021, city inspectors concluded that the work continued “with the introduction of a staircase in the fourth house and the preparation of the first floor slab for concreting”.
During the investigation, the two businessmen argued that at the material time, they were no longer the owners, a thesis that the MP did not accept.
