Left wants explanations from the prosecutor in AR. Enough talks about a “very dangerous path” | Attorney General’s Office

The President of the Assembly of the Republic (AR) defended this Friday that the Attorney General of the Republic must explain, in Parliament, processes that resulted in political crises and left-wing parties agree with José Pedro Aguiar-Branco on the need for Lucília Stuttering to give explanations, lacking consensus on a position at a conference of leaders on how it can be heard. In contrast, Chega criticizes Aguiar-Branco for interfering in justice.

The President of Parliament considers that when we are faced with “political facts” created by criminal investigations it is necessary to give explanations, in an allusion to processes such as the Operation Influencer or the Madeira corruption investigation.

A position that, in fact, had already been assumed by his predecessor Augusto Santos Silva when he was still the second figure in the State hierarchy. Ferro Rodrigues, former president of the AR, had already demanded explanations from the attorney general.

In statements in Parliament and broadcast by RTP3, the parliamentary leader of the Bloco de Esquerda Fabian Figueiredo recalled that “BE had demanded clarifications from the attorney general from the first moment”. “We have seen the development of Operation Influencer and its weaknesses”, which generates “growing concern”, he points out.

The Blocist deputy criticizes Lucília Gago’s “evasive statement” which “led to the resignation of the Government and the dissolution of the AR” to “salute the president of the AR for joining this appeal of which the BE has been part since the beginning, which asks the Attorney General of the Republic to be clear, transparent and available to give satisfactory explanations, especially regarding the Operation Influencer”.

Thus, Fabian Figueiredo appeals to Lucília Gago to “take good note” of Aguiar-Branco’s request “and be available to, once and for all, come to the AR to provide all clarifications on these cases”.

The blocker hopes that “it will not be necessary to take other initiatives for the prosecutor” to go to Parliament, namely to the first committee, where “other prosecutors have already” given explanations in the past. This is the case, for example, of Souto Moura regarding the case Casa Pia.

“We want to believe that the attorney general understands the signs” and “takes the appeal seriously”, continued the deputy, warning that if Lucília Gago “insists on not clarifying”, the BE “will look for a wider field to ensure that the attorney comes to AR”.

In the same vein, Jorge Pinto, deputy of Livre, argues that “explanations are necessary not only for deputies, but above all for the Portuguese”, although he emphasizes that, regarding Aguiar-Branco’s statements, it is first necessary to “better understand the scope” of this call to Parliament.

“We will propose in an assembly of leaders that this can be discussed” to “understand the scope” of Gago’s call to Parliament “and then have a final opinion on the validity” of this intention, given that “the question is how, where and when”. In other words, Livre wants to “better understand what PAR intends with this call”.

Even though Livre does not want to “make this a common practice”, Jorge Pinto argues that the “climate of suspicion is already created, it is already a reality” and therefore agrees with the president of AR.

PCP does not make hearing impossible

Communist deputy António Filipe began by saying that the PCP awaits “that there may be some initiative” to listen to Lucília Gago, whether by “her own initiative or on the initiative of some parliamentary group”, and then highlight three points that must be safeguarded and ” be clear.”

“The attorney general is not politically responsible to the AR. The autonomy of the Public Prosecutor’s Office (MP) is a basic principle of the democratic rule of law” that “must be respected” and, thirdly, the prosecutor “cannot and should not provide clarifications on specific processes”.

“Having said that, we understand that there is some perplexity in public opinion regarding the functioning of the MP and regarding the way the MP communicates. It may be useful for there to be some clarification on this matter, not so much for the AR, but for the country through the AR” , said António Filipe, adding that the communists will not stop any initiative to listen to the prosecutor as long as the principles listed above are respected. “In this sense, we will not take any initiative of our own, but we will not make any proposal in this sense unfeasible.”

The PAN’s leader and sole deputy also agrees that “it could make perfect sense” to listen to Lucília Gago in Parliament and is “available” to, at a conference of parliamentary leaders, “follow up on the solution” that may be found. What is certain is that, for Inês Sousa Real, hearing the prosecutor in Parliament “in no way undermines the separation of powers”.

André Ventura has a different opinion, for whom Aguiar-Branco’s will represents “a very dangerous path” and constitutes a “clear violation of the separation of powers”.

“Absolute recklessness”

Also in statements made in Parliament, the president of Chega states that “what is worrying about these statements is that the president of the AR, in a clear violation of the separation of powers, says that when judicial processes create political facts, the attorney general must come to the Parliament to provide clarifications.”

The “imprudence of these words is absolute”, assesses André Ventura, considering that such a position “gives the idea to the justice system that when you mess with the wrong people, they are called to attention in Parliament”.

Noting that he has “never” seen “so much pressure to resolve a case”, the populist leader argues that “we have to understand that justice has its time”, otherwise “the message we are sending is that politicians protect themselves to others”.

“The greatest injustice we can do to the country is to have one justice for politicians and another for others (…). It seems to me to be one of the biggest interferences ever in the judiciary”, insisted André Ventura, guaranteeing: “If anyone wants to make a clarification to the country, we are 100% in agreement”.

In other words, Chega agrees that if the prosecutor or someone on behalf of the Attorney General’s Office understands that explanations are due, his party agrees that they be provided. .

After having preferred on several occasions not to take a position on the need, or not, for the prosecutor to provide clarifications on processes such as Influencer or the case in Madeira, to later evolve and culminate in the conviction that Lucília Gago should give explanations, socialist general secretary Pedro Nuno Santos meanwhile defended that justice should, once and for all, listen to former prime minister António Costa .