“Slow” and “eastern”? Costa says Marcelo’s words were a “compliment” | Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa

The former prime minister, António Costa, returned this Friday the criticism directed at him by the President of the Republic, Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa, during a dinner with foreign journalists, saying that he was “slow because he is oriental”: “How You know, I’m an optimist and, therefore, I always see the good side. I interpreted those words as a compliment, a considered way of being in life and exercising political life”.

Speaking to CNN Portugal, the former secretary general of the PS said that Marcelo’s statements may have been “a certain self-criticism for not having this eastern rib and, often, there being less consideration on the part of the President”.

“Prime ministers have one function, the President of the Republic has others. Being from the same political family necessarily generates tensions, being different political families, also necessarily generates points of divergence, which is absolutely normal and has never hurt our personal relationships” , he considered, adding that he was not offended.

“No, no, no [fiquei ofendido]. I have a relationship with professor Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa. Almost 40 years ago he was my teacher and, when we each had our own private activities, we collaborated professionally. Afterwards, we always had cordial relations both outside of functions and in the performance of functions. It was never a surprise to us that there were disagreements between us, because that is part of life,” he said.

“I do not intend to comment.” It was in this way that António Costa, former prime minister, refused to comment on justice issues and the manifesto signed by 50 personalities from different sectors in defense of a “civic upheaval” that puts an end to the “worrying inertia” of political agents regarding reform of Justice.

Costa: Public Ministry must go to Parliament to provide information

In the same CNN statements, António Costa also said that “it doesn’t make sense” for the discussion on the Influencer case to take place in the Assembly of the Republic. “I would make a distinction. First, about the activity of the Public Prosecutor’s Office, which has to provide information. I believe, in fact, I insist, that the law already provides for an annual report that is presented to the Assembly of the Republic and the Assembly of the Republic It’s up to you to decide how you appreciate it.

Secondly, regarding specific processes that are ongoing, I think that the proper place for assessment is in the courts and it is in the courts that they should be assessed and not in a political entity. I think this is what the Constitution states. I think this is a very clear principle about the separation and interdependence of powers, which means that no power is totally independent, they are all interdependent on each other, the way in which this interdependence is exercised necessarily varies without sacrificing that value of independence.

As far as I believe, there are several forms that political power has, the Assembly of the Republic has in relation to the definition of criminal policy, right from the moment of definition, because they approve the criminal investigation priority law – it is the Assembly that approves it. Secondly, as far as I believe, but I may be wrong, the law provides that the Public Prosecutor’s Office annually presents a report on its activity to the Assembly of the Republic. Whether the Assembly of the Republic discusses it in depth or in depth, listening to the Attorney General or not listening to the Attorney General, that is a matter within the competence of the Assembly of the Republic.”