Most of the parties this Thursday rejected Chega’s proposal that the Constitutional Court could check the legality of the decisions of the President of the Assembly of the Republic (PAR), considering it “undermining power.”
At today’s meeting of a possible constitutional review commission, the required two-thirds consensus (implying agreement between the PS and the SDP) on almost none of the proposals was registered, but it was this Chega proposal that sparked further discussion, with IL and PAN, to raise doubts as to whether whether the powers of the PAR should be subject to appeal to a higher authority.
Chega intended to introduce into the Constitution a new competence of the Constitutional Court (CC): “Check the legality of the actions of the Chairman of the Assembly of the Republic at the request of any parliamentary group declaring non-observance of his constitutional rights.”
“We consider it necessary to strengthen the oversight of the work of the PAR, which has the right to almost a “provisional visa” for the entry of initiatives,” MP Bruno Nunez justified.
From the PS, MP Isabel Moreira emphasized that the TC “does not have the exclusive right to defend the Constitution”, considering that “the assembly of the Republic is obliged to avoid even discussing clearly unconstitutional proposals.”
“That would be a complete perversion of TK,” he thought.
Paulo Mota Pinto, an PSD MP and former TC judge, went even further and even felt that the proposal would “undermine the principle of separation of powers”.
“I understand that Chega often wants to deal with numbers, she has the right to protest, but the desire to change the Constitution by legalizing the internal practice of the Assembly goes too far,” he criticized.
At the meeting, where BE and Livre were absent, PKP deputy Alma Rivera also categorically rejected the proposal.
For the IL, MP João Cotrim Figueiredo, despite not following this proposal, stressed that the PAR has “the widest powers and belongs to the party with the majority”, asking what remedies exist for a political force that feels “Obviously offended.”
In contrast, PAN’s only MP, Inés Sousa Real, argued that Chega’s proposal should be even wider, granting this right to all political forces, pointing to a recent example of what she considered injustice.
“We have two political forces that were excluded from participating in the TAP parliamentary commission of inquiry, who can PAN and Livre turn to? majority”. .
At the end of the discussion, Bruno Nunez said that he believed Chega would one day preside over the Assembly of the Republic, warning that topics such as abortion and euthanasia would not be discussed at that time because the party considered them unconstitutional.
“Today they are in the chair, tomorrow it will be us,” he said.
Along the way, another proposal by Chega will appear, providing for a reduction from ten to eight in the number of TC judges elected by the Assembly of the Republic, and an increase in the number of co-opted ones, a proposal that was unanimously rejected by the parties.
Also, without an agreement between the PS and the PSD, the IL proposal to create a Supreme Council of the Judiciary (which will bring together the three current councils) will not be included in a possible constitutional review, despite the fact that the parties have recognized the need for increased scrutiny in these bodies.
“It’s hard for me to understand how a council with a majority of magistrates tests itself,” Cotrim lamented.
Only one BE proposal for discussion by the Supreme Judicial Council and its argument in favor of respecting the rule of publicity deserved universal sympathy.
Author: Portuguese
Source: CM Jornal
I’m Sandra Hansen, a news website Author and Reporter for 24 News Reporters. I have over 7 years of experience in the journalism field, with an extensive background in politics and political science. My passion is to tell stories that are important to people around the globe and to engage readers with compelling content.