The Union of Prosecutor’s Offices (UMMP) on Friday considered that the prosecutor general of the republic “can and should report” to parliament about the general activities of the deputy, but “not talk about the facts of specific cases.”
Luse’s position was expressed by the President of the SMMP, Paulo Lona, who understands that the Attorney General of the Republic, Lucilia Gago, “can and should report to the Assembly of the Republic (AR) on the general activities of the deputy, on difficulties, insufficient resources or slowness”, and not on the facts of specific processes, as, for example, the “Influencer” case or the Madeira case.
If the PGR were to be summoned to parliament to discuss specific cases, it would be a “violation of the separation of powers,” warned Paulo Lona, noting that the way some parliamentary groups defended Lucília Gago’s move to the AP suggested that it would be mainly an investigation influential figures involving former Prime Minister António Costa.
According to the SMMP president, there is a “very delicate balance” in calling and subordinating the IRT to give explanations in parliament, especially since MPs may be tempted to ask questions about “specific facts” under investigation.
In this regard, Paulo Lona understands that it does not make sense for the PGR to go to parliament and then “not be able to talk about the concrete facts” of the media processes that appear to the deputies.
However, the President of the SMMP admitted that he has long believed that the Prosecutor General’s Office “must improve communication”, even in order to “show that there is not only a negative side”, but also many areas of positive intervention in this judicial system that has gained autonomy and independence from April 25.
The need for the prosecutor’s office to improve its communication was in fact one of the mottos of Paulo Lona’s speech at the last SMMP congress, and Lusa added today that the profile of the next PGR, who will succeed Lucilia Gago in October, will have to change. be a person who has the ability to communicate.
However, BE, PCP, Livre and PAN today defended the PGR hearings in Parliament into the MP’s actions, insisting on the need for explanations – a hypothesis that Chega found inadequate.
These positions were adopted after the President of the Parliament, José Pedro Aguiar-Branco, considered today in an interview with Antena 1 that Lucília Gago should give explanations to the AP about the processes that caused the political crises.
We are talking about the investigations carried out by the deputy, for example, which led to the fall of the previous chief executive led by António Costa, and the government of Madeira led by Miguel Albuquerque, which led to early elections in both cases.
Chegi President Andre Ventura said he heard “with some surprise and concern” the words of the speaker of parliament, believing that the deputy is obliged to give explanations and can communicate “more effectively”, but without coming to the AR.
Fabian Figueiredo (BE) felt that Lucília Gago owed the country an explanation and praised Aguiar-Branco for joining this call, emphasizing that “in 50 years of democracy we have never seen such an episode.”
The PKP said that it was waiting until Lucilia Gago could give an explanation in parliament regarding the actions of the deputy, and clarified that the communists would not make any requests, but would not make them impossible to implement.
As for Livre, MP Jorge Pinto insisted that the PGR owes an explanation “to the MPs, but above all to the country,” and said his party would propose discussing the topic at a leadership conference to better understand “the scale of this problem.” call”.