On Tuesday, the SDP justified its refusal to submit a draft opinion on Chega’s censorship to the Speaker of Parliament by saying that it does not want to contribute to any “folklore” and parties remember that “there are rules.”
During the discussion in the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, Rights, Freedoms and Guarantees, a request was submitted by the SDP parliamentary group with a request to provide a reason for preparing an opinion on Chega’s resolution aimed at condemning the behavior of the Chairman of the Assembly of the Republic. (PAR), Augusto Santos Silva (MP, elected by PS).
“All the elements that were sent to me have been confirmed, the PSD has decided not to participate in any way in these disputes between PS PAR and Chega,” justified the Social Democrat MP Paula Cardoso, who was in charge of drafting the opinion on the case.
According to the deputy, chairman of the parliament, in the manner in which he requested the opinion of the first commission on the initiative of Cheg, “it is clear and recognized that this is not about some kind of regimental or constitutional issue, in which he has no doubts about the application, but this ethical and political question.
“If this is an ethical-political issue, then it is not for us to give opinions on this folklore between the PAR and Chega,” the deputy said, adding that the SDP parliamentary group is not available “neither today nor in the future for participation.” in this type of question.
The deputy argued that the decision under consideration on the acceptability of the Chega project “could have been taken, it could have been taken in a different way” and that “trying to hide without making a decision for actions that repeatedly violate the Regulations and the Constitution is a reprehensible practice on both sides, and The SDP does not agree with this practice.”
PS, Iniciativa Liberal, Chega, PAN and Livre (BE and PCP were not present) criticized the decision of the Social Democrats, emphasizing several times that there are rules for assigning opinions to parliamentary groups according to a grid created for this purpose. .
Despite the fact that the parties asked the PSD to change their position, the request was not granted, and since no MP can be forced to prepare an opinion, the distribution grid entrusted the drafting of the document to the only PAN MP, Ines Souza Real, already after the Liberal Initiative, she refused to “do the work that the SDP should do.”
According to news provided by TSF this afternoon, the application filed by PSD was intended to commission the development of the PS’s opinion.
During the debate, the socialist Pedro Delgado Alves defended that “in the practice of the commission it is not customary to vote on who is the rapporteur” and emphasized that “there are rules for the distribution of legislative initiatives that follow a certain sequence.”
The deputy also said that, as a rule, deputies give an excuse if they have a “direct interest in the case”, and indicated that none of these arguments were made by the PSD.
“Of course, if all deputies, deputies and acting ones, say that they are politically unavailable for reasons of conscience (…) a deputy has the right to refuse to give an opinion, not a single deputy can be forced to do so now, the conclusion here is this: so what the deputy group is next on the list,” he argued, emphasizing that due to a possible conflict of interest, neither P.S. nor Chega could do this.
As for Chega, parliament leader Pedro Pinto said the party just wanted the opinion to be made, but recalled that the SDP accepted the drafting of the opinion in July, before the parliamentary recess.
The same argument was used by Liberal Initiative MP Patricia Gilvaz, who added that it was “a distribution rule that must be followed and must be carried out.”
PAN’s Inés Souza Real was surprised by the rejection, recalling that the SDP “is the largest opposition party”.
“Opinions can have their complexity even when we are here to unravel what could be ethical, political, or even formal and regimental grounds, but despite wanting to get into the ethical or political realm, it seems to us that this is what there is. for being here,” he said.
Livre’s Rui Tavares stressed that the refusal “carries a political message” and said that all deputies are elected to comment on issues, even if they are “more or less politically serious”, adding that regardless of their origin, , is an “important and topical” issue affecting the “prestige” of the Assembly of the Republic.
At the end of July, Santos Silva turned to the 1st Commission with a request to give an opinion “on the constitutional and regimental conformity” of the draft resolution of Chega, “precisely for the purpose of its acceptability” and justified this decision “in connection with the doubts expressed by the services of the Assembly, but also from – for the very deep and very complex doubts “raised” at the ethical-political level, not in connection with this particular draft resolution, but in connection with the precedent that it could set.”
Author: Lusa
Source: CM Jornal
