The President of the Assembly of the Republic will request the Constitutional Court (TC) information on the Transparency Entity that the parliamentary group of IL had requested directly from the TC and that it raised “nuisance” and “bewilderment” in that body.
Augusto Santos Silva also asked the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, Rights, Freedoms and Guarantees for an opinion on how to proceed in situations in which theDeputies wish to request information from public entities in addition to the Government and services dependent on it, since what exists is already 45 years old.
These decisions are contained in the summary of last week’s leadership conference meeting, released today. The parliamentary leaders discussed the letter sent by the president of the TC, João Caupers, to the president of the Assembly of the Republic (PAR), Augusto Santos Silva, in which the judge expressed “perplexity” at having received a request from the Liberal Party. Initiative (IL) related to the Transparency Entity.
For João Caupers, this IL initiative consisted of a “direct questioning of a parliamentary group to the Constitutional Court, outside the relationship requirements between sovereign bodies????????
On this point, “it was agreed” at the conference of leaders that the PAR would respond to the letter from the president of the Constitutional Court “requesting the information requested by the IL deputies and would also ask Commission 1 for a new opinion.” , can be read in the abstract.
When “inconvenience caused by the application”Augusto Santos Silva” said that the provision of the requested information was not at stake, but whether it made sense for the Assembly of the Republic to act before the Constitutional Court or another sovereign body as it did with the Government or with the public. administration in general.
“And he argued that they should not be treated in the same way, despite the fact that several requests had already been made to the Court of Auditors, which had responded to them. In order to respect the sovereign bodies, it seemed more appropriate to me that any request for information be communicated to the PAR and transmitted by the PAR, in this case, to the Constitutional Court”, he said.
Regarding the legal issue, the President of the Assembly of the Republic recalled the opinion of the Commission of Regulations and Mandates, of 1977, whose rapporteur was Vital Moreira, since it is at stake “to know if the power of the deputies to request and obtain information of the bodies of any public entity includes the remaining sovereign bodies, in addition to the Government”.
“This opinion recognizes that the main difficulty lies in the interpretation of the expression any public entity provided for in subparagraph e) of article 156 of the Constitution, concluding that, with possible exceptions, deputies may not request information from other sovereign bodies, in addition to the Government and services dependent on it”, can be read in the summary.
In the opinion of Santos Silva, “45 years after the ruling was issued, it is justified to ask the Committee on Constitutional Affairs, Rights, Freedoms and Guarantees for a new ruling on the interpretation of said formulation.”
On November 9, when this letter became known, the leader of the IL parliamentary group, Rodrigo Saraiva, mentioned, in a note sent to Lusa, that he received “with great bewildermentthe response of the TC and considered that, “although the discomfort of the TC judges with the healthy democratic scrutiny carried out by the deputies is notorious, the unavailability of sending such simple, but so necessary documents to the Assembly of the Republic.”
In his presentation, João Caupers had mentioned that the plenary support division reported that, “according to the Regulations of the Assembly of the Republic, The response time to requests is 30 days.????????
“Your Excellency will understand the perplexity caused, in the first place, by what, in the present circumstances, is offered as a direct interpellation from a parliamentary group to the Constitutional Court, unrelated to the requirements of the relationship between sovereign bodies. Secondly, due to the content of what is required -including the information that is public-, which is reminiscent of a control by the mayor, which is also considered inadequate, “said the judge, showing himself”sure that this incident was due to an oversight????????
In the request, the liberals requested the “real and expected” execution map of the amount allocated in the State Budget this year for the Transparency Entity and also the budget map “with allocation breakdown by allocation items” for the same organization next year. .
Source: Observadora
