[ad_1]
During this process, did you ever think of quitting?
The only day this question could be asked would have been March 30, but do you think it would have made sense for me, coordinator of the state of emergency response, to abandon the fight? My commitment to human rights is the same as always. I spoke about this issue three times in the Assembly of the Republic. On April 8, May 5 and June 16, with much less impact than the audience on Tuesday. I spoke three times in the Assembly of the Republic on this subject. One on the initiative of the deputies, two on my initiative. My commitment was the one I announced on March 30: total commitment in relation to something that is very serious, which is the denial of what the role of Portugal is, of the SEF, which was highlighted on June 10 by Cardinal Tolentino de Mendonça along the way. extraordinarily regularized migrants in the context of a pandemic. We were the only country that did it with this dimension. There are more than 200 thousand foreign citizens who have benefited from access to health, social security, a bank account, from this decision taken at the initiative of the SEF. And my other commitment was to encourage the IGAI to go so far – and more than the initial investigation of the Public Ministry – in investigating the truth, in what is the responsibility of the Government, with the full responsibility of whoever comes. take on specific responsibilities.
The President of the Republic admitted that this SEF may not work and that other protagonists may be necessary for the necessary reforms. Did you feel leaning against the wall?
I totally agree. That is what the government program says. The commitment is very clear: separation of the SEF from the police dimension at airports, at land or sea borders, from administrative functions, issues of granting residence permits.
Weren’t you affected by the statements of the President of the Republic on Thursday the 10th?
I am not a commentator, of course. But what is at stake are the reforms that, as the President of the Republic rightly says, are the exclusive responsibility of the Government.
And is the President of the Republic aware of the macro restructuring plans that are being prepared?
There is a rudeness that I will never do, which is to reveal my conversations with the Prime Minister or the President of the Republic. I think both of you have already talked enough about this matter.
Did you consider impolite what the National Director of the PSP did in the Palace of Belém to reveal the outlines of the reform in progress?
First, it did not reveal any contours. As he clarified himself, he expressed his opinion. What happened is something that obviously cannot be repeated. And that was understood. I called the national director the next day. And in person we clarified what had to be clarified. It is worth what it is worth. Chief Superintendent Magina da Silva has demonstrated remarkable operational ability throughout her life and is therefore now the national director of PSP. Naturally, he lacks political experience. I know from experience that there are risks for which I must be better prepared than the national director.
Do you have confidence in the national director of the PSP?
The question about the national director of the PSP is clarified. The PSP must speak externally about what its powers are, operational issues in which the Government does not intervene and respects the operational autonomy of the police.
It was a mistake that the national director of the PSP pronounced like this but he will continue in office. It’s solved?
I make valuation errors, as we just said. But I think I never made the mistake of speaking after a conversation with the President of the Republic.
