Brussels has highlighted several shortcomings in Portugal’s much publicised ‘fight against corruption’ and cites the situation where just four magistrates have to analyse around 4,000 asset declarations each, submitted by politicians.
The European Commission has asked that Portugal applies "more effort and resources" to root out corruption but the State seems happy with the status quo, where it can point to high profile cases while allowing lower grade corruption to continue as it always has.
The prevention of corruption in Portugal, "continues to be problematic due to the lack of a coordinated strategy and the fragmentation of competences," states the European Commission which wants to see rather more effort that currently being displayed
As for the pile of asset declaration from politicians, Brussels points out that "there are between 15,000 and 16,000 political office holders, so each investigator has a caseload of around 4,000 each."
"The capacity of the Public Prosecutor's Office is extremely limited and constitutes an obstacle to effective, timely and regular verification of assets," the Commission said in its worthy report, released this week.
Later in the document, Brussels points out that the asset checking operation is a service that “does not cross-check information entered by respondents with other official databases, such as population records and business records, or with bank account information," hence is close to useless.
Brussels also is critical that cases are dealt with in chronological order, with no system to priorities cases that look fishy, and that this causes delays in bringing corrupt politicians to book.
In the same report, Brussels recommends the strengthening of local prosecution offices which would benefit from "better resources" for combating corruption.
The report is likely to be read with disinterest by Lisbon and filed in a bottom drawer.
Comments
I think you have answered your own question, the news papers are free to write what they want, the Government doesn't appear to intervene.
And even today HAMILTON writes about censirship in one of the other topics as well...
I can see good comments from Boris and Williams whether I agree with them or not. However Hamilton is the same old broken record that keeps writing comments that in today's world can be considered hate speech. Apparently anyone that slanders and defames another in Portugal can be convicted in a court of law. So be careful Hamilton!
As for this "feudal" legislation, I ask how many lives have been destroyed by false accusations? Defamation and libel might not land you in jail in other countries but it certainly destroy lives and has the same effect in silencing whistle-blowers.
I hope it will help us for the next topics to come.
Marta Andersen worked for the OECD and was let go from her job there too.
When Ms Andersen worked for the EU commission she did not uncover fraud, she highlighted areas of the EU finances that could be open to fraud. She later refused to sign off on her work and was sacked from her position.
Ms Andersen later got involved in politics and with none other than U.K.I.P, yes mr Farages party, she must have got fed up with them and joined the Conservative party and failed in both parties to be elected.
Please read wikipedia for details.
For most EU countries, defamation and libel no longer constitute a crime, unlike in Portugal. By virtue of the legislation, but also of the Portuguese judges' interpretation, the Portuguese justice system weighs more on the side of the protection of honour than on the side of freedom of expression, which has led to convictions in the European Court of Justice"
https://rr.sapo.pt/noticia/86470/portugal-esta-longe-da-europa-ao-criminalizar-a-injuria-e-a-difamacao
Ask Marta Andreasen, the Commission's Chief Accountant, who was sacked for whistleblowing on EU fraud.
Then ponder why the EU's accounts have failed audit for 23 consecutive years.