The Iniciativa Liberal (IL) political party has expressed disappointment over the Justice Ombudsman, Maria Lúcia Amaral’s, restrictive interpretation of the law, which prevented the Constitutional Court from making a decision on the demarcation of parishes. IL’s position is based on the belief in the rule of law and the statement followed a legislative action by the parliament on March 6, which approved the disaggregation of parishes. This decision was made just over two months before the national elections scheduled for May 18.
In IL’s view, this parliamentary move constitutes a direct violation of the Legal Regime for the Creation, Modification, and Extinction of Parishes, which prohibits the creation of parishes during the six months preceding any national election. The Justice Ombudsman, however, concluded that the prohibition is only applicable to elections involving local government bodies. IL strongly opposes this narrow viewpoint, emphasizing the law’s use of the broader term ‘any national elections’ in Article 15, which, according to them, should not be overlooked or minimized.
IL argues that while the law delineates a general prohibition regime and a specific one for by-elections, there is no restriction that confines the six-month rule solely to local electoral events.
Historically, as IL points out, a previous version of the current law, dating from 1982, already established this prohibition of administrative reorganizations prior to ‘any elections for sovereign bodies, regional assembly, or local governments’.
IL believes that the absence of detailed enumeration in the current law indicates an intent to simplify rather than restrict. They further argue that the six-month restriction on parish reformation prior to elections aims to ensure electoral system stability and predictability, given that parishes are responsible for managing voter registration and election logistics.
Changing them pre-election, the party argues, could jeopardize the fairness and transparency of the electoral process.
IL’s parliamentary leader, Mariana Leitão, reaffirms that the disaggregation of parishes poses a significant disadvantage to the nation. She also highlights the IL’s electoral program, which suggests that all parliamentary groups should be able to request the Constitutional Court’s assessment of the constitutionality or legality of norms.
She states, “Respect for the Constitution should not depend on third-party interpretation or parliamentary arithmetic but rather on the competent court, to which only a few have access.”
Maria Lúcia Amaral decided against forwarding IL’s request, which sought to declare the disaggregation of parishes illegal, to the Constitutional Court. Her rationale was based on the interpretation that Article 15 of the Legal Regime applies solely to elections of local government bodies.
This approval of parish disaggregation passed in parliament on January 17, with only IL voting against it and was reconfirmed by the Assembly of the Republic on March 6, over objections from IL and Chega.
