Despite the request for a hearing, the PSD refutes any pressure in the request, stating that “the Minister of Education, Science and Innovation never pressured the Rector to admit those candidates irregularly, nor suggested any solution that violated the existing legal framework.”
The request follows a report that the Rector of the University of Porto claimed to have received pressures from various “influential people,” without naming them, to allow the entry of 30 candidates into the Faculty of Medicine who had not obtained the minimum grade in the required test for a special access course for graduates from other fields.
In the request submitted today to the Assembly of the Republic, the PSD Parliamentary Group calls for the “urgent hearing” of the Minister of Education, Science and Innovation, Fernando Alexandre, and the Rector of the University of Porto, identified also as a “member of the strategic council of the Socialist Party,” António Sousa Pereira. The PSD also requests the hearing of the Director of the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Porto, Altamiro da Costa-Pereira.
The aim is to “provide clarifications about the process of the Special Competition for Access to Medicine by Graduates at the University of Porto for the academic year 2025/2026.”
The report indicated that the matter reached the Minister of Education, who contacted the Rector to express the possibility of creating extraordinary places so that these students, who hadn’t achieved the minimum grade in the required test for the special competition for graduates from other areas, could join the Faculty of Medicine.
“Thus, the accusation of the Rector of the University of Porto is false,” conclude the social-democratic deputies Pedro Alves, Inês Barroso, and Ana Gabriela Cabilhas in the request submitted today to the parliamentary committee on Education and Science.
The PSD Parliamentary Group considers “the alleged facts and the accusations made by the Rector of the University of Porto to be extremely serious.”
“The Rector claims that someone informed the students they had been admitted, but whoever did so lacked the authority, with the Rector stating that he only became aware of it ‘several days later, on July 7,’ supposedly 17 days after the students had been informed they had been accepted. Subsequently, the Rector claims to have received ‘pressure’ from ‘influential people, who have access to power’ to approve the said list,” the social-democrats state.
According to the PSD, the minister “promptly clarified the situation,” stating that “he became aware of the situation through communication from excluded candidates and a written suggestion from the Director of the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Porto for the creation of 30 supernumerary places.”
“After an attempted contact by the Rector of the University of Porto, the Minister of Education, Science and Innovation returned the call, and this situation was discussed. During the phone call, readiness was expressed for the creation of 30 supernumerary places, provided there was a legal basis, which the Rector agreed upon,” notes the social-democratic document.
Furthermore, continues the PSD in the request, “with the aim of assessing the legal basis for the creation of these supernumerary places, an opinion was requested by the Ministry of Education, Science and Innovation from the Inspectorate-General of Education and Science (IGEC), considering that the disclosure of the list of admitted candidates created a legitimate expectation among those 30 candidates.”
“During the phone call, it was also suggested by the Minister of Education, Science and Innovation to the Rector to initiate an internal process to determine the party responsible for the publication of the list of admitted students without the Rector’s approval, with appropriate consequences,” the PSD further states, adding that “in its opinion, the IGEC concluded the legal inadmissibility of creating supernumerary places, due to the absence of a legal basis for such a solution, as well as the risk of violating principles of legality, equality, and legal security, noting that as a result of a submission by a group of candidates to this competition, an ombudsman process was opened at the IGEC, which is ongoing.”
