wpu.nu

Sida:Pol-2020-05-14 DA21183-04-M Camarate-air-crash.pdf/117

Från wpu.nu

Den här sidan har inte korrekturlästs


In the exercise of its powers, already after April 25, 1974, CREEFA continued to authorize purchases of military material through expenditure authorization applications directed to its president, namely imports.

Credits granted to finance arms imports were, in termination of contracts, restored at the National Treasury, adding to the available balance the special credit opened through DL 115/74. of 207mar / 74. The replenished funds were deposited in the Treasury of the Public Finance of the 7th Fiscal Quarter of Lisbon, constituted reinforcement of PAE / 73, and were subject to new withdrawals ».

iv) Analysis of the declaration of unconstitutionality of Decree-Law no. 548/80, of 18

November

According to the final audit to the FDMU, the “ non-declaration of unconstitutionality of DL n° 548180 due to a non-binding opinion of the Constitutional Commission and a resolution of the Council of Revolution does not, by itself. raise questions or suspicions that directly relute it to the occurrence of accounting deficiencies reported by the IGF or even a possible deviation from the purpose of allocation of the FDMU!

On this subject, it is important to remember the most relevant facts highlighted by the IGF inspection:

« In summary, the then Prime Minister [Francisco Sá Carneiro) - in what was accompanied by President of the Assembly of the Republic, the request of a group of deputies from the parliamentary - raised the declaration of unconstitutionality of a decree-law of the initiative

97

98

of the Revolution Council that provided for the assets of the FDMU [Decree-Law 548;80 of November 18].

The Prime Minister maintained that the Revolution Council had legislated beyond its legislative competence, invading that of the Government and the Assembly of the Republic within the allocation of financial resources - the FDMU balance - which, being the State's, was not regular military jurisdiction.

Although divided - as can be seen from the various losing votes and different positions on (in) constitutionality of the norins of the urticles of the diploma - the Constitutional Commission came give reason to the Government and to the parliamentary group, but as is clear from the Resolution No. 247/81, the Revolution Council decided in its own favor, not accepting the opinion of the Commission and not declaring the syndicated diploma unconstitutional.

Hence, it can be concluded that one of the critical points of the supervisory system constitutionality enshrined in the first version of the Fundamental Law is that it could occur, as it will be recognized, without effort, thu the Council of the Revolution decide on its own.

Even so, the functioning of the corporate constitutional inspection system, in the case of