7 DE NOVEMBRO DE 1984

282-(165)

do Provedor de Justiça e da sua actividade (texto anexo).

Seguiu-se urna troca de impressões sobre vários aspectos do Ombudsman parlamentar da Suécia.

1 — Em face do interesse dos assessores pelo estatuto profissional dos seus colegas suecos, o Chief-Ombudsman esclareceu que os juristas sob as suas ordens eram convidados para prestar funções no serviço, em regime temporário, semelhante à nossa comissão de serviço. O período de exercício de funções oscila entre 4 e 6 anos, sendo a remuneração superior àquela que auferiram noutra actividade por conta de outrem em, pelo menos, 1000 coroas suecas. Esta superioridade retributiva verifica-se igualmente no que respeita aos outros trabalhadores do serviço.

2 — O Ombudsman encarregado das questões militares, Sigvard Holstad, respondeu a diversas perguntas sobre o assunto, salientando que não são aceites reclamações contra militares de patente inferior a sargento e que não há restrições quanto ao objecto das reclamações, que pode até consistir nas condições de realização de exercícios militares, embora os casos mais frequentes se relacionem com a disciplina militar. São feitas inspecções regulares às unidades militares.

3 — A actividade dos Ombudsman relativamente aos pedidos de indemnização de prejuízos causados por entidades públicas foi também objecto de debate. Embora não haja qualquer impossibilidade legal, não se verifica intervenção do serviço, visto os cidadãos se dirigirem directamente ao Ministério Público para tal fim.

4 — Os Ombudsman também não dedicam interesse privilegiado aos casos de corrupção, de resto pouco frequentes. Não existe qualquer departamento especial de investigação destes casos que, como ilícitos criminais que são, estão a cargo das autoridades judiciais e policiais.

5 — O Chief-Ombudsman esclareceu ainda o modo como eram feitas as inspecções, sendo de registar que são usualmente precedidas de alguns dias por visitas de assessores que procedem a um levantamento prévio dos casos comportando possível interesse.

Exposição sobre a competencia do Provador da Justiça

The «Provedor de Justiça» was created in 1975, only a few months after the Council of Europe Parliamentary Assembly has approved a recommendation on that subject.

Later on, based upon the § 24 of the Portuguese Constitution (today's § 23) the Parliament approved the «Provedor de Justiça Act» (Law n.° 81/77, of the 22nd. November).

It seems to have existed during the Middle Ages crown servants charged of receiving and handling complaints from the people against nobleman's abuses. Nevertheless, we don't find a permanent magistrate, like it happened in Spain with the «Justitie Mayor de Aragón», inspired on the arabian «Sahib-el-Maza-lim». Anyway, we must agree that the Portuguese «Provedor de Justiça» was much more affected by the influence of the Swedish and danish ombudsman than by any obscure and equivocal tradition.

The name «Provedor de Justiça» has an easy explanation: «justiça» means obviously justice, «provedor»

means the man who looks after things, who cares for the problems. The verb «prover» has the same latin origin and near the same sense of the english verb «to provide». The «Provedor de Justiça» is supposed to be the man who provides solutions according to the laws and the concept of fairness.

The statute of the «Provedor de Justiça» is the result of a combination of the Scandinavian influence and the Portuguese reality.

Naturally, we have a lot in common and a few

differences.

Like in Sweden, the «Provedor de Justiça» is elected by the Parliament for a term of four years. A majority of two thirds are now required.

The «Provedor de Justiça» cannot modify or annul a decision of an administrative official or body. He has the power of demanding any documents concerning the matters he is investigating (with two exceptions: State security and defense matters and international relations). He cannot criticize the President of the Republic, the Parliament, the Government, the courts for their judgement, and the regional authorities and his investigating powers regarding all these authorities are reduced to the administrative decisions, so excluding legislative and policital action (in spite of this exclusion, the «Provedor de Justiça» may recommend legislative improvements).

All officials are obliged to colaborate with the «Provedor de Justiça», by giving him the information he may need to fulfil his investigation duties and by assisting him on these tasks. Besides the exception already referred, the «secret of justice» is also able to support same refuse of information.

The «Provedor de Justiça» main weapons are the persuasion and the publicity. As a matter of fact, his recommendation and admonitions may be related to the Parliament and published on the newspapers. Their effectiveness depends on a firm action and a strong and independent image.

Complaints may be addressed to the «Provedor de Justiça» by any citizen. No personal interest is required and no time limit is set The control of administrative decisions held by the «Provedor de Justiça» do not prevent other judicial or administrative actions (yet, the members of the Army may only complain to the «Provedor de Justiça» after having appeal to the highest rank of the hierarchy without success).

The «Provedor de Justiça» has his own initiative to start investigations («egen drift»). Most of them are based upon newspapers issues, some on anonymous letters which, like in Sweden, are not admissible as complaints.

The main differences between ombudsman and the «Provedor de Justiça» are a natural consequence of the different historical backgrounds and social environment.

The Portuguese State has no democratic traditions with small intermissions, it always has been an autocratic State, centralized and burocratized. So, the creation of the «Provedor de Justiça», on my opinion, has more to see with the protection against the State power — all the State powers — tham with a balance of powers, within the french tradition. We keep nowadays a very clear «Séparation de pouvoirs» with a strong —perhaps too strong— parliamentary component, and an almost mythical respect for