Filipe Amorim / Lusa
Prime Minister Luís Montenegro
Montenegro assumed in the statements he made to the entity for transparency in 2024 that the family company implied a risk of conflict of interest.
The Prime Minister, Luís Montenegro, recognized with the entity for Transparency (EPT) that the company of his family, Spinumviva, represents a Risk for the exercise of your position. The head of the government assured that it will provide clarification on the case in the parliamentary debate of the censorship motion to the executive presented by the arrival, says.
In 2024, Montenegro submitted Three income statements to EPT, including spinumviva, in accordance with the legislation on the wealth control of political office holders. Although he said he was no longer a partner of the company on June 30, 2022, the prime minister had to declare the firm due to his wife’s participation and the possibility of incompatibilities. Montenegro also revealed that he had received 4800 euros from Spinumviva.
Law No. 52/2019 requires that income statements include activities likely to generate incompatibilities. Article 13 (3) establishes that the holders of political positions shall identify financial interests relevant, including direct or indirect appearances in societies arrested by their own or spouse.
One of the central points of the controversy lies in the sale of most of the Montenegro quota in Spinumviva to his wife in June 2022, a transaction considered null, since the Civil Code prohibits sale of quotas between married spouses in a regime of communion of acquired. Thus, Montenegro remains the majority partner of the company, with a participation of 62.5%.
This situation raises concerns about potential conflict of interest, since Spinumviva has a wide corporate purpose, including purchase and sale of real estate. Recently, the government approved a Change to Soil Lawwhich could benefit the Prime Minister’s family company.
The opposition has already expressed concerns about the transparency of the case and may use the censorship motion debate to require additional clarifications.
