Tiago Petinga / LUSA
Superior Council of Administrative and Fiscal Courts disagrees on central points. Opinion is not binding.
The Government wants to speed up the fact that they are in Portugal in an irregular situation.
But the Superior Council of Administrative and Fiscal Courts (CSTAF) does not agree with the proposal.
In the vote, and after a strong discussion, as described by , the 11 members rejected the changes proposed by the Government gave a negative opinion.
It was a rejection by unanimously. Even Helder Pombo, judge proposed by Chega, voted against this opinion.
CSTAF claims that there are three standards in the bill that can be contrary to European law.
The first has to do with the resource of a expulsion decreed by AIMA – Agency for Migration and Asylum Integration; the Government wants that, even if the immigrant appeals the expulsion, he is expelled before there is a definitive decision.
Judges also fear an “increase in the number of precautionary proceedings filed before administrative courts, with a view to obtaining the suspension of the effectiveness of such decisions”. “The courts would be buried in actions to prevent immediate expulsions”, indicates a judicial source.
CSTAF also does not agree that the minimum age for expulsion becomes 16 years old. “It is not in line with the concept of minor that has been accepted in European legal instruments”.
The 11 members also do not agree with the end of the mandatory “founded suspicion” of “attacking national security or public order” to expel an immigrant.
Even with this lead, the law can advance: CSTAF’s opinion is not binding. The Legislative Assembly does not need a positive opinion to approve the changes.
