Judicial Controversy Unfolds: Lisbon Court Alleges Corruption in Madeira Case

Overview of the Case

The criminal instruction judge, Jorge Bernardes de Melo, has faced significant criticism from the Public Ministry (MP) for allegedly placing too much weight on the statements of the defendants over the evidence supporting claims of criminal activity. However, the Lisbon Court of Appeal countered this view, indicating that the judge did not solely rely on the defendants' testimonies but also considered witness statements to justify his decisions regarding coercive measures.

Allegations of Corruption

One of the key issues raised was the sponsorship of Custódio Correia towards the activities of the former president of the Funchal City Council during a rally, which the MP deemed suspicious. Nevertheless, the court noted that at the time of the judicial interrogation, the three defendants were not strongly indicated for the alleged scheme involving Pedro Calado and Custódio Correia.

Role of the Judge

The court emphasized the importance of the judge's role in the inquiry phase according to national criminal procedure, stating that it does not require an uncritical validation of the MP's claims. The judge must adhere to the law and the Constitution, avoiding vague or generic assertions from the MP.

Findings of the Court

The Lisbon Court of Appeal concluded that the evidence available did not support the imposition of coercive measures beyond what was previously established. The court recognized various suspect practices among individuals in public and private sectors, indicating potential involvement in passive corruption, misuse of power, and other financial crimes. However, it only recognized the risk of flight as a significant danger among the concerns raised by the MP.

Conclusion

The court's decision reflects a complex landscape of judicial scrutiny, highlighting the balance between prosecutorial claims and judicial evidence evaluation in cases of alleged corruption.