PSD in Lisbon Considers Legal Action Against Local Housing Referendum: What You Need to Know

PSD Criticizes Referendum Process

The PSD (Social Democratic Party) in the Lisbon Municipal Assembly has expressed strong criticism regarding the ongoing referendum process concerning local housing in the city. The party highlighted a significant issue: the lack of validation of the required 5,000 signatures necessary to proceed.

Legal Action Under Consideration

Luis Newton, the leader of the PSD group in the Municipal Assembly, stated, "We are currently assessing a legal precautionary measure regarding this procedure. The aim is to ensure that the administrative validation of the process is restored to its rightful order."

Concerns Over Submission to the Constitutional Court

Newton lamented the announcement made by the Lisbon Municipal Assembly (AML) regarding the submission of the referendum process to the Constitutional Court for preventive oversight of its constitutionality and legality. He noted that a correction was made to the initial statement, removing the signature of the PSD’s first secretary, Ana Mateus.

The Referendum Initiative

The referendum is promoted by the Movement for Housing Referendum (MRH), which seeks to ask voters two crucial questions:

1. Do you agree to amend the Municipal Regulation on Local Housing to mandate the cancellation of registered local accommodations in residential properties within 180 days?
2. Do you agree to prohibit local accommodations in properties designated for residential use?

Controversial Voting Outcomes

The conversion of this popular initiative into a local referendum was a decision made just a week ago, with the vote supported by PS, BE, PEV, PAN, Livre, and two deputies from Cidadãos por Lisboa, while PSD, CDS-PP, IL, PPM, Aliança, Chega, and an independent deputy opposed it. The PSD subsequently requested the annulment of the referendum approval due to confirmation from the Ministry of Internal Administration that only 4,863 valid signatures were collected from an initial 6,528 submitted.

Urgency for Proper Validation

Newton emphasized that the process can only be legally initiated after the court validates the signatures. He expressed concern over the hasty procedures taken before the necessary validations were completed, citing a series of discrepancies in the signature counts. He highlighted that the recently submitted 600 signatures are still pending validation, similar to the earlier submissions, and emphasized that such actions cannot proceed without proper legal validation.