1

DRAFT RESOLUTION NO. 206 /X

AMENDMENT TO THE RULES OF THE ASSEMBLY OF THE REPUBLIC,

(RESOLUTION NO. 4/93, WITH THE AMENDMENTS INTRODUCED BY THE

RESOLUTIONS NO. 15/96, 3/99, 75/99 AND 2/03)

Justification note

It was established that by the end of the month of April all parliamentary groups

would present the proposals they considered to be discussing with a view to further improvement

of parliamentary work and of the functioning of the Assembly of the Republic.

This draft resolution connates the proposals of the Parliamentary Group " The

Greens " which imply amendment to the Regiment of the Assembly of the Republic. " The

Greens " present still, in the overall package, other proposals, formulated in another

draft resolution and others of simple recommendation to Parliament.

As to those that imply amendment to the regiment, here substantiated, we make

followed by a summary accompanied by a justification of the proposal:

Monthly debate with the Prime Minister

'The Greens' propose that these monthly debates will take a form that

allow you to assume your true purpose, that is, that the 1º Minister is confronted

with the issues of the different parliamentary groups.

Thus, it would make much more sense that there would be no initial intervention from the

Prime Minister, usually dedicated to a specific theme, to which the different

parliamentary groups end up having to devote a portion of their time of intervention.

It would make more sense for the debate to start soon for the first round of issues of the

parliamentary groups, with the answers one to one of the Prime Minister, followed by

replica and rejoinder.

2

'The Greens' then propose that the monthly debate keeps the current moulds, with the

three rounds, withdrawing from it only the initial intervention of the Prime Minister and

consequently also a topic of debate.

Interpellation to the Government

In an interpellation to the Government, it has logic for the interpellant party to start the session,

explaining the purpose of the same and framing the topic of discussion, and that the Government

talk next.

What has no logic is that it is not the interpellant party to shut down the session by withdrawing,

thus, the conclusions due from the initiative it took. In effect, currently the

regiment gives the final say to the Government.

The experience has shown already, in some interpelations, that some members of the

Government announces some measures in the closing sessions of the interpelations, in

time to do so in the interpellation debate period, thus staying the groups

parliamentarians, and specifically the interpellant, with no opportunity to speak out

on the "novelties" that the member of the Government leaves for the end.

The proposal of the Greens is that in the closing session continue to have the floor

Government and the interpellant party, but instead of being the Government to shut down should be the

interpellant party to take the last word in the "his" initiative.

Response to requirements

When an MP makes an application it is because he considers that the information to be obtained

is important for the exercise of your mandate and for the realization of your work

parliamentarian.

The requirements are the only way for an MP to be able to drive quickly by

written to a member of the Government, seeking to get a written answer.

Some responses to applications arrive illuminating and in good time, others

they take so long that when they arrive they no longer have useful effect for the deputy, others

3

nor do they come to be provided. In effect, it varies greatly from government to government and, within

of these, from ministry to ministry.

'The Greens' then propose that a uniform regime should be found that will guarantee that a

of the powers conferred on Members by the Constitution of the Portuguese Republic not

is outlawed by the lack of response from the Government, or other entities

required.

We thus propose that the scheme currently envisaged in the regiment (of which the entity

required to respond with the urgency that the answer justifies, which is too much

subjective), be replaced, by enshrining a 45-day deadline for response to

requirements. In the event that the required entity understands that it has no conditions for

reply within the time limit, it informs of the extension of that time limit (which cannot

exceed another 45 days) and has to justify that act, i.e., point out the reason that leads it

a not to be able to respond within the appropriate time.

We propose that you want the applications, you want the answers, you want the justification of

adjournment of response are published in the Journal of the Assembly of the Republic.

Duty of information of the Government

'The Greens' propose that when the Government submits to Parliament a proposal

of law, should provide MPs with all possible information that allows them to

know of the sustainment of the presentation of that proposal.

Thus, it should be understood that in the formal requirement for the submission of the proposals for law,

which translates into the explanation and justification of the proposal, whether to integrate the presentation

of studies, opinions or other documents that support the advanced initiative.

Places in the plenary

In the plenary, it is often the need for a parliamentary group to have a need for

point out in a speedy manner at the table of the Assembly of the Republic an any record,

or to the support services to the plenum, or even to the direction of the other groups

parliamentarians. Also the right to the aparties is instituted in the context of the debates

parliamentarians.

4

Everything makes itself difficult and sometimes becomes even impractical if the parliamentary groups

do not have a seat in the front row of the Chamber, where the directions of the

groups.

Thus, for a matter of visibility, necessary for the exercise of the work

parliamentarian in plenary, it is important to stipule the principle that all the

parliamentary groups are entitled to take place in the front row of the Chamber and that

right do not stay at the discretion of the good or bad political will of the parliamentary majorities.

Session of the April 25

The plenary meeting that takes place in Parliament every year to mark the 25 of

April 1974, must have regimental consecration, by the importance it has, by the

particular characteristic that it has as to the presence of guests, among which the

President of the Republic who also in it takes the floor, and for being the only one who during

the year takes place on a holiday day.

Thus, "The Greens" propose that in the Regiment to sign up for this plenary meeting

special, with the allocation of the word to all parliamentary groups, for no time

greater than 10, followed by interventions dThe President of the Assembly of the

Republic and, at the invitation of this, dO President of the Republic.

Reports of the petitions

It is very common that a petition, after admitt and of having been named your

reporter, be subjected to one or more interim reports, which often postpones your

ready condition of climbing the plenum.

Thus, "The Greens" propose to establish a time limit, not extended 60 days

for the conclusion of the final report of the petition, without prejudice to the reporting

intercalares, which should be done taking into account the one that is the deadline for the

completion of the final report.

This way will accelerate one of the determinant requirements for the petitions they meet

conditions for climbing the plenum, can be scheduled in a more speedy manner.

5

Reports of the committees

It is often the case that the reports of draft laws contain an appreciation

express policy on the content of the same.

Being certain that the reports are not voted on, but only the conclusions and the opinions,

if these are politically innocuous and objective in their content, as usually

are, are, are approved, "attaching", however, in the publication in Journal the report that

has not been the subject of a vote, but that it is there, and sometimes with content of appreciation

policy.

It does not seem right to us that the vote is incited only on the conclusions and the opinion

which constitute the end of a global document, of which the report is the first part.

'The Greens' then propose that the report should also be the subject of a vote.

...................................................................................................

These are the proposals that the Parliamentary Group "The Greens" presents in the following

draft resolution, which aims to make changes to the Assembly Regiment of the

Republic (Resolution nº4/93, with the amendments made by the resolutions nº15/96,

3/99, 75/99 and 2/03), by changing articles 35º, 66º, 67º to 138º, 239º to 243º, 245º, 246º and 250º

and proposing a new article (81º-A):

Article 35º

(Report, conclusions and opinion)

1-(...)

2-(...)

3-(...)

4-(...)

5-(...)

6-The conclusions and the opinion are formulated in articulation.

7-The report, the findings and the opinion are subject to voting in committee and, always

which required by a Parliamentary Group, are voted on separately.

6

8-The report and the respective findings and appear to be voted on, are published in the Journal

of the Assembly of the Republic.

9-(previous # 8)

Article 66º

(Days of meetings)

1-(...)

2-(...)

3-(...)

4-(...)

5-On the April 25 of each year, a plenary meeting is held, evocative of the

revolution of 1974.

Article 67º

(Place in the meeting room)

1-(...)

2-In the absence of agreement, the Assembly deliberates, respecting the principle that all the

Parliamentary Groups are entitled to have a seat in the front row of the Chamber.

3-(...)

Article 81º-A

(evocative session of the April 25)

1-At the evocative plenary meeting of the April 25, 1974 revolution take the floor

all Parliamentary Groups, for no longer than 10 and by order

growing of its representativeness, following the President of the Assembly of the

Republic and, at the invitation of this, The President of the Republic.

2-A Assembly of the Republic invites a set of entities and personalities to

attend the plenary meeting provided for in the preceding paragraph.

7

Article 138º

(Formal requirements of the projects and proposals for law)

1-(...)

2-(...)

a) (...)

b) (...)

c) (...)

d) the set of studies, opinions and other documents underpinning the

presentation of the proposed law.

Article 239º

(Debate with the Prime Minister)

1-(...)

2-The debate consists of questions addressed to the Prime Minister by the groups

parliamentarians, developed in three laps.

3-(...)

4-(...)

5-(...)

Article 243º

(Debate)

1-(...)

2-(...)

3-(...)

4-The debate ends with the interventions of a member of the Government and of a

Deputy of the interpellant parliamentary group, which closes it down.

Article 245º

(Requirements)

1-(...)

8

2-A The requested entity shall respond within 45 days from the date of

receipt of the application.

3-If the required entity understands that it has no conditions to comply in good time

the previous number, shall, within that time limit, indicate the enlargement of the same by

time determined, which may not exceed twice the time limit set in the number

previous, justifying the reason for the need for this enlargement.

Article 246º

(Publication)

The requirements, answers and justification of extending the deadline for response,

provided for in the previous article) are published in the Journal.

Article 250º

(Examination by the committee)

1-(...)

2-A The Commission should appreciate the petitions and realize the arrangements that it judges

suitable, culminating in that process, without prejudice to reporting

intercalares that request clarifications to competent entities, in the elaboration of

a definitive report, completed within 60 days, from the date of admission of the

petition.

3-(...)

Palace of S. Bento, April 30, 2007

The Deputies

Heloísa Apollonian Francisco Madeira Lopes