António Costa: “Portugal will not fall into the hands of the extreme right”

António Costa (Lisbon, 1961) is running out of his last weeks as Prime Minister of Portugal, after resigning last November. His name appeared in an investigation by the Prosecutor’s Office that has not yet resulted in any accusation. He resigned and legislative elections were called for next March 10. Prime Minister Costa gave an interview to La Vanguardia, in Barcelona, ??and the first question could not be any other:

what he is acussed?

So far nothing. The only communication I have received is a note from the Prosecutor’s Office [Attorney General’s Office] citing a telephone intercept in which two people I don’t know said they could count on me to resolve a problem. Neither of those two people, who I don’t know, have talked to me about that problem.

If you had known in November of last year that after a few months there would be no charges, would you have resigned?

At that moment I had no doubt that I should resign. The first duty of a politician is to defend the institutions. For me it is not conceivable that the leader of a country, the prime minister, could be under official suspicion. Justice has to do his job and I respect it. For the health of democratic institutions, for the trust of citizens in the institutions, the leader of the country cannot be under suspicion. This is my conviction. I’m not trying to give anyone ethics lessons, but it’s the pattern I’ve adopted.

Dissolution of Parliament and early elections. Do you think it was the best decision? I understand that you proposed another formula. [Costa suggested the election of a new prime minister and some information pointed to Mario Centeno, current governor of the Bank of Portugal].

In Portugal, the dissolution of Parliament and the calling of elections is a decision that falls under the responsibility of the President of the Republic. It is public that I proposed another solution, since the Socialist Party had a large parliamentary majority [absolute majority] and was in a position to elect another prime minister. The president had another vision, we are going to elections and the socialists will try to win them.

I understand that after the events that led to his resignation, there have been other controversial episodes in the judicial field. Three politicians from the Madeira archipelago, linked to the PSD (centre-right), were arrested under serious accusations of corruption, which the investigating judge has diluted. You were Minister of Justice for a few years. Is there something that doesn’t work in Portuguese justice?

We have a justice system that is somewhat different from other European countries, with greater independence of the courts and total autonomy of the prosecutor’s office. We have made a large investment in judicial police resources to increase their numbers and technical capacity, and that has accelerated many processes that were slow or stopped. That has created more judicial activity. Justice is a system of checks and balances. I think what is important is that the social communication system and citizens understand the different phases of justice. It is important for a democracy that no one pays above the law. And it is also important for the common citizen to know that the prime minister will be investigated if he is under suspicion. A second important thing is that only the courts have the power to judge and establish a guilty verdict. The truth is that today it is very difficult to make these theoretical principles compatible with practical reality, because public information is governed by times other than those of justice. For this reason, it is very necessary to respect the functioning of justice, so as not to return to the Justice of the Middle Ages in which trials were held in the public square. We must preserve the contribution to civilization that the independence of the courts has brought. There is no need to anticipate sentences. I believe that there is not a problem with the justice system in Portugal, the problem lies in understanding the timing of justice. The initiation of an investigation should not be confused with a conviction. That’s one of the problems. We have to do pedagogy about it. We must never forget the legal principle of presumption of innocence.

I see that you avoid reproaches and that you do not accuse judges of meddling in politics. Will that be your tone during the election campaign?

When this story concludes I will be able to say something, but at this moment I assume that justice is doing what it should. The electoral campaign must be kept away from these issues. We can argue about the politics of justice, but not about justice itself. We can argue about the means of justice, but the system must be respected. I have a very clear conscience and I know what the final decision will be. I know it because I know the reality. But I’m not going to publicly discuss that. When justice wants to talk to me, it knows where I am and can talk to me. I do not speak to justice through the media.

Elections on March 10. Do you think that a clear government solution for Portugal will emerge from these elections?

It’s too early to say. Debates between the candidates are beginning to be held on television. [In Portugal all the candidates of the parties with parliamentary representation face each other in face-to-face debates. There are more than thirty debates of that format]. We come from some very hard and special years. As soon as we got over the covid, we were invaded in our homes by images of Ukraine. Then came the strong impact of an inflation that we had not experienced for thirty years. To curb inflation, the European Central Bank has begun to increase interest rates. Then came the tragic crisis in the Middle East and the blockade of the Red Sea, which could have an impact on inflation. We are facing a large accumulation of situations of social tension, easy territory for populists. The problem is that populists only have easy solutions based on words. And the words are carried away by the wind. I think they also say that in Spain. Easy words are carried away by the wind.

As in other countries, in Portugal the extreme right [the Chega party, a word that means ‘enough’] is also growing. Could Chega end up having the upper hand?

In Portugal we have a party system, today more fragmented than yesterday, with two main forces, one of the center-left, the Socialist Party, and another of the center-right, the Social Democratic Party. It is true that populism has grown, but my conviction is that as we get closer to the elections, that growth will reduce.

Can there be some formula for agreement between the two big parties, PS and PSD, some formula for consensus?

There was once, in 1983, but I don’t think that’s the option. My conviction is that, barring absolutely exceptional circumstances, a grand coalition government, as in Germany, would have the effect of strengthening the extremes.

We could conclude that Prime Minister António Costa believes that Portugal will not end up depending on the vote of the extreme right.

I think that won’t happen.

Next April marks 50 years since the Portuguese revolution of April 25, 1974, a very important moment in European history. Also important for Spain. What is your assessment of the legendary Portuguese April?

Freedom. An extraordinary change in the level of qualifications and education of the people, economic development, social development, the health system, the public school, the independence of the justice system, everything that freedom, democracy and Europe have allowed us be today. And the peace. The end of the colonial wars.

Is there nostalgia for Salazarism in Portugal?

[António de Oliveira Salazar, dictator between 1932 and 1968, who was succeeded by Marcelo Caetano until April 1974].

No, that doesn’t exist. Not even the extreme right expresses that nostalgia. Their themes are different: aggressiveness towards immigration, hatred of gypsies, a fascination with authoritarian discourse, but they do not dare to express nostalgia for the dictatorship.

After April will come the European elections in June and in November, the presidential elections in the United States. International relations are being reformulated. Is Europe risking it?

We are in a very important moment for Europe. The accumulation of problems and dilemmas forces us to deepen European integration. The answer is not less Europe, but more Europe. If people are anxious about globalization, we will not fix it by returning to the illusion of protectionism. We need greater integration and we need a solid social pillar to leave no one behind. Europe is experiencing a geopolitical moment as important as the fall of the Berlin Wall. This means that in the coming years we have to go to an expanded Europe, surely with the Western Balkans and a peaceful Ukraine. This means institutional and budgetary changes, for this expansion to be successful, as was the integration of Spain and Portugal, as was the entry of the Baltic countries and the countries of central Europe. This means that in the next European elections, the Christian Democrats (now more liberal-conservative), the Liberals, the Social Democrats and the Greens must remain the central camp of European politics. That central field must continue to be the driving force.

We have seen the European People’s Party looking to its right. Is there the possibility of a change of axis that marginalizes the social democrats?

I think the biggest challenge that populism presents is not whether it can win. It is the ability that populism has to condition its neighbors on the democratic right. I am optimistic about it. When I see the new Prime Minister of Poland, Donald Tusk, a member of the EPP, taking on and winning against the Polish ultra-conservative right, I feel optimistic. I hope that your other EPP colleagues understand that this is the way: to fight them instead of assuming their agenda.

Russia, Putin’s Russia, eliminates its opponents as in the times of the tsar and Stalin. It advances in Ukraine and begins to threaten Estonia. Donald Trump says that if he is president again he will ignore Europe if he does not spend more on defense. Speeches in favor of greater spending on weapons and ammunition are already proliferating. Do you see it possible to introduce the demand for greater military spending into the European democratic consensus?

All of us are now concerned with the risk of the return of Putin’s candidate for the presidency of the United States. That would be tragic for the world. But that shows that we must have a strong Europe. And that implies that Europe is also strong in its defense policy. I think we are moving forward. We have to produce more European war material and buy more European war material. It doesn’t mean spending more buying from others. It means industrial investment. Technological investment. Employment. This approach can generate consensus. I believe that we are going to a new founding framework of the European Union like the one that the Economic Community for Coal and Steel meant in the sixties.

To conclude, do you maintain your willingness to play a role in European politics in the near future?

My life doesn’t depend only on me. We are not going to speculate now about the future. The most important thing is that a clear majority of support for the European project emerges in June. We are facing very big challenges.