Os secretários de estado da democracia portuguesa: perfis sociopolíticos e carreiras governativas

Dissertação apresentada para cumprimento dos requisitos necessários à obtenção do grau de Mestre em Ciência Política e Relações Internacionais

The Portuguese Administrative Elite, 1851-1910

The aim of this article is to examine the composition and patterns of recruitment of the ministries’directors-general, as well as to assess the interconnections between bureaucracy and politics, from the beginnings of Regeneração (1851) until the breakdown of Monarchy (1910). The post of director-general was considered one of “political trust”, that might be filled by individuals from outside the civil service, and the selection and de-selection of officeholders depended exclusively on the ministers’ will. Nonetheless, most directors-general were experienced bureaucrats, boasting a steady career as civil servants, and remained in office for long terms, regardless of ministerial discontinuities. In other words, High Administration became relatively immune to party-driven politics. Due to their professional background and lengthy tenure, directors-general were usually highly skilled specialists, combining technical expertise and practical knowledge of the wheels of state bureaucracy. Hence, they were often influential actors in policy-making, playing an active (and sometimes decisive) part behind the scenes, in both designing and implementing government policies. As regards their social profile, directors-general formed a cohesive and homogeneous elite group: being predominantly drawn from urban middle class milieus, highly educated, and appointed to office in their forties.

O regime penal das imunidades dos titulares dos órgãos políticos de soberania

Portugal is one of the countries that has a constitutional regime of immunity. This protects certain individuals in political positions from prosecution under the law. These individuals are said to have a privileged status when compared to ordinary citizens. The purpose of this study is to examine the immunities enjoyed by President, the members of Parliament and the government ministers. The regime of immunities can be found to generate a certain sense of injustice and feelings of mistrust since the individual can not, albeit temporarily, be held criminally responsible for criminal conduct. It is urgent, therefore, to find a consistent justification with the principles and values of the Criminal Law. The Parliament is the place of the exercise of democratic power and, therefore, a member of Parliament assumes a central position in parliamentary activity. For this reason, it will be necessary to determine analysis to determine the meaning the prerogative of criminal irresponsibility. One question that must be asked is to know how the dogmatic plan that the immunities of the political organs of sovereignty must be seen.