The usual coins. Opinion by Pedro Marques Lopes

It took the President of the Republic stating the obvious for Carlos Moedas to come out from under the skirts of Montenegro and Marcelo himself and say something about the Elevador da Glória tragedy.

He didn't do so as would have been normal and advisable, that is, at a press conference where he could have been subjected to scrutiny that is always much more profound than a simple interview, no matter how capable the interviewer. This being no mere political act or trivial event, but rather the greatest human tragedy in the city of Lisbon in centuries—with consequences for many sectors of our community life—it would have been more than advisable for Moedas to respond in a much more comprehensive manner.

The Mayor of Lisbon declined to clarify what happened, reassure Lisbon residents about the maintenance of social facilities, or demonstrate strong leadership in this time of uncertainty. He was simply what he has been since his election: a self-proclaimed propagandist and a populist in disguise.

The attempt to invent a hero in the person of the brakeman has nothing to do with the possible heroism of the deceased, it serves only to try to create a martyr that Moedas himself will be responsible for promoting.

The exploitation of a dead person is one of the most despicable things one can do, perhaps surpassed only by attacking people who cannot defend themselves or attributing to them actions whose commission is unknown. I'm referring, of course, to Jorge Coelho, to whom Carlos Moedas attributed actions or omissions whose existence is unknown. I don't even know how to describe this.

I'll assume the emotion he tried to show at the end of the interview was real, but even if it were, it's not what Lisbon residents need right now.

The interview brought a breakthrough to political science. According to Carlos Moedas, political responsibility only exists if the citizen's representative, aka politician, commits an action that can be directly attributed to them. In other words, practically nothing is the responsibility of those we elect. It would take a thousand books to compile examples of aspects of our shared life that are not directly influenced by those we elect, but are their responsibility.

The President of the Republic has a different view: "Anyone who heads a public institution is subject to political judgment for anything untoward that happens within that institution, even through no fault of their own, even without any intervention." "Anyone who holds political office is politically accountable."

In short, that's what Carlos Moedas thought when Fernando Medina was mayor. He changed his mind, but he forgot to mention it.

Let's be clear: having political responsibility does not require someone to resign when something goes wrong (as long as there is no violation of the law, conviction, or similar). This is a personal judgment. Broadly speaking, any incumbent should resign if they believe that their continued employment jeopardizes or affects the credibility of an institution.

The icing on the cake of Moedas's unfortunate performance was his use of the interview to attack his political opponents, accusing them of partisanizing the tragedy. As even his supporters have realized, the mayor has a difficult relationship with the truth. We've seen this when he claims projects that aren't his, when he claims the streets are clean, well-maintained, and well-lit, when he claims he helped the city deal with the phenomena of tourism and new immigration—let's be fair, unicorns have been heavily promoted.

The one who insisted on discussing partisan profiteering was, no less, the prime minister when he appeared to be giving the mayor a pat on the back. Furthermore, by inviting Moedas to the Council of Ministers, he merely politicized the issue: what the hell was the mayor doing there other than politicizing the issue? Was it there that Moedas provided the comfort he claims to have provided to the grieving families? Was any decision made there related to the accident?

Is demanding accountability a political advantage? If calling for someone's resignation is unworthy of the opposition (and the few who did weren't even direct opponents), what about Moedas, who called for Medina's resignation?

Let's forget, out of modesty, the part about calling political opponents murderers.

I'm one of those who think Moedas shouldn't resign because of this tragedy, nor should it be the center of his election campaign—it would be terrible for the city if it were. The disaster his administration has been for Lisbon and the way he has used his position for mere personal advancement should be judged at the ballot box.

The texts in this section reflect the authors' personal opinions. They do not represent VISÃO nor reflect its editorial position.