Supreme Court Tosses Costa Wiretaps; President Rebelo Seeks Stronger Safeguards

A faint sigh of relief travelled across Lisbon’s political circles this week, yet it was paired with a stern warning: the method that placed the name of a sitting prime-minister inside an explosive corruption file must never be repeated. That was the essence of President Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa’s reaction after the Supreme Court discarded wiretaps involving António Costa in the so-called Operation Influencer. The head of state insisted the misstep should serve as a lasting “lesson” for Portuguese institutions — a reminder that legal safeguards, personal reputation and democratic stability are inseparable.

Questions Multiply After Wiretap Misfire

The Supreme Court’s decision to nullify unapproved recordings thrust the issue of procedural rigor, prosecutorial discretion, judicial oversight, digital surveillance, data retention, constitutional limits, accountability and public trust to the forefront. Commentators on morning radio phone-ins drew parallels with Spain’s Pegasus scandal, while constitutional scholars noted that the Portuguese Constitution grants especially strong protection to communications involving holders of sovereign offices. Yet, despite those protections, excerpts of the discarded wiretaps leaked to the press, fueling days of speculation about Costa’s future before investigators admitted they lacked grounds to keep him under suspicion.

How We Got Here: Operation Influencer Briefly Revisited

Operation Influencer began as a multi-jurisdictional probe into concessions for lithium mining, green hydrogen, data-center licences, lobbying contracts, overseas shell companies and possible influence-peddling. Five people, including a personal aide to Costa, were detained on 7 November. Within hours, television tickers announced that the prime minister himself was under investigation — a claim now walked back. The Public Prosecutor’s Office later clarified that Costa’s name surfaced only because it was uttered in intercepted phone calls. Those specific calls were never green-lit by the Supreme Court, which is the sole body allowed to authorise covert measures targeting members of government. By law, any material gathered without such approval is inadmissible.

What the President Said — And Why It Matters

Standing before reporters outside the Belém Palace, Rebelo de Sousa stressed that the episode underscores how fragile citizen confidence, judicial credibility, constitutional compliance, media responsibility, parliamentary serenity, investment climate and Portugal’s international image can be when legal shortcuts occur. He added that the constitution’s framers were explicit: extraordinary surveillance powers require extraordinary justification. Anything less, he warned, leaves the presumption of innocence, separation of powers and rule of law exposed.

Judicial Oversight Under the Microscope

Legal observers pointed out that Portugal’s wiretap approval system already involves multiple filters: a prosecutor must justify the request, an investigating judge must sign it, and the Supreme Court must confirm validity when high-ranking officials are involved. In practice, however, pressures of fast-moving probes can lead to shortcuts, especially in cases touching on energy megaprojects, EU recovery funds, cross-border partnerships, lobbying networks, encrypted messaging platforms and cloud-based evidence storage. The Council of Magistrates opened an internal review to determine why lower-court judges forwarded material to the case file before Supreme Court authorisation. Depending on the outcome, disciplinary proceedings could follow.

Political Reverberations From São Bento to Rua da Junqueira

Inside Parliament, opposition parties seized on the saga to demand clearer boundaries between prosecutors and politicians. The centre-right PSD argued that the episode verifies the need for a new judicial framework, parliamentary oversight committee, whistle-blower protections, digital evidentiary standards and time limits on investigations. The Left Bloc, meanwhile, accused corporate interests of using the justice system to derail environmental reforms. For the governing Socialists, the ordeal delivered twin headaches: Costa’s resignation on 8 November and a leadership contest now scheduled for late January. Pollsters say voters are watching whether the party can present a candidate untarnished by the lithium, hydrogen and real-estate controversies.

Lessons Portuguese Citizens Demand

For many voters, the affair crystallised enduring concerns that Portugal oscillates between under-enforcement and overreach. Transparency watchdogs warn that sloppy surveillance invites appeals that can drag on for years, allowing well-connected defendants to run out the clock. Conversely, non-validated wiretaps that reach the press can shred reputations long before any trial. Civil-society groups are therefore pressing for a balanced solution that protects both effective corruption-fighting, privacy rights, journalistic freedom, data security, judicial efficiency and democratic legitimacy.

What Happens Next

The Supreme Court’s ruling obliges prosecutors to rebuild large portions of their case without the tainted audio. Analysts say the file still contains bank records, email exchanges and testimony that could sustain charges against the original five detainees, but the timeline inevitably lengthens. Meanwhile, Parliament is expected to fast-track amendments to the Code of Criminal Procedure clarifying the chain of custody for digital evidence and the threshold for public disclosure. Whether those changes will reassure investors eyeing Portugal’s €18 B hydrogen corridor or citizens weary of scandals remains to be seen. For now, the President’s words echo: the oversight system faltered once; it must not falter again.