Imbroglio simply Vasco da Gama and Maracanã consortium in one other half. Councilors Alexandre Isquierdo (União Brasil-RJ) and Tarcísio Motta (PSOL-RJ) joined final Friday (24) with a consultant in the House of Commons (MP-RJ) in opposition to the choice to publish the switch of Cruzmaltino to the Gym, subsequent to the third, to the stadium.
Politicians just like the arguments that got here from the “Heart-to-Heart Consent Conference for the Use of Public Products”, signed by the State authorities, which gave the chance to management Maracanã by means of the council, which is managed by Flamengo (file) and Fluminense (permission) celebration).
Essentially, Isquierdo and Motta spotlight 2 sentences of paragraph 5, in their merchandise “b”, merchandise X, which states: “Licensing should be used in equal situations by different skilled soccer groups”. And additionally they quote paragraph 1: “In relation to the Maracanã Stadium, Permissionaire will handle the operation and upkeep of the property, in order to host the most important variety of first-class soccer matches on the stadium throughout the Permission Period.”
Yet in the doc, the councilors opposed the council’s argument for the upkeep of the garden, the place they indicated that the game would happen with a minimal of 24 hours, the day earlier than Fluminense would take the Corinthians to the stadium. leisure. for collection A.
To counter this justification, Isquierdo and Motta launched a collection of matches in the Maracanã, from 2021, the place consecutive matches had been held with at the very least 24 hours of interval.
The commissioners felt that there was a breach of the stadium’s allow guidelines and that there was no room for “unique therapy”.
“Therefore, in view of the truth that it is a allow to train the general public good, the pursuits of all should be overcome, and that due strategy of legislation, there isn’t a room for any inconsistency with the provisions of the Convention, for cures. discrimination or for violation of the statutory ideas of excessive standing of public curiosity and negligence with the aim of personal curiosity or satisfaction celebration contests.says another to illustration.
Alexandre Isquierdo and Tarcísio Motta conclude by asking for the World Ministry “Take acceptable authorized motion to examine reported irregularities”. They additionally connect strict permission guidelines for use, letters and visitors on the topic.
It is value noting that the committees are working in opposition to the political enviornment in the nation, however they’re gathered in favor of the theme.
Information of the Government and Vasco’s Action in Justice
At the identical time, imbroglio additionally lives on two fronts: on the aspect of the State Government, the City Council knowledgeable Flamengo and Fluminense requesting a evaluation of the veto of the Vasco game below the opportunity of imposing sanctions on golf equipment, which he cites the penalties supplied. given in sentence 19 of the Law of Attraction of the Civil Servants of the Maracanã department. They vary from fines to even revocation of the license.
Vasco, then again, filed a lawsuit in the 51st District Court in opposition to the licensed Flamengo, claiming that the game in opposition to the Games came about in the Maracanã “below the identical buying and selling situations provided on the Fluminense Games in 2022 ”.
The gardener additionally demanded compensation for damages in the non-compliance case and identified that Rubro-Negro was violating the phrases of use.