Lack of strategy and the “favouring” of the Minister of health

Afonso Almeida Brandão"

The recent discrediting of the government of Daniel Chapo, of ministers, secretaries of state and mayors of FRELIMO at the national level, is only a symptom of a deeper structural problem: the absence of a clear and consistent national strategy for the development of Mozambique. A telling example is the case of the Minister of Health, Hilário Ussene Isse, who approved the support of US$2,249,216.00 to the company CLINICARE, where he was an employee before being appointed minister. This act raises serious concerns not only about the suitability of the decision, but also about the criteria used by the government in defining public investment priorities in the health sector.

The report published by Semanário Evidências last week sheds light on this case, bringing to light serious issues of possible conflict of interests and harmful management of state resources. According to the journalistic investigation, the selection of CLINICARE did not comply with the principles of fair competition and transparency, having ignored the instructions of the President of the Republic to avoid excessive spending and practices that could constitute undue favoritism. In addition, the Ministry of Health ignored five other eligible competitors, deliberately favoring CLINICARE, a company owned by ECOMED and with links to the Minister himself, whose involvement is still under investigation. This episode reproduces practices of nepotism and clientelism that have characterized previous FRELIMO governments, showing that the party has not changed its stance on the use of public resources for its own benefit. The episode raises legitimate doubts about the conduct of the Minister of Health, in a context in which ethics and rigor in public management should be uncompromising.

In addition to the ethical and legal issues, this case highlights a systemic failure: the lack of a structured plan such as the Recovery and Resilience Plan (RRP), which could guide government decisions based on clear and measurable goals. The absence of a coherent national strategy has allowed decisions to be made on a case-by-case basis, often guided by personal or corporate interests, to the detriment of the public interest.

This episode leads us to a broader reflection on the role of strategy in the development of countries. In 1994, I had the opportunity to visit Japan, where I learned about the national strategy outlined in 1946 and reformulated in 1956, which prioritized technology and innovation as drivers of progress. This strategic vision was fundamental to Japan's rapid recovery and economic rise in the post-war period.

Inspired by this example, I have tried for years to promote the adoption of a similar approach within the Mozambican government and in various instances in Portugal, including party congresses and SEDES. Through the Portuguese Industrial Association (AIP), with the support of Professor Veiga Simão and Dr. Jaime Lacerda, the Magna Carta da Competitividade was drawn up in 2003, which proposed a vision of development based on the qualification of human capital, scientific and technological production, and efficient access to communication and transport networks.

Unfortunately, in both Portugal and Mozambique, this strategic vision has never been implemented with the necessary rigour. In Portugal, the RRP has been criticised for being a patchwork, with scattered and sometimes contradictory investments. The focus on hydrogen and environmental initiatives without a structural basis raises doubts about the coherence of the plan. Tourism, which is growing naturally, continues to receive support while sectors with greater potential for economic transformation are neglected.

In Mozambique, the scenario is equally bleak. Although the new FRELIMO government took office a few months ago, it has yet to present concrete measures that signal a break with the past or a real commitment to structured development. The practice has been one of timid advances followed by significant setbacks, with no clear direction.

Returning to Portugal, the education system remains in crisis, and rail mobility keeps the country isolated in the European context, despite the support available. Telecommunications have evolved thanks to past initiatives, but other structural sectors remain stagnant. In Mozambique, low wages and job insecurity persist as obstacles to economic and social progress.

In this context, the real strategic question is whether the country should invest in education, science, innovation and export industry, or continue to depend on fragile sectors such as tourism, which generates low-skilled jobs with little sustainability. This strategic choice has been ignored by successive governments, both in Portugal and Mozambique.

In Portugal, the government led by António Costa has opted for a communication and propaganda agenda based on the RRP, but without ensuring critical mass for structural changes. In Mozambique, the government continues to prioritize formal trips and symbolic meetings, without delivering tangible results. As journalist Salomão Moyana pointed out in a recent program on MBC-RT, the Mozambican ruling class seems more interested in following the President on his travels than in governing seriously.

If the media had played their role more assertively, they could have highlighted the disconnect between the funding raised and the lack of an integrated development vision. In both countries, this is a succession of isolated decisions, without the necessary strategic linkage capable of bringing about significant and sustainable changes.

As journalist Helena Matos astutely observed in Lisbon, and as Salomão Moyana reiterated in Maputo, leaders accustomed to a culture of privilege do not understand why acts of favouritism, which are common practice for them, cause public scandal. Similarly, the question arises as to the origin of the assets of the Minister of Health, Hilário Ussene Isse, given his modest background, which reinforces the need for a full clarification and a rigorous investigation.

In short, the underlying problem remains the lack of a clear and shared strategic vision for the future of Mozambique and Portugal. Without such a basis, any development effort will be doomed to dispersion, ineffectiveness and, in the worst case scenario, capture by interests that do not serve the common good.

2025/12/3