Mozambican Justice: Indictment of VM7, Criminalization of Democracy and Canonization of a Martyr

Paulo Vilanculo"

Democratic law is the fundamental foundation of any rule of law that asserts itself as pluralistic and participatory. It guarantees citizens not only the right to vote and be voted for, but also freedom of expression, political association, peaceful protest, and, above all, the right to dissent and propose alternatives to the established power. At its core, democratic law means the possibility of active participation in the nation's political life, without fear of retaliation, persecution, or censorship. Given this, a crucial question must be raised: what is the role of the Mozambican justice system in this process? When the courts become complicit in political persecution, they cease to be guardians of the Constitution and become instruments of its violation. What kind of judges would accept participation in political schemes disguised as legality, jeopardizing society's trust in the impartiality of justice and undermining the foundations of the democratic state in Mozambique? The Mozambican justice system faces a historic test: either it must be seen as an instrument for guaranteeing citizens' rights and freedoms or it will be used as a tool for eliminating political dissent. In a country that proclaims itself democratic, where the Constitution guarantees political pluralism and the right to dissent, the recent political and judicial landscape in Mozambique appears to be moving in the opposite direction. Despite the formal separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution, practice reveals a subordinate, intimidated, or co-opted justice system. When magistrates, prosecutors, and judges engage in self-censorship, act under political guidance, or hesitate to hold the powerful accountable, the absence of true judicial independence is confirmed, which is tantamount to saying that democracy is in danger. The latest events involving the main opposition leader, Venâncio Mondlane, are a worrying reflection of a growing trend: the use of the judiciary as an instrument of political repression, the silencing of dissenting voices, and the criminalization of the democratic exercise of citizenship. When the judicial system becomes a repressive arm of the ruling party, guarantees of impartial justice disappear, and this erodes trust in institutions, the rule of law, and the civil and political rights of citizens. This type of strategy is almost new in Mozambique's political history. Authoritarian-leaning governments often use state institutions—the police, courts, and prosecutors' offices—to maintain absolute control of the political arena. The difference, however, is that today this occurs under a legalistic veneer that seeks, in a disguised manner, to legitimize actions that violate the rule of law. These criminalizations constitute a direct attack on the pillars of Mozambique's democratic regime and, in practice, function as a mechanism to block the return of the political pluralism achieved after the end of the one-party system. When this right is threatened or criminalized, the very concept of democracy collapses, and the state risks degenerating into an authoritarian system disguised as legality. Mondlane has been the target of accusations alleging crimes against the state and Mozambican society. What we see behind the scenes, more than substantial evidence or solid legal grounds, is a clear attempt to tarnish its public image, weaken its presence in the national political debate, and prevent the consolidation of a real alternative to the current power. The Mondlane case, in this sense, represents more than an attack on an individual; it is a symbolic attack on the very idea of democratic alternation and the people's right to freely choose their representatives. Therefore, this is not just the persecution of individuals, but a gradual process of hollowing out democracy in Mozambique, where political pluralism is tolerated only in words but combated in practice. By judicially persecuting democratically elected opponents, such as Venâncio Mondlane, without a solid legal basis and with evidently political motivations, the Mozambican state undermines the essential principles of democracy: alternation in power; respect for the popular will expressed at the ballot box; and the existence of a legitimate and free opposition. The accusations against Mondlane, far from appearing to be legitimate concerns for national security, sound like a warning to anyone who dares to challenge power, even within the framework of democratic legality. Defending the right to dissent, to criticize, and to express difference is the essence of any functioning democracy. Criminalizing Mondlane today is, in practice, criminalizing the right of every Mozambican citizen to dissent, organize politically, and fight for an alternative. The Public Prosecutor's Office should have the primary function of defending democratic legality, monitoring compliance with the law, and representing the State in court. Their primary mission is to maintain justice, peace, harmony, and impartiality. They should act with complete independence, even from political power, ensuring that laws are applied without discrimination or persecution. They are responsible for investigating and holding accountable acts, combating abuse of power, abuse of authority, and other practices that compromise good governance, protecting citizens' fundamental rights, preventing the use of the justice system to repress political opponents or restrict civil liberties. On the other hand, they should promote social cohesion by acting fairly and transparently, helping to restore trust in public institutions and the justice system, contributing to social and political stability. The mission of the Public Prosecutor and the Ombudsman are crucial pillars in maintaining justice, peace, and political and social harmony in a state governed by the rule of law like Mozambique. Both the Public Prosecutor and the Ombudsman should be impartial and courageous actors in defending legality, equity, and citizens' rights. By intervening in cases of injustice, arbitrariness, or violations of rights, the Ombudsman contributes directly to peace and social stability. The silence, omission, or submission of these agents in the face of political persecution, corruption, or injustice constitutes a betrayal of their constitutional mandate and seriously compromises peace, public trust, and political harmony in Mozambique. When the justice system turns a blind eye to political persecution, ignores violations of fundamental rights, and acts solely to protect the interests of the current government, it becomes an active accomplice to an authoritarian project. This complicity is not only silent, but operational: cases are opened against opponents based on flimsy arguments, while crimes of corruption and misgovernance within the ruling party remain untouched. The justice system should be the citizen's last refuge against arbitrariness. When this refuge is tainted by political selectivity, public trust in institutions is undermined and space is created for civil disobedience, social resentment, and even the collapse of the democratic order. Justice loses its sacred character of balance and becomes an instrument of political warfare. The Mozambican justice system, instead of being a guardian of peace and democracy, is being used as a weapon of political elimination., which constitutes a serious violation of constitutional foundations. Civil society, academics, the press, and grassroots movements cannot remain silent. Although Mozambique formally claims to be a multi-party state, such actions reveal a veiled attempt to reestablish a single-party system in practice, where only one political force has real space to govern, make decisions, and hold power, while the others are neutralized, ridiculed, or criminalized.

2025/12/3