WE CAN:Mendonça wins “Political impeachment” againstForchid

Paulo Vilanculo"

The legal offensive led by Hélder Mendonça has transformed an internal dispute into a question of political and institutional legitimacy. Between frozen accounts, internal conflicts, and court decisions, PODEMOS seems to have reached a point where the fight for the political survival of its leadership is no longer resolved solely within party structures.In the case of Albino Forquilha, therefore, impeachment is a constitutional or legal mechanism through which a public authority, usually a president or high-ranking official of a state body, can be formally accused and subjected to a process designed to determine responsibilities that may lead to their removal from office or abandonment of their leadership.Forquilha, who until now sought to preserve control of the party amidst successive conflicts, now finds himself forced to defend not only his management and his continued leadership, but the very survival of the party. The crisis engulfing PODEMOS allows us to ask a question that, until recently, might have seemed improbable: are we witnessing the beginning of the end of Albino Forquilha's leadership and, simultaneously, the re-entry of Hélder Mendonça into the race for party control? If the internal elections go ahead, the real question will be less "who ousted Forquilha?" or "who will be able to convince the members that they deserve to lead the next chapter of PODEMOS?".

The internal crisis within PODEMOS has just entered a new and decisive phase; this time, the main stage is no longer just the internal political arena, but the court. The dispute and disagreements between Hélder Mendonça and Albino Forquilha did not begin with the issue of mandates. Mendonça had already raised doubts about PODEMOS's financial management, questioning discrepancies between the figures presented internally and the amounts that, according to him, actually entered the party's coffers. The financial and administrative crisis also intersected with another legal process involving PODEMOS and the Civic Solidarity Association of Mozambique (SCM). The Maputo City Judicial Court ordered the freezing of the party's bank accounts, in the context of alleged non-compliance with previous decisions related to the management and sharing of resources stipulated in a memorandum signed between the two organizations. The ruling also determined that documents should be sent to the Public Prosecutor's Office for possible criminal proceedings for alleged aggravated disobedience.

Following the judicial freezing of the party's accounts, Albino Forquilha's leadership is once again facing pressure from the courts, this time with a decision that calls into question the continuity of the current party bodies and paves the way for a leadership renewal. In February 2026, Mendonça was suspended during the 11th session of the Central Council. The leadership rejected the accusations and maintained that the disciplinary measures against Mendonça were related to statements considered damaging to the party's image. Mendonça, in turn, considered the suspension illegal and appealed to the Court, legally contesting the permanence of the current structure, arguing that the mandates of the bodies had expired in 2024 and requesting a precautionary measure until elections were held to renew the PODEMOS bodies. The Judicial Court, in the city of Maputo, ruled in favor of Mendonça.

Hélder Mendonça, former secretary-general and one of the historical figures of the political party, achieved an important legal victory against the current leadership headed by Albino Forquilha, jeopardizing the continuity of the party's current bodies. The question is no longer whether Mendonça won the battle against Albino Forquilha. Mendonça may not yet have secured the leadership of PODEMOS. But he achieved something politically relevant: he brought the current bodies to a point where the political power of each leader is no longer sufficient, above the judicial decision. Although this does not guarantee Mendonça's ascension to his suspended position as secretary-general, it creates a concrete possibility that PODEMOS' next battle will be fought at the internal ballot box.

The episode reveals a political irony that is difficult to ignore. The conflict that began within the party structures ended up transforming into a question of the (il)legitimacy of the governing bodies themselves. Forquilha now faces the challenge of transforming a judicial defeat into an opportunity for party reorganization. The biggest question is whether PODEMOS will emerge from this internal war more democratic or whether it will continue to be consumed by a dispute between its own protagonists. Forquilha's position has ceased to be merely political and has become a negligent battle in conflict management and a lack of political maturity to understand that, in a party organization, authority is not sustained solely by remaining in office, but by the legitimacy of the mechanisms that allow one to occupy it.

This gains particular relevance when one recalls that Forquilha appears as a witness in the legal proceedings involving Venâncio Mondlane and the post-election demonstrations of 2024, while in 2024, Forquilha and PODEMOS were politically aligned with Venâncio Mondlane and publicly defended certain positions regarding the protests and the restoration of what they considered to be the popular will. Subsequently, Forquilha became part of the list of witnesses in the case against Mondlane. The question, therefore, is not to anticipate whether his testimony is true or false—that assessment is up to the court—but to what extent the events following the electoral crisis can be considered when evaluating the consistency of Forquilha's positions over time. Thus, the real challenge for Forquilha is to publicly address the contradictions that his recent trajectory may raise, allowing the court to determine the probative value of his statements.

Politics is also the art of building bridges; the successive destruction of bridges can transform former allies into adversaries and small disagreements into major battles. There is a popular expression that says "whoever sows the wind reaps the whirlwind," and the conflict-ridden environment surrounding Forquilha—a reflection of his alleged "betrayal" of other figures or organizations—falls into the metaphor that Forquilha is already enjoying "the bread he himself maliciously kneaded," reflecting the political responsibility of those who manage conflicts through confrontation, transforming former allies into adversaries and internal disputes into legal proceedings. The problem now is no longer just the Forquilha-Mendonça or Forquilha-Mondlane relationship; it is the ability of the PODEMOS leadership to politically survive a crisis that has become institutional. What is at stake now is a battle for the legitimacy of the PODEMOS leadership. 

At the end of these battles, perhaps the greatest lesson from the Forquilha case is that no political mandate is the personal property of its holder. Looking at the succession of events, it becomes inevitable to state that, in the context of political disputes, amidst confrontation, estrangement, and the judicialization of conflicts, politically, "the plan backfired" for Albino Forquilha. The bread he kneaded during the internal wars may now be reaching the table of those who prepared it.

2025/12/3