Maputo, 3 Apr (AIM) – The Quelimane City Law Court, in the central Mozambican province of Zambezia, on Wednesday acquitted the Mayor of Quelimane, Manuel de Araujo, in a case of defamation, brought against the mayor by the chairperson of the Quelimane District Elections Commission (CDE), Zacarias Muheia.
Muheia had accused Araujo of libeling him on Mozambican social media in the aftermath of the municipal elections held on 11 October last year.
The CDE declared that Araujo, the mayoral candidate of the main opposition party, Renamo, had lost, and that the ruling Frelimo Party had won. This was part of what the opposition described as “a mega- fraud”, in which the National Elections Commission (CNE) declared that Frelimo had won in 64 of the 65 municipalities.
Thanks to parallel vote counts by opposition parties and by civil society organisations, it was soon established that Renamo had won in several major cities, including Quelimane.
The Constitutional Council, the country’s highest body in matters of constitutional and electoral law, restored some justice to the result, and declared Renamo and Araujo the winners in Quelimane.
The libelous message which Araujo had supposedly published on social media was a mock “Wanted” poster bearing a photograph of Zacarias Muheia and the words “District Director of STAE wanted alive or….”
This could have been interpreted as a death threat, and Muheia demanded that Araujo pay him damages of 250,000 meticais (about 4,000 US dollars at the current exchange rate).
But there was no evidence that Araujo had anything to do with the mock poster. Indeed, when it appeared, he was not even in Quelimane.
The judge, Cripelho Candido, found it proven that Araujo (and his co-accused Baptista Maquina) had not written or published the message, and did not even know Muheia. He therefore regarded the accusation as unproven and acquitted Araujo and Maquina.
Araujo was not in court to hear his innocence proclaimed, but the Renamo Quelimane district delegate, Latifo Xarifo, said that justice had been done.
“We were expecting this”, he told the independent television station STV, because there was nothing incriminating the two accused. “The court only decides with proof, and here it was shown that there was no proof, so we are happy with the judge’s ruling”.
(AIM)
Pf/ (382)