Constitutional Council dismisses 95 percent of electoral disputes

Maputo, 1 Nov (AIM) – The Constitutional Council, Mozambique’s highest body in matters of constitutional and electoral law, has dismissed around 95 percent of the electoral disputes and offences filed with the district courts by opposition parties in the context of the presidential, parliamentary and provincial elections held on 9 October.

According to Pedro Nhatitima, the spokesperson for the Supreme Court, speaking to reporters, on Thursday in Maputo, only five per cent of the cases were judged and sentenced, and the case file was sent to the Constitutional Council for due observation and assessment.

“Most of the cases were unsuccessful for various reasons, including the lack of prior challenge, and the failure to attach evidence due to lack of knowledge of the procedures by the political parties involved”, he said.

“Prior challenge” refers to the principle that an appellant must raise the alleged irregularity at the earliest possible moment.

Nhatitima explained that in many of the appeals lodged with the courts, the appellants limited themselves to making generalized allegations without attaching the necessary evidence, and, even in cases where the courts have taken steps, it was not possible to confirm the allegations made by the appellants.

The party with the highest number of appeals is the Optimistic Party for the Development of Mozambique (Podemos), which backs the independent presidential candidate Venancio Mondlane.

“Podemos submitted a total of 70 appeals to the district courts. Renamo submitted 51 appeals and the Mozambique Democratic Movement (MDM) submitted 15 appeals. There were contestants who asked for the elections to be cancelled or repeated due to irregularities considered serious in polling stations, but their appeals were not upheld given that this is the competence of the Constitutional Council and not the district courts”, said Nhatitima.

Of the few appeals that were upheld, the courts mostly proved that there was a discrepancy between the number of voters and the number of ballot papers in the ballot box, the refusal of the local branches of the Electoral Administration Technical Secetariat (STAE) to receive complaints, the delivery of extra ballot papers to voters (which is a form of ballot box stuffing), and the failure to call party representatives to attend the intermediate (i.e. district or city) tabulation of votes.

All of these are crimes, and the case papers should be forwarded, not to the Constitutional Council, but to the Public Prosecutor’s Office.
(AIM)
Ad/pf (403)