Africa-Press – Mozambique. Notwithstanding the review carried out in 2019, the ‘hidden debts’ case will be conducted on the basis of the Criminal Procedure Code of 1929, by decision of the judge in the case, Efigénio Baptista.
The judge presiding the trial of case 18/2019-C, known as the ‘hidden debts’ case, argues that the stages of denunciation, investigation and indictment were regulated by the Criminal Procedure Code of 1929.
The new Criminal Procedure Code was approved in December 2019
Among several changes, the new Criminal Procedure Code changes the designation of defendants (réus) and declarants (declarantes) to “arguidos” and “testemunhas” (defendants and witnesses).
Furthermore, terms of preventive detention are extended in the new code, which would have justified the maintenance of the defendants detained in this process for an even longer period of time.
However, during the discussion of preliminary issues on the first day of the trial, the defence, notably Alexandre Chivale, who represents four of the 19 defendants in the case, requested that the constituents be treated as “arguidos”, as provided for in the 2019 Code of Criminal Procedure, and that the deponents be treated as witnesses.
A foreshadowing of the answer was already coming from the representative of the Public Prosecutor, Ana Sheila Marrengule.
“Once the form of the process to be followed is defined, these issues will be resolved, not least because we have a list of 58 deponents heard in this capacity under the 1929 Code of Criminal Procedure. We have Article 9 [of the 2019 revised code], which establishes the validity of the acts performed under the previous law,” she remarked.
The judge of the case, in turn, clarified the legal basis to be used for conducting the process.
“The court understands that, should the new law be immediately applied, the question would be raised as to the deadline for filing an appeal.”
Judge Efigénio Baptista’s other argument is that the procedural stages of denunciation, instruction and indictment ( denuncia, instrução e acusação) had been held under and regulated by the old law.
“The form of the process is that of a dispute [querela], and this is the form that must be followed until the end, that is, until the decision becomes final, according to the provisions of paragraph 2 of article 3 of the new Code of Criminal Procedure,” he explained.
The question is then about the legal coverage of preventive detention, taking into account that, based on the 1929 Code of Criminal Procedure, the deadlines were extrapolated. In fact, the defence insisted in Monday’s session that all detainees must respond in freedom.
However, judge Efigénio Baptista understands that this stage [of the process] is not he place for the defence to require the freedom of its constituents, so the previous decision is upheld.
The court also said that it decides to maintain the coercive measures applied to the defendants on the grounds that the assumptions that initially determined them were still met.
In view of the decisions, the defendants will continue to be treated as ‘réus’, and the witnesses as ‘declarantes’ and those in pre-trial detention will stay in pre-trial detention,
By
José João
