The problem of justice in Angola

When a person is suspected of having committed a crime, their guilt must be established in criminal proceedings. In this context, a number of fundamental principles and procedural rules must be respected in order to guarantee the right to a fair trial and the right to an effective defense. These principles and rules, which are found in various international treaties such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (link1), the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights (link2)or the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms (link3)serve as real safeguards to prevent citizens from being left at the mercy of an arbitrary State.

Like any other State, Angola is subject to these principles. However, while the Angolan Constitution and legislation guarantee respect of these principles in theory, at least to a certain extent, it is unfortunate that in practice they are regrettably ignored by the judicial authorities, whose independence from the government is notoriously non-existent.

For many years now, various international organisations have criticized this total lack of independence and impartiality, without which there can be no justice worthy of a State governed by the rule of law.

As early as 2008, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention expressed its “concern about the weak role of judges in the current system, which is dominated by the Ministry of Interior and the Public Prosecutor’s Office” (link4).

This alarming observation did not evolve over the years. Indeed, in its 2019 report on Angola, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights took the following position:

“The Human Rights Committee remained concerned about reports of persistent deficiencies in the administration of justice, in particular the lack of independence of the judiciary and the insufficient number of trained judges, prosecutors and lawyers. […] The Human Rights Committee stated that Angola should strengthen the independence of the judiciary and the prosecutor’s office, intensify its efforts to eliminate corruption in the judicial system […]“(link5).

The US Department of State also criticizes in its annual reports the institutional weakness of the Angolan judicial system, particularly in connection with the political power’s interference in decision-making (link6).

Due to the deficiencies of its judicial system, Angola is ranked 114 out of 139 by World Justice Project, the leading source of independent data on the rule of law (link7). The impartiality index of Angolan criminal justice is only 0.33/1 (0 indicating a totally arbitrary system and 1 a totally impartial system), while the independence from the government index is only 0.34/1. In terms of respect of the right to a fair trial and the defense rights, Angola’s score is 0.33/1 (link8). Similar scores to Angola are given to countries such as Afghanistan and Pakistan.

According to international organisations and media, the lack of independence and impartiality of Angolan judicial authorities is reflected in the so-called anti-corruption campaign currently being conducted by the government, which targets only selected personalities for their relations, confirmed or assumed, with the regime of former President dos Santos. This is despite the fact that members or close associates of the current government are implicated by civil society for the same type of alleged offences.

In this context, many observers criticize the judiciary’s instrumentalization for political purposes, stressing that the methods used by the government to fight corruption are “extremely ambivalent” and fall under a “discretionary and politically motivated practice” (link9). According to international media, many are beginning to wonder whether this so-called anti-corruption campaign is not in fact a “vendetta” against former rivals rather than the beginning of a true era of transparency, suggesting that these procedures are being used as a mere political weapon (link10).

The lack of independence and impartiality of Angolan judiciary is also reflected in various presidential decrees. In this respect, a recent Presidential Decree (No. 69/21 of 16 March 2021) allocates part of the assets forfeited in criminal proceedings directly to the Prosecutor’s Office and courts. In breach of fundamental principles that should govern any criminal proceedings, these authorities thus have a personal interest in convicting defendants and forfeiting assets (link11).

Another recent presidential decree (No. 154/21 of 8 September 2021) allocated more than USD 12 million for the acquisition of high-standard housing for private use of judges of the Supreme Court, Constitutional Court and Prosecutor’s Office (link12).

Angola’s most renowned constitutionalists and criminal lawyers see these various measures as a ruse by the government to “domesticate” the judiciary. Others go so far as to say that “the judiciary is on its knees before the political power” (link13).

This disastrous situation has the effect of undermining the credibility of judicial proceedings led in Angola. As a matter of fact, the Spanish Supreme Court recently ruled on an Angolan extradition request and refused to grant Angola the extradition of an Angolan citizen on the grounds that the Prosecutor’s Office, which had made the request for mutual legal assistance, was an authority lacking independence and directly subject to the government’s instructions (link14).

Spain has thus rightly decided to refuse cooperation to Angola, a State that clearly does not guarantee respect of the fundamental principles of criminal procedure.

One can hope that these events will prompt Angola to carry out a thorough reform of its judicial system to ensure that it has the independence it needs to conduct credible proceedings governed by respect for human rights. At the time of writing, however, this appears to be a long way off. 

---