The Impact of the Violation of Fundamental Rights and Guarantees in the Carlos Manuel de São Vicente Case

By Irene Alexandra Neto – 5 November 2025

---

The Heritage of São Vicente and Family is Private, Legitimate and Legally Constituted

Carlos Manuel de São Vicente was convicted in Angola on trumped-up charges of embezzlement, tax fraud, and money laundering, in a case marked by numerous and serious violations of fundamental rights and guarantees.

The assets of the São Vicente family, strictly private in nature, were confiscated without legal basis or proof of illicit origin, despite having been built over more than four decades of legitimate and lawful economic activity, including insurance, reinsurance, pension fund management, reinsurance brokerage, hotels, banking, investments, and real estate.

All income was accounted for, audited, and supervised annually by competent authorities, and not a single indication of illicit origin was ever identified. The family’s assets result exclusively from duly declared and taxed business activities. There are no public funds or assets within their patrimonial sphere, nor any legal basis to support expropriation or accusations of illicit enrichment.

---

Violation of Fundamental Legal Principles

The judicial process violated Articles 9 and 14 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) and Articles 9, 10, and 11 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) — both ratified by Angola and possessing constitutional value under Article 13 of the Constitution of the Republic of Angola.

These provisions enshrine the right to liberty and security of person, the presumption of innocence, and the right to a fair and impartial trial before an independent tribunal.

The Working Group on Arbitrary Detention of the United Nations Human Rights Council, in its Opinion No. 63/2023 of 14 November 2024, concluded that the Angolan State had violated these rights and recommended:

1. The immediate release of Carlos Manuel de São Vicente;
2. The full restitution of confiscated assets and funds;
3. The payment of adequate compensation for the damage suffered.

Failure to comply with these determinations represents a continuing violation of international law and Angolan constitutional norms.

São Vicente and his family exercised an internationally protected right by filing a complaint with the United Nations. They cannot suffer reprisals for using international human rights protection mechanisms.

---

Nullity of the Judgment and Procedural Defects

The judgment that condemned São Vicente is tainted with serious and insurmountable defects at both the procedural and substantive levels.

In his legal opinion dated 5 May 2022, Professor Manuel da Costa Andrade, Emeritus of the Faculty of Law at the University of Coimbra, concluded:

“It is clear that the facts found proven and imputed to the defendant, Carlos Vicente, do not allow his conviction in any capacity for the crimes of Embezzlement, Tax Fraud, and Money Laundering for which he was convicted in the First Instance. This is because it is not possible to identify in the proven matter facts capable of fulfilling the objective and subjective assumptions required for the typification of the aforementioned crimes.”

He further stated:

“Criminal liability is thus excluded immediately and definitively, at the radical threshold of typicality. In such terms, his conviction for any of those three crimes would only be possible at the cost of a frontal and irremediable violation of the principle of legality — nullum crimen sine lege.”

The sentence is therefore null and void by operation of law and invalid in any State governed by the rule of law that respects the principle of legality and criminal typicality.

---

Collective Punishment – Illegal and Unconstitutional

Carlos São Vicente has been deprived of liberty since 22 September 2020, without any evidence of a crime. His detention was declared arbitrary by the UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention (Opinion 63/2023).

His assets were confiscated and his funds frozen without legal basis. His family — never accused or charged — was also expropriated, deprived of their property, homes, savings, and means of subsistence, and forced into exile.

This constitutes a grave violation of the presumption of innocence, the right to private property, and the absolute prohibition of collective punishment.

---

Infeasibility of International Ratification of the Sentence

In international law, the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments are governed by universally accepted principles of sovereignty, due process, and respect for fundamental human rights.

No State is obliged to recognize or enforce a judgment rendered in another jurisdiction when that judgment was obtained in violation of the rule of law, judicial independence, or international human rights obligations.

A decision that violates the right to liberty, the right to a fair and impartial trial, or the principle of judicial independence — as protected by Articles 9 and 14 of the ICCPR and Articles 9, 10, and 11 of the UDHR — cannot, under international law, produce effects outside the jurisdiction in which it was issued.

Consequently, no rule-of-law State bound by the ICCPR and the UDHR can lawfully recognize or enforce a judgment resulting from an arbitrary or politically motivated process. To do so would be contrary to international public order and to the universal principles of justice that govern cooperation between nations.

---

The Importance of Judicial Independence and Impartiality

The independence and impartiality of the courts are essential guarantees enshrined in Article 10 of the UDHR, Article 14 of the ICCPR, and Article 174 of the Constitution of Angola.

A judgment rendered by a dependent or partial court is neither legally valid nor internationally recognized. Respect for these principles is a prerequisite for the credibility of the judiciary and for citizens’ confidence in justice.

---

The Supremacy of the Constitution

Under Articles 226 to 230 of the Constitution, the Constitutional Court is responsible for ensuring that all acts of government comply with the Basic Law.

Any presidential decree or judicial sentence that violates constitutional rights must be declared unconstitutional and immediately lose legal validity. No organ of the State is above the Constitution.

The Angolan State must implement Opinion 63/2023 of 14 November 2023 because the ICCPR and the UDHR form an integral part of the Constitution of the Republic of Angola — and the Constitution supersedes any lower court judgment that violates fundamental rights and guarantees.

---

The São Vicente Case as a Test of the Rule of Law in Angola

When a citizen is deprived of liberty without evidence, when private property is confiscated without legal basis, and when United Nations recommendations are ignored, what is at stake is not just one person — it is the State’s commitment to legality and human rights.

Angola has a legal and moral obligation to:

1. Immediately release Carlos Manuel de São Vicente;
2. Return assets and funds wrongly confiscated or frozen;
3. Compensate the family for material and moral damages suffered;
4. Ensure that its justice system aligns with international law.

---

In Africa, the Memory of Leaders is Honored Through Respect for Their Families

As a widely recognized cultural and political principle in many African societies, the memory and legacy of a leader are honored by respecting the dignity of his family — not out of privilege, but out of respect.

Our family has not asked for privileges.
We ask for justice.
We ask for respect.

I am the daughter of the Founder of the Nation.
I have his blood. I carry the weight of his memory and our history.

As a wife, a mother, and a daughter, I am deeply disturbed to see the State exalting the figure of President Agostinho Neto while paradoxically subjecting his family — his daughter, son-in-law, and grandchildren — to more than five years of suffering, deprivation, and injustice.

The greatest tribute to the Founder of the Nation is not only to erect monuments or hold ceremonies. It is to protect the dignity of those who bear his name, his history, and his blood. Protecting the family of those who served the nation is a way of protecting the nation itself.

When justice fails, it is not just one man who pays —
It is an entire family that serves the sentence.

The freedom of Carlos Manuel de São Vicente is not a political favor.
It is not an act of benevolence.
It is a duty of the State — before the law and before human rights.