International lobby group Human Rights Watch has urged the Angolan government to release four activists serving what they call “politically motivated” jail sentences in the oil-rich exclave of Cabinda.
Concern has also been raised about a new state security law that risks limiting freedom of expression and could lead to more arbitrary and political arrests.
Lawyer Francisco Luemba, Catholic priest Raul Tati, economist Belchior Lanso Tati and former policemen Benjamin Fuca are serving jail sentences of between three and six years each for supposed links to the rebel group Flec (Front for the Liberation of the Enclave of Cabinda), which carried out the attack on the Togolese football team at the start of the Africa Cup of Nations in January.
Their arrests are seen as a way of silencing opinion about Cabinda’s long-running independence struggle and the reasons for Flec’s attack.
In August, the four were found guilty under Article 26 of the 1978 state security law that allows for convictions for unspecified “other acts against the security of the state” even if such an act was not “provided for by law”.
It was decided that the four committed a crime by possessing documents about Cabinda’s independence struggle and participating in a meeting with Flec leaders last year, arranged, according to the defence, to promote dialogue about Cabinda’s future.
Lawyers from Angola’s Bar Association tabled an appeal on the grounds that the 1978 legislation — passed during post-independence Angola’s civil war — clashed with the country’s new constitution, which became law in February this year and which states that crimes must be concisely defined. The deadline to respond to the appeal has long passed.
Rule of law
Rona Peligal, Africa director at Human Rights Watch, said: “The constitutional court should rule promptly and impartially on the Bar Association’s motion and, should it find Article 26 to be unconstitutional, order those convicted under it to be released immediately.”
Fernando Macedo, a constitutional law expert from Angola’s Lusíada University, said: “The judges must make their decision based on their assessment of the constitution, the law in question and judicial norms. In my view, there is no question that Article 26 is unconstitutional.”
He said the longer the constitutional court took to make its decision, the more suspicious its behaviour became.
A new draft of the state security law removing Article 26 has been approved by Parliament, but has yet to be signed off by President José Eduardo dos Santos and no time frame has been set to do so.
Peligal said the new law still fell short of international standards on free expression. It was a concern that under Article 25 of the new law “insulting” the Republic of Angola or the president of Angola in “public meetings or by disseminating words, images, writings or sound” is a crime against state security, punishable by up to three years in prison.
She also highlighted the fact that the new Article 26 stated that “turmoil, disorder or riots” that “disturb the functioning of organs of sovereignty” are a crime against the security of the state, punishable by up to two years in prison. Although the new law will cover the whole of Angola, it is likely to be more forcefully applied in Cabinda.
In recent years, a number of journalists and civil society members have been arrested, some serving jail terms for supposed state security violations, and last month, two teachers were jailed for inciting civil disobedience by handing out leaflets calling on people in Cabinda not to celebrate Angola’s Independence Day.
A solution was supposedly found in 2006, when former Flec leader Antonio Bento Bembe signed a memorandum of understanding with the Angolan government to dissolve Flec in return for integration into the army and the government. But the January shooting, which killed two and cast a shadow over the choice of Angola to host the Cup of Nations, came as a stark reminder that Flec, although splintered, remains an active force.