The presidential candidate for UNITA, Adalberto Costa Júnior, on Tuesday said that the rule of law is at risk in Angola and the courts were hostages of the political power
“Those who think they can destroy the democratic rule of law and manipulate the courts, have no doubt, we are working hard to ensure the security of the state,” said Adalberto Costa Júnior. He was speaking at a meeting with opinion leaders representing civil society.
The meeting, held at a hotel in the Angolan capital, marked the end of Adalberto Costa Júnior’s campaign for the presidency of UNITA, at the party congress, scheduled for 2, 3, and 4 December.
In his opening speech, Adalberto Costa Júnior made several commitments, namely that of carrying forward a constitutional revision based, among other aspects, on the resumption of the direct election of the president.
Currently, the Angolan Constitution gives the head of the list of the party with the most votes in the national constituency the right to head the state in what is an indirect election.
“We want to return sovereignty to the Angolan people (…) Today we have a president who hitchhikes from parliament. We want to reduce the excessive powers of the president and have them monitored by the Angolans,” he said.
According to Adalberto Costa Júnior, the review of the Constitution is not only a project of alternation. It is a project of fighting poverty because it excludes, violates and kills human rights.
Another commitment made is to hold local elections in all municipalities.
“Never before has society been the target of a consultation on the models q would like to see implemented, on development strategies, on what kind of parents we are today, what kind of parents we want to be,” he stressed.
At the end of the meeting, Adalberto Costa Júnior said he was not afraid.
“I am not afraid of this challenge. We will take it to the end”, he said, reaffirming his commitment to the United Patriotic Front, a political project that integrates UNITA, the Democratic Bloc and Abel Chivukuvuku, who leads a movement that is seeking legalisation as a political party.
The meeting to close Adalberto Costa Júnior’s campaign took place a day after UNITA’s Political Commission approved, for the second time, the holding of the 13th Congress on 2, 3 and 4 December and decided to preventively suspend militants who appealed to the Constitutional Court (TC) to invalidate the date of the Congress.
The deliberations were taken on Sunday, at the 2nd extraordinary session of the Political Commission, according to a note to which Lusa had access and UNITA (National Union for Total Independence of Angola) stresses that it will not tolerate any more interference from Angola’s political courts.
The issue at stake is an initiative of a group of militants that requested the impeachment of the Congress by the leadership of the party of the “Galo Negro” (Black Rooster) and filed an injunction with the Constitutional Court, alleging that the scheduling of the conclave was made in a climate of intimidation.
At Sunday’s meeting, the Political Commission reaffirmed the choice of date with 175 votes in favour (90%), 15 votes against (8%) and three abstentions (2%) and pointed out that the autonomy of parties in internal management is guaranteed by the Constitution of Angola and the Law on Political Parties.
“In these terms, from now on, UNITA will not tolerate interference by the Angolan political courts in its internal life,” the statement said.
In October, the TC annulled UNITA’s 13th Congress. Adalberto Costa Júnior was elected, citing the violation of the Constitution, forcing the party to maintain the previous leadership led by Isaías Samakuva.
The TC’s ruling agreed with a group of militants who demanded the annulment of the Congress invoking several irregularities, among which the dual nationality of Adalberto Costa Júnior (Portuguese and Angolan) on the date of presentation of his candidacy for the elections of the 13th Congress.
The ruling was signed by seven of the 13 councillor judges and was not unanimous, with judge Josefa Neto voting against it.
The judge said that the decision on this matter constituted a violation of the principle as mentioned above of autonomy and the principle of minimum intervention by the Constitutional Court, which is equally necessary to safeguard the autonomy of political parties.
