Translated by Francisco Chuquela

To confirm the news published by some press this week, our justice will look bad in the photograph or even much more in addition to the so-called “Embraer” case.

On the other hand, a possible confirmation of the facts as presented to us in some press, will only legitimize the prudence that we always advise in the processing and investigation of the process.

Prudence was simply ignored for the unhappiness of a whole system from which a demeaning-free procedure is expected to clear the forest for a long runway for the take-off of a spacecraft of speculations, with much discredit to the mix.

Time and again we see the exchange of pampering between the Prosecutor’s Office and the Court, when the PGR is disallowed for lack of material in certain cases, which indicates a deficit of preparation, not knowing if this deficit is intentional or not, to achieve hidden goals and innocent in particular.

If one confirms what some press quoted makes known to us about the Embraer case, it will help us to better understand at least one of the reasons for the “exchange of pampering”.

It is clear from the aforementioned report that there has been no over-invoicing in the acquisition of such aircraft, which has already been said enough, unlike what our judicial system has hastened to conclude.

What is more serious in this case is the fact that, knowing that it requested information from the indispensable source, our justice didn’t bother to wait for the information requested. It ignored the old maxim, according to which, knowing how to wait is a virtue.

Paulo Zucula, José Viegas and Mateus Zimba, who were even deprived from their liberty and not everything, were promptly accused, only when they had to release millions of meticais, among other measures of coercion, in a clear humiliation that could have been avoided, until all doubts were dispelled, through information from the main source.

In fact, there have been indications of precipitation in this case for a long time. When the PGR went to present the case to Parliament in April 2017, it repeated what had appeared in the local media, which suggested that the constitution of defendants was made only on the basis of what the press brought to the public.

Apparently, at that time the PGR hadn’t brought new elements resulting from its own investigation. As it stands today, the PGR had no information from Embraer. In addition the PGR informed the Parliament at that time that the defendants were being heard in freedom. But it was known that none of the defendants had been heard on that date.

Não estamos a assumir as informações supostamente da fonte principal veiculados em alguma imprensa como factos consumados, mas somente e tão-somente alertar ao facto de que a PGR tem que tomar mais seriamente a questão da presunção de inocência e na correcta investigação dos factos.

We aren’t assuming the information supposedly from the main source conveyed in some press as consummated facts, but only to alert to the fact that the PGR has to take more seriously the issue of the presumption of innocence and the correct investigation of the facts.

And to confirm such facts, the obvious question that doesn’t want to remain silent is that who will compensate the three citizens of the damages of all kinds that have suffered and continue to suffer, before the society, the family, etc.

Will our justice come to the public in the same way in which it mistreated them, to redeem itself and restore all that it has taken away? It is often said that the first news is the one that stays, so there will not be something to pay the damage caused to the three citizens. Moral damage, materials, etc.

What did our justice lose by waiting for the information requested from Embraer to act in the certainty that it was faced with fait accompli? What were the objectives to achieve behind so much hasty zeal (?) Uncommon in our judicial system?

There are thousands upon thousands of citizens who have been deprived of their rights simply because our judicial system overlooks its processes, and there are cases where many of the countrymen end up leaving for the beyond desperate, for denied justice.

It has long been speculated that the rush or not to dispatch certain processes depends on the amount of money each process involves, with big implications in the fees for the teams involved. Is this the case?

We have already said and reiterate that if the three citizens “put the foot in the ring” they should be tried and condemned. What we deplore is the exhibitionism that was intended to convey, with hard consequences for the image of the suspects and their families.

We have come to question and reiterate the reason for the deprivation of liberty to the three citizens, who at no time denounced any intention to flee from the country, much less disturb the investigations. We are aware that they have always collaborated with justice, adding even more to the feeling of total aberration, given the gratuitous spectacle that has been provided to us, with the three citizens being used free of charge to animate the scene!

Because knowing to wait is a virtue, we will continue to wait until justice is done with total objectivity, transparency, ethics and deontology, both in favor of our State and in favor of the three citizens, as the facts determine. (x)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *