This article can be accepted only by readers that are not informed of the current issues related to Mozambique. For us, Mozambicans living in Mozambique it was not as "shoking" as Mr. Paul Fauvet made it. The corruption without faces is not shoking in Mozambique. Cases dropped is not shoking in Mozambique. Delay in the judicial process is not shoking in Mozambique. The paper does not say "stealing", it instead explain what happened and how. "There was indeed such a case in August..." It is not a made up story. The case was dropped just like many other cases involving "big fish" were dropped. The claim was the same "no evidence ". "The allegations against Paulino were made immediately it became known that Guebuza wished to sack the former Attorney-General, Joaquim Madeira, and give Paulino the job. The timing certainly made it look as though the embezzlement charge was just a desperate move to stop Paulino becoming Attorney-General." If Paul Fauvet is right, only who knew the presidents wishes could have made such allegations. "But then the Attorney-General's office sent a formal criminal accusation against Paulino to the Supreme Court (the only court which can hear cases against senior judges). Somebody leaked a few select pieces from the hearings before Trindade to "Zambeze", and Carvalho obediently wrote them up." Does this make it false that Paulino was accused? Was it a bank loan? Was it paid back? I am sad for those who may blindly believes in stories written by Mr Fauvet who has proven to most of us that he writes want he wants and not the truth. He knows how to make a story sound what he wants.

Another articles has come up with substancial proofs of the case. Is that also a desinformation? Can Mr Paul Fauvet proof that Zambeze was wrong? That the case involving Augusto Paulino is a made up story?