Paul Fauvet
24 March 2008
Maputo — Mozambique's Higher Mass Media Council (CSCS), the watchdog body on press freedom and the right to information established under the Constitution, has condemned the right wing weekly "Zambeze" for its libelous campaign against Attorney-General Augusto Paulino.
The CSCS received a complaint from Paulino in January, arising from "Zambeze"'s repeated claim that he is the accused in a case concerning the theft of 300,000 meticais (about 12,500 US dollars). Paulino had allegedly helped himself to the money when he was the presiding judge of the Maputo Provincial Court in order to buy a house
By the time Paulino complained to the CSCS, the allegation had been thrown out by three of the most senior legal bodies in the country. First, the Supreme Council of the Judicial Magistrature (CSMJ), the body that disciplines judges, looked into the matter in August. It found that there was no evidence of any wrongdoing by Paulino, and concluded that the accusation against him had been made in bad faith.
Nonetheless, Paulino's enemies pushed for a trial by the Supreme Court. So a Supreme Court judge, Joao Trindade, investigated, called witnesses, listened to Paulino's accusers and to Paulino himself - and concluded that there was no sign that any crime had been committed.
As Mozambican law demands, the case papers were remitted to the Public Prosecutor's Office, and Assistant Attorney General Erasmo Nhavoto clearly agreed with Trindade, and with the CSMJ, for he refused to press any charges against Paulino.
Despite this, week after week, long articles appeared in "Zambeze" suggesting that there was a serious case against Paulino, and suggesting that, in February, he would be "in the dock" before the Supreme Court.
In fact, all that happened in February was that two other Supreme Court judges, Luis Mondlane and Norberto Carrilho, looked at Nhavoto's dispatch declining to press charges, agreed with it, and shelved the case.
Given all this background, the CSCS had little difficulty in concluding that Paulino's complaint against "Zambeze" was justified. The CSCS ruling declared that Paulino could not be called an accused, because there were no charges against him. Neither the inquiry carried out by the CSMJ, nor the investigation of Judge Trindade could unearth any evidence that a crime had occurred.
There was no stolen money, and Paulino did not have his hands in the till. All that existed was an accusation, made by a court official, Adelaide Muchanga, who had been demoted by Paulino (and may therefore have been harbouring a grudge). She was unable to show that Paulino had stolen anything.
The CSCS pointed out that there can only be a criminal case when there is an accused. So Paulino "was never in the dock, because there was never any criminal case against him, as 'Zambeze' wanted us to believe".
In publishing its series of articles against Paulino, "Zambeze", said the CSCS, "manipulated public opinion, creating a false idea about the fitness of the Attorney-General". In so doing, the paper had "violated the duties of journalists as envisaged in the Press Law of 1991".
The CSCS ordered "Zambeze" to publish this ruling in full in its next edition - in fact, "Zambeze" delayed another week, which the paper claimed was due to "a mistake in pagination".
Far from showing any repentance, "Zambeze" reacted to the CSCS ruling by calling it an attack on press freedom and on the right of citizens to information. It protested that Paulino did not use the right of reply which he enjoys under the Press Law, and that the CSCS did not bother to speak to anyone on "Zambeze" before issuing its ruling.
These protests, true though they are, evade the central point - which is that for several months "Zambeze" ran a campaign against one of the topmost figures in the Mozambican legal establishment, based on a falsehood, on a crime that never existed.
The "Zambeze" reply declares, accurately enough, that the CSCS has no power of censorship, since censorship is outlawed under the constitution. Very true - but the CSCS has not tried to censor "Zambeze". Accusing a paper of manipulating public opinion is not the same thing as censoring it. Nor can a paper evade accusations that it has been telling lies by screaming that the authorities are trying to censor it.
As for "Zambeze"'s front page claim that Paulino was "in the dock", the paper's reply to the CSCS explains that it meant this "figuratively". Paulino, it insisted, was "in the dock" "in a journalistic manner of speaking".
In other words, lies become truth if they are told "figuratively", or "journalistically".
"Zambeze" also argues the matter is of great importance because it has been taken up by deputies in the Assembly of the Republic. In reality what happened earlier this month was that three deputies from the political party that "Zambeze" tirelessly supports, the former rebel movement Renamo, demanded that Paulino should not be allowed to give the annual report to the Assembly from the Attorney-General's Office. They demanded instead that Paulino be removed from office.
And where did these illustrious parliamentarians find their information about the dreadful crimes that Paulino had supposedly committed? From "Zambeze", of course ! And two days later, "Zambeze" hit the streets with the headline "Renamo doesn't want Paulino in parliament".
This is an excellent example of the echo chamber effect. A story is fabricated by a paper, it is picked up in parliament, and that feeds back into yet another issue of the paper - although not an iota of extra information has come to light. The crime for which Paulino was being pilloried remains as fictitious as ever.
Meanwhile, Paulino is suing "Zambeze" for libel - and that may prove much more serious than a rap over the knuckles from the CSCS.
Pf/ (965)
Be the first to Write a Comment!
Copyright © 2008 Agencia de Informacao de Mocambique. All rights reserved. Distributed by AllAfrica Global Media (allAfrica.com). To contact the copyright holder directly for corrections — or for permission to republish or make other authorized use of this material, click here.
AllAfrica aggregates and indexes content from over 125 African news organizations, plus more than 200 other sources, who are responsible for their own reporting and views. Articles and commentaries that identify allAfrica.com as the publisher are produced or commissioned by AllAfrica.
