Maputo — Augusto Paulino, the presiding judge in the Carlos Cardoso murder trial, on Friday suggested that the Public Prosecutor's Office should look into the behaviour of a weekly paper which published what it claimed to be the court's ruling in the case a day early.
The paper "Zambeze" claimed to have access to the court's verdict and sentences, and splashed this story across its front page in an unsigned article. However, the "Zambeze" story bore little relation to the real ruling as read out by Paulino on Friday. "Zambeze" had guessed that five of the accused would receive 24 year sentences, and the sixth 10 years.
In fact, all six were sentenced to over 23 years, and the most severe sentence was 28 years and six months. Furthermore the sentences were broken down, crime by crime, a detail entirely absent from the "Zambeze" story. Thus each of the six was sentenced separately for the first degree murder of Cardoso, for the attempted murder of his driver Carlos Manjate, and for criminal conspiracy. Several were also sentenced for other crimes - including illegal use of a firearm, car theft, and use of a false passport.
Had these sentences been accumulated, loan shark Momade Assife Abdul Satar, for instance, would end up serving 50 years and eight months. In fact, the Mozambican practice is to consolidate the separate sentences, and this resulted in overall sentences of, for example, 23 years and three months. Paulino recalled that, when the court retired, on 13 January, to consider its ruling, he had urged the media not to pre-empt its decision. He regretted that some papers had paid no attention to this request.
Paulino considered the way in which some of the media had carried out ad-hoc opinion polls among members of the public about the trial as "violations of journalistic ethics".
But much worse was "Zambeze", which he described as "a paper that picks up a ruling that doesn't exist, and turns it into its major story and the subject of an editorial".
He wondered where "Zambeze" had picked up the false ruling.
This kind of behaviour by the media "greatly displeased" the court he said. It could be interpreted as an attempt to influence the court, and "to affect the freedom and independence enjoyed by judges".
He suggested it would be appropriate for the Public Prosecutor's office and for the Supreme Mass Media Council (the watchdog press freedom body established under the constitution) "to look into what happened".
The editor of "Zambeze", Lourenco Jossias, told AIM that Paulino would be welcome "to do what the law entitles him to do, and send a denial to the paper".
As for a possible investigation by the Public Prosecutor's Office, "that's his suggestion. We're waiting", Jossias said.
Asked whether his paper had been deceived by its sources, Jossias replied "We're not sure whether we were deceived or not.
We're still looking at the matter".
He claimed that the publication of the false court ruling would not affect the paper's credibility.
