Constitutional Council Labels District Judges as 'Interns' and Reiterates District Courts Lack Authority to Annul Elections
The ongoing controversy surrounding electoral disputes in the country appears far from resolved. Recently, the Honourable Judge Advisor of the Constitutional Council (CC), Albano Macie, publicly reiterated that district courts do not have the authority to annul an election. Macie emphasised that district judges are at the beginning of their careers, facing various limitations arising from the law and other factors.
According to Macie, district courts lack a comprehensive understanding of the electoral process, rendering them incapable of making decisions of such magnitude. Additionally, he highlighted the economic limitations of these courts, which can only resolve conflicts up to 200,000 meticais.
In the opinion of the Judge Advisor, electoral processes involving a significant group of people cannot be annulled by a judge without a holistic view of the process. He further stated that not even the Supreme Court has such authority, which is exclusive to the CC.
“It is not enough to want to invalidate elections; it is necessary to have that attribution. District courts should limit themselves to judging illicit acts. There is no legal basis that grants them the authority to annul an election,” Macie stated.
Macie warned that in future electoral disputes, any annulment decision made by district courts would be considered null and void. He advised judges not to waste time on such decisions.
“If they decide to annul an election again, we will not uphold it. They will only be wasting their time,” he reinforced.
The President of the Constitutional Council, Lúcia Ribeiro, supported Macie's statements, underscoring that district courts do not have the authority to invalidate or validate elections. Ribeiro advised district judges to fulfil their role of resolving only electoral conflicts.
According to Ribeiro, the Constitution of the Republic grants the CC the exclusive right to validate and proclaim electoral results. A district court, she said, does not have the necessary global view to annul an election, making such an act unconstitutional.
“Who validates is who invalidates, that is, annuls. It is up to the CC to validate and proclaim. If a district judge validated an election, could they proclaim the results? Of course not. This authority is exclusive to the CC,” Ribeiro explained during the opening of a journalist training session on electoral processes in Marracuane.
Ribeiro dismissed the discussion about the possibility of district courts annulling elections, clarifying that the Constitution prevails over any other law.
“Even if the National Assembly granted this authority to district courts, such a law would be unconstitutional. The constituent legislator was not distracted when granting this authority exclusively to the CC,” she affirmed.
Ribeiro advised district courts to focus on judging electoral illicit acts and to produce timely sentences. For disputes and complaints, district judges should substantiate in writing serious situations that affect electoral results and refer them to the CC for consideration in the validation process.
For Ribeiro, the only way to confer such authority to district courts would be through a constitutional amendment, reaffirming that any political will expressed in a law, if unconstitutional, would have no effect.
