By Quinton Nicuete
The defense of investigative journalist Estácio Valoi on Monday (20) submitted a formal application to the Pemba District Public Prosecutor’s Office requesting the revocation of the search and seizure warrant issued in case No. 244/0201/P/2026, in which the journalist is named as a defendant.
The defense argues that the seizure of the journalist’s computer and mobile phone lacks legal grounds, maintaining that, in a case concerning alleged defamation, the content deemed offensive is already part of the court record and is fully known to the complainant, making the continued retention of the devices by the authorities unnecessary.
According to the defense, the complainant—the alleged victim identified in the case file—already possesses all the material considered defamatory or slanderous that was published by the defendant. Therefore, there is no legal basis for searching the defendant’s electronic devices for the same allegedly defamatory material. The lawyers argue that the case should simply proceed with its investigation in accordance with the applicable legal provisions.
They further contend that the search and seizure warrant itself lacks any legal justification, having been issued and executed without a lawful basis.
“The legal principle requiring judicial decisions to be properly reasoned, particularly where they affect fundamental rights and freedoms, has been violated. The execution of the warrant in question undermines and restricts freedom of the press, the exercise of journalistic activity, freedom of information, the exercise of citizenship, the right to property, the right to privacy, the protection of journalistic sources, and the defendant’s right to work, in addition to constituting an act of intimidation that is legally reprehensible.”
The defense also argues that the warrant violates Article 209 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CPP), which governs searches.
“The legal requirements for carrying out searches are not met in this case. The Investigating Judge failed to demonstrate, in the warrant, how the legal conditions set out in that provision had been fulfilled.”
The lawyers further maintain that the warrant does not comply with Article 213(1) of the CPP, which establishes the conditions for the seizure of objects related to the commission of a specific crime, taking into account both the nature of the offence and the purpose of obtaining such evidence.
According to the defense, the law provides that the source or object from which published information originates is irrelevant in proceedings of this nature. What matters is the published content itself, once it has been made public, shared, or reproduced. In this case, the articles and information connected to the proceedings remain publicly available in the place where they were originally published and can be accessed by any interested party.
The defense further alleges additional irregularities surrounding the devices currently held by the Pemba District Public Prosecutor’s Office and the National Criminal Investigation Service (SERNIC), claiming that the passwords protecting the devices were breached, allowing unauthorized access to the journalist’s files and email account.
“There can be no doubt that these constitute two unlawful and unjust procedural acts that violate a range of fundamental rights and freedoms, namely: freedom of the press, the exercise of journalistic activity, freedom of information, the exercise of citizenship, the right to property, the right to privacy, the protection of sources, and the defendant’s right to work.”
The lawyers further argue that the actions constitute a violation of the principle of legality governing criminal proceedings, as well as the obligation to provide legal reasoning under Article 8 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which states:
“Every decision issued by a judicial authority, whether a judge or the Public Prosecutor, within criminal proceedings, must be supported by clear and precise reasoning, both regarding the factual issues and the applicable legal arguments.”
Considering that seizure constitutes a means of obtaining evidence under the Criminal Procedure Code, the defense questions what evidence the authorities intend to obtain from the journalist’s devices.
For these reasons, the defense requests that the search and seizure warrant be revoked and that the journalist’s equipment be returned immediately.
The application comes more than one month after the devices were seized on 16 June 2026, during which period, according to the defense, Estácio Valoi has remained deprived of the tools necessary to carry out his professional work, without any known judicial decision regarding their return.
The case continues to raise concerns among press freedom organizations, while criticism persists over the silence of the Attorney General’s Office and the Mozambique Bar Association (OAM) regarding the proceedings, as well as over the prolonged retention of the journalist’s equipment. (Moz24h)
Leave feedback about this