Cape Verde AG Rejects PM’s ‘Coup’ Claims After Indictment
Cape Verde’s Attorney General, Luís Landim, has dismissed Prime Minister Francisco Carvalho’s claims of a “coup d’état” as a “normal” reaction to being indicted on multiple corruption charges. The exchange highlights escalating tensions between the country’s executive branch and its judiciary.
“Society is Alive”: Attorney General Unfazed by Rhetoric
The controversy stems from a Public Prosecutor’s Office indictment released Tuesday, which implicates the Prime Minister in alleged crimes committed during his tenure as a local official. Carvalho fired back in a press conference on Thursday, labeling the legal action a politically motivated “coup d’état.”
Speaking on the sidelines of an event in Praia, Landim remained calm in the face of the Prime Minister’s accusations. “Such reactions are normal,” Landim stated. “At the judicial level, dozens of people are accused, tried, and convicted daily. We are serene; the magistrates remain firm in doing their work.”
Landim suggested that the backlash is actually a sign of a functioning democracy. “If the Public Prosecutor’s Office is not being talked about, then it is concerning,” he added. “When the work is done, people naturally complain and react. That means society is alive.”
A Litany of Charges
The indictment leveled against Francisco Carvalho is extensive, covering 26 alleged crimes committed while he served as the President of the Praia City Council. Three other councilors are also named in the documents, which cover a period between 2021 and 2025.
The charges include:
- Abuse of power and embezzlement
- Falsification of public documents
- Passive corruption and qualified fraud
- Violation of budget execution and urban planning rules
- Undue receipt of advantage and defrauding public property interests
Pushback Against Constitutional Changes
In the wake of the indictment, the ruling African Party for the Independence of Cape Verde (PAICV) has proposed changing the model for selecting the Attorney General. Landim voiced strong opposition to the move, arguing that the current constitutional framework ensures that a magistrate—rather than a political appointee—heads the office.
“If this Attorney General is inconvenient, let them be changed,” Landim declared, “but it makes no sense to alter the Constitution for the convenience of one or another.” He warned that changing the selection process could lead to the appointment of individuals who lack the necessary judicial profile for the role.
As the legal proceedings move forward, the Attorney General emphasized that the duration of such cases depends entirely on the complexity of the evidence and the investigation, signaling that the judiciary will not be rushed by political pressure.
Image: Pexels – damien Saillet
