The request was made this Tuesday during the period of preliminary questions, presented in the second session of the trial, in which the representatives of the two defendants, accused of defrauding the State of millions of dollars, asked for the acquittal of most of the crimes of which they are accused.
The defense in its request invoked the 2016 law, which grants amnesty to all crimes punishable by a prison sentence of up to 12 years, which were committed by nationals or foreigners, between 11 November 1975 and 11 November 2015, excluding the crime of embezzlement.
Generals Hélder Vieira Dias Júnior "Kopelipa" and Leopoldino do Nascimento "Dino" are accused of several crimes such as influence peddling, money laundering, document forgery, criminal association and abuse of power, with lawyer Fernando Gomes dos Santos and the companies Plansmart International Limited and Utter Right International Limited also being defendants.
The companies will have been used by the accused to set up the scheme, involving a financing agreement between Angola and China to support national reconstruction, after the civil war, which also included the China International Fund and its subsidiaries and Sonangol, whose former president Manuel Vicente is named several times in the indictment.
Both "Kopelipa's" defender, João Amaral Gourgel, and "Dino's" defender, Bangula Quemba, invoked the amnesty law, as did Benja Satula, who represents the Chinese companies and who asked that they be acquitted as defendants and constituted as witnesses in the process.
Bangula Cuemba also raised issues related to the coercive measures imposed on General "Dino", namely the return of his passport and the end of the ban on leaving Luanda and the country, highlighting that his constituent, accused since September 2022, has been "imprisoned in the open air" for five years.
Amaral Gourgel, who also represents lawyer Fernando Gomes dos Santos, considered that the Public Prosecutor's Office is creating an unprecedented case, by constituting a defendant who is a lawyer in full exercise of his functions, requesting his acquittal because he understands that his intervention in the process was limited to the practice of legal acts.
The court may soon suspend the trial in light of an ordinary appeal of unconstitutionality filed by Benja Satula, which is pending before the Constitutional Court.
At issue is an appeal against the adversarial investigation, rejected by the judge of guarantees, which gave rise to a complaint to the president of the Supreme Court, who understood that the new law prohibiting the appeal against the indictment order was the most favourable to the defendants.
The defense of the Chinese companies understood that this ruling violated the fundamental right to appeal, appealing to the Constitutional Court, which summarily dismissed the appeal, returning it to the plenary of this court, where it is ongoing, having suspensive effects.
