The court judged "the dilatory exception of the lis pendens and, consequently, the acquittal of the proceedings to be well founded", can be read in judgment 732/22.
In the assessment, the plenary of judges emphasizes that "lis pendens is a negative procedural assumption - considering these as those (elements) whose verification prevents the judge from knowing or appreciating the merits of the case".
"The legal institute of lis pendens occurs when there is repetition of a case, with the previous case still in progress (cf. no. 1 of article 497 of the CPC)", refers in the judgment, also highlighting that lis pendens is a dilatory exception that, if proceeding, implies the acquittal of the defendant/defendant from the instance".
The Constitutional Court refers that, from the analysis of the case file with n.º 941-C/2021, it was found that, in parallel, its procedures are running in the same court another identical process, assessed under n.º 924-B/2021 , "with the same subjects, request and cause of action, which gives rise to a dilatory exception of lis pendens, under the terms of subparagraph g) of paragraph 1, of article 494 of the CPC [Procedural Code Civil]".
The plenary of judges describes that the two processes present as similarities that both processes are related to political parties the same parties, alleging that the deliberation of the Political Commission, which set the date for the holding of the XIII ordinary congress for the 2nd, 3rd and December 4, 2021, within the scope of the meeting on October 20 of the same year, was made under duress and threats to its members.
"The request is similar: in this Proc. No. 941-C/2021, it is required that the decision of the Political Commission that approved the date of the XIII congress be declared null, by coercion; and in the other Proc. No. 924-B/2021, the annulment of the act that convenes the XIII ordinary congress and the deliberation of the Political Commission that supports it is required", argues the judgment.
In the case in question, the judgment indicates that there are no difficulties in determining the identity of the subjects "because the parties are the same, namely Ilídio Chissanga Eurico, Amaro Cambiente Sebastião Caimana, Sócrates Iava Cabeia, Elisbey Chinjola Bamba Setapi, Manuela do Prazeres de Cazoto, Ana Filomena Junqueira da Cruz Domingos and Felipe Mendonça, as applicants, and the UNITA party, as requested".
"Actually, from the analysis of the records, there is no doubt that both actions are intended to obtain the same legal effect, that is, the intention is to invalidate the XIII ordinary congress of the UNITA party, which determined the election of Mr. Adalberto Costa Júnior as president of that party", it is highlighted in the judgment.
In December 2021, UNITA was forced to hold the XIII ordinary congress of the party again, by canceling the previous one held in November 2019, in which Adalberto Costa Júnior had been elected president of the political formation.
At the congress in December of last year, Adalberto Costa Júnior was once again elected leader of UNITA, and the Constitutional Court took note of the party's congress last month, that is, it registered the governing bodies and the party's statute.
This Thursday's decision allows UNITA to run in the next general elections, scheduled for the second half of August this year.
