"No authority can replace a lawyer in a given process, whether administrative, public or criminal. The mechanism to let a lawyer from sponsoring a citizen is through either the resignation on the part of the citizen/defendant or the revocation of the mandate by the lawyer", said this Friday the chairman of the OAA, Luís Paulo Monteiro.
"A third entity cannot appear and replace, change this relationship that exists between the citizen/defendant and the lawyer", he stressed, when speaking at a press conference about events that took place in the trial of the media Lussati case.
The trial in the Lussati case, in which 49 defendants are enrolled, resumed on Monday, after more than a month of suspension, when the judge in the case, Andrade da Silva, replaced some of the representatives with defendants by an official defender.
The constant contradictions between the defense and the judge, which motivated the representatives to leave the courtroom twice as a protest mechanism, are the basis for the replacement of the representatives by an unofficial defender.
The facts that have been witnessed, Luís Paulo Monteiro pointed out this Friday, "lead to believe that, in fact, what the Constitution of the Republic of Angola [CRA] says was not fulfilled and the time has come to this ethical and deontological rescue that has been experienced in court".
"For justice to be done in a healthy, calm and objective way, that is, a judge or a public prosecutor [MP] cannot replace a lawyer when he is constituted in the case by forensic power of attorney", he underlined.
The defendants "voluntarily appointed their lawyers, their defenders, by means of forensic powers of attorney", but "the court, against the will of the defendants, replaced the lawyers appointed by an official defender on the grounds that they left the courtroom two times during the trial session", he recalled.
This court decision, he argued, "seriously calls into question the Angolan justice and above all the democratic rule of law, it is a procedure against the CRA and the rules and procedures established in the Criminal Procedure Code".
"Why does the court not comply with what is enshrined in the law? Why does it limit the constitutional guarantees of the defendants who freely chose those appointed lawyers and who returned to ratify the mandates?", he questioned.
"We believe that disagreements between the judge and the lawyers should not penalize the defendants. We must act immediately, given that we are facing a flagrant violation of the defendants' constitutional guarantees", he stressed.
The Lussati case, in which 49 defendants are listed, has as its visible face Major Pedro Lussati, assigned to the Military House of the Presidency of the Republic, considered the head of the group, detained in possession of millions of dollars, euros and kwanzas stored in suitcases, crates and in several vehicles.
The hearings for this trial, which take place at the Talatona Convention Center, in Luanda, continue this Friday with the hearing of the defendants.
More than 30 lawyers make up the defendants' defense block and half of these were replaced by an unofficial lawyer, a measure disapproved by the OAA for "violating the CRA".
In his institutional position on the events that took place in this process that is taking place in the 3rd section of the Common Crimes Room of the Luanda District Court (TCL), the chairman also spoke of difficulties arising from this process.
Namely the fact that the OAA "has communicated to the court that the court-appointed defense attorney is in a suspension regime at the level of the order and that communication has not yet been returned with the order", he explained.
"In other words, a trainee lawyer was appointed who does not have a regular relationship with the OAA and we are waiting for the answer, which implies that these defendants who were removed from their representatives still effectively do not have lawyers", he pointed out.
Luís Paulo Monteiro also reported that the OAA requested certain procedures from the judge, which the lawyers also did, but so far they have not received any response.
The order "has already consulted with the presiding judge of the TCL, with the presiding judge of the Supreme Court and is awaiting responses regarding these steps taken and effectively appeals to take this issue raised by the OAA to heart with due acuity", noted .
Since, in the eyes of society, he added, "the CRA is effectively trampled on in relation to this replacement of lawyers".
"If the lawyers had a negative behavior in the trial session, the judge had to report to the OAA, in light of the CRA, a step that cannot be put aside, because they cannot suffer two penalties", concluded the OAA chairman.
The coordinator of the Commission for the Prerogatives of Lawyers assigned to the OAA, Vicente Pongolola, also participated in this press conference and disapproved of the judge's stance, referring that the "only entity that has disciplinary protection for lawyers is the OAA".
"The freedom of choice of lawyer by an accused cannot be interfered with", he shot.
Defendants in the Lussati case complain of "denial of justice", due to the fact that the judge appoints unofficial defenders "against their will", and of his presumption of "tainted" innocence, and accuse the court of "obstructing" the actions of the their representatives.
The defendants, in requests sent to the judge in the case, to which Lusa had access on Thursday, claim for "denial" of justice due to the fact that their lawyers were suspended and their attorney was appointed "against their will".
The defendants are indicted for crimes of embezzlement, criminal association, undue receipt of advantage, economic participation in business, abuse of power, fraud in the transport or transfer of currency abroad, illicit introduction of foreign currency into the country, illegal trade in currency and other crimes.
