Mozambique's Constitutional Council has declared unconstitutional several provisions of the country's telecoms traffic control regulation, ruling that the government bypassed parliament by imposing restrictions on fundamental rights without the required legislative authorisation, according to information released on Friday, 31 July.
The ruling is contained in Judgment 6/CC/2026, dated 29 July, and follows a request for abstract successive constitutional review filed by the Office of the Ombudsman, which challenged multiple provisions of the Telecommunications Traffic Control Regulation approved under Decree No. 48/2025 of 16 December.
Under that regulation — which triggered widespread public opposition — the National Communications Institute of Mozambique (INCM) was granted authority to block telecommunications in cases of 'imminent risk to public security' or to the state.
'In cases where an imminent risk to public security, state security, the security of persons and property, or a risk to the availability of services caused by adverse and/or criminal situations is established, through a court order, the regulatory authority may issue an instruction for partial or total blocking,' reads Decree 48/2025 of the Council of Ministers.
The regulation, which came into force in December, was introduced a year after a series of telecommunications blackouts across the country — including shutdowns of social media platforms — during protests that followed the general elections of October 2024. Those protests resulted in more than 400 deaths, as well as the destruction and looting of businesses and public property.
The constitutional challenge argued that the decree established a regime of monitoring, data collection, service suspension, and intervention in telecommunications networks that infringed constitutionally protected fundamental rights, including freedom of expression and information, the right to privacy, and the inviolability of communications.
The Constitutional Council found that the Telecommunications Law, cited by the government as the legal basis for the regulation, did not permit the creation of a permanent communications monitoring system, as it contained 'no provision authorising the structural and permanent surveillance of communications.'
In examining the decree, the council's judges concluded that the government had exceeded the limits of its regulatory powers under the Constitution, legislating on a matter reserved exclusively for the National Assembly.
'It is noted that its author established a normative regime of monitoring, data collection, service suspension, and network intervention that constitutes substantial restrictions on fundamental rights, namely freedom of expression and information (Article 48), the right to privacy, and the inviolability of communications (Article 68),' the judgment states.
The Council underlined that any restriction on fundamental rights can only result from legislation approved by parliament and not from an executive regulation. 'We are therefore faced with a violation of the principle of the rule of law, given that the matters regulated by the decree fall within the exclusive competence of the National Assembly,' the ruling states.
The court consequently concluded that the decree was organically unconstitutional, on grounds of violating the principle of separation of powers, finding that the government had substituted itself for the parliamentary legislator in defining the essential content of fundamental rights.
The Centre for Democracy and Human Rights (CDD) stated that it was instrumental in initiating the process that led to the ruling, explaining that following the internet and social media blackouts during the 2024 post-electoral crisis, it had submitted a petition to the Ombudsman requesting a constitutional review of the decree.
For the CDD, the decision represents 'an important victory for active citizenship, the democratic rule of law, and the defence of citizens' fundamental rights, freedoms, and guarantees,' demonstrating that 'active citizenship can produce concrete change when it resorts to the mechanisms provided' in the Constitution to defend the public interest.
The Constitutional Council also determined that the declaration of organic unconstitutionality rendered it unnecessary to examine the remaining alleged constitutional violations, concluding that this represented the 'most serious defect' of the decree.
Source: Diário Económico
Original article: https://www.diarioeconomico.co.mz/2026/08/01/desenvolvimento-2/cc-considera-inconstitucionais-normas-que-permitiam-bloqueios-de-telecomunicacoes-no-pais/
