On Monday 29 July, Mozambique ‘substantially’ won its 195.9 billion meticais (3.1 billion dollars) case in the High Court in London against the Lebanese shipbuilder from the United Arab Emirates, Privinvest, for allegedly paying bribes in relation to the decade-long ‘tuna bonds’ scandal.
On this subject, DE spoke to some economists to analyse the country’s economic situation in the light of this decision, arguing that the nation has gained a great advantage, as its image will improve on the international stage, and Mozambicans will not have to pay debts that did not benefit them.
In this context, we spoke to economist Elcídio Bachita, who believes that ‘the judgement handed down by the London Commercial Court, in which Privinvest is required to make good the damage caused by the hidden debts case, represents an important milestone in Mozambique’s economic history, in that it restores the country’s credibility in the international arena, particularly with international financial institutions and capital markets, which will undoubtedly open up significant space for us to be able to access credit at relatively more competitive prices’.
On the other hand, the economist believes that the London court’s new ruling will substantially reduce the state’s level of risk when it comes to being analysed by international financial rating agencies. “It means that, with this ruling by the London Commercial Court, the credit risk for our country will decrease dramatically. This puts Mozambique in an advantageous position, especially when it comes to foreign direct investment.
The state stands to gain, because investors no longer look at Mozambique as a defaulting state, but rather that this same state was used by its senior officials at the time, using their position to defraud the nation by receiving bribes that were paid in their favour by Privinvest without, however, observing the legal rules or procedures, namely approval by the Assembly of the Republic, the Attorney General’s Office and the Administrative Court. We can get back on the road to growth.

Elcídio Bachita
For Borges Nhamire, an expert from the Centre for Public Integrity (CIP), who has followed the case closely, quoted by DW, ‘the damage that the debts have caused Mozambique is irreparable. It will take generations of Mozambicans to perhaps return the country to the situation it was in. It has been proven on several occasions that the money did not come to Mozambique. When the money was disbursed by the banks in London, it never came to the country.
The money went directly into Privinvest’s accounts and from Privinvest’s accounts it began to be distributed to the people who had been corrupted. In other words, it would be a double injustice for Mozambicans to have to pay this amount”

Borges Nhamire
An opportunity for more transparency
Economist Estrela Charles shares the same position, saying that ‘with London’s decision, Mozambique is in a very privileged position, because once again it has been proven that the people should not pay for something they didn’t really benefit from.
This is what we, as civil society, have been emphasising all along: all the perpetrators of the hidden debts must be held accountable,’ she said. However, she drew attention to the issue of transparency and accountability of others involved: ‘Now is, once again, an opportunity for Mozambique to improve its levels of transparency.
There is still a lot to be clarified in this case, especially with the question of the return of the amounts, because this decision was only favourable to Mozambique thanks to the testimony, in this case of the former finance minister, who acknowledged having received the amount of the bribe. This was an important intervention in favour of Mozambique in this trial.”
For the economist, Mozambique needs to take advantage of this ‘cue’ in order to improve its transparency levels. “We don’t expect to receive information at international level, as we have been receiving in relation to the issue of hidden debts.
But this is an opportunity, now, for the country to increase the levels of transparency in the process of hidden debts, and not only that: of all the nation’s indebtedness. More important than that is to hold all those involved in this process accountable at national and international level too,’ she explained.

Estrela Charles
How can the indemnities be used?
For Elcídio Bila, the value of the indemnities arising from this decision will reduce the level of public debt contracting, both internally and externally. “It’s a decision that will boost the development of the national economy in the medium and long term. This money could be used to boost education, health, construction and the rehabilitation of access roads,’ he suggested.
Estrela Charles, for her part, argued that ‘we can take advantage of this amount, not only for investments in the education and health sectors, but also to reduce the level of indebtedness in Mozambique. We know that we are already paying off a large part of Ematum’s debt. With this compensation, if it actually takes place, it will be very important for us, because we believe that we can improve various social indicators here in Mozambique, but it is important that we know and follow up and demand transparency at government level for the use of these funds that have been recovered, because if there is no transparency in terms of use, we could run the risk of having another situation of hidden debts or assets – like what is happening with the issue of the return of Manuel Chang’s 442.4 million (seven million dollars).

Manuel Chang in court in South Africa
The leader also said that ‘the Public Prosecutor’s Office and the Ministry of Economy and Finance confirm that the former minister returned the amount he received from the bribe, but they don’t say how and when he returned it and which route he used. Where is this money? What do you intend to do with it? I believe there needs to be more transparency at government level in order to resolve this type of situation.”
The hidden debts scandal dates back to 2013 and 2014, when the then Finance Minister Manuel Chang, now in detention in the United States, approved state guarantees on loans from ProInducus, Ematum and MAM to the banks Credit Suisse and VTB, without the consent of parliament.
Discovered in 2016, the debts were estimated at 170.6 billion meticais (2.7 billion dollars), according to figures presented by the Public Prosecutor’s Office.
The trial was the culmination of almost four years of litigation in the British courts, to which the country resorted alleging corruption, conspiracy to defraud by unlawful means and dishonest assistance to cancel debts and claim financial compensation worth millions of dollars.