September 10, 2024 – Angolan President João Lourenço has recently enacted two controversial pieces of legislation that have sparked significant concern among human rights organizations and legal experts. These laws, which were signed into effect on August 29, 2024, are poised to severely restrict freedoms of the media, expression, and association in Angola.
The National Assembly passed the Bill on the Crimes of Vandalism of Public Goods and Services on July 18, 2024. This legislation imposes harsh penalties, including prison terms of up to 25 years, on individuals involved in protests that result in vandalism or disruptions to public services. This bill criminalizes not only acts of vandalism but also the mere act of documenting or disseminating information about security measures for public infrastructure, potentially criminalizing journalists and activists.
Additionally, the National Security Bill, enacted on August 7, 2024, grants the government broad and unchecked authority over media outlets, civil society organizations, and other private institutions. The bill permits security forces to censor media broadcasts and disrupt telecommunications without judicial oversight. It also mandates that individuals report any security-related information they come across in their professional duties, with non-compliance potentially leading to criminal prosecution.
Zenaida Machado, Senior Africa Researcher at Human Rights Watch, criticized the new laws, stating, “The adoption of these repressive measures poses a grave threat to the operation of media and civil society groups in Angola. The government must reconsider these laws and repeal them to ensure a space for free and open media in the country.”
The new legislation has faced condemnation from domestic and international human rights organizations, including Human Rights Watch. Critics argue that the Crimes of Vandalism Bill infringes upon fundamental rights protected by both the Angolan Constitution and international human rights treaties, such as the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which Angola has been a signatory since 1992.
Under Articles 8 and 15 of the Crimes of Vandalism Bill, individuals could face up to 15 years in prison for simply recording or sharing information about security measures for public goods. Article 23 allows authorities to implement unspecified “appropriate measures” to prevent damage to public infrastructure, further broadening the scope of governmental control.
The National Security Bill includes provisions that undermine national, regional, and international human rights laws. For example, Article 36 authorizes security forces to shut down media outlets and disrupt telecommunications under vaguely defined “exceptional circumstances” without a court order. The bill also permits unwarranted inspections and surveillance of public and private spaces by security forces.
The Association for Justice, Peace, and Democracy, an Angolan civil society group, has expressed concerns that the new laws will enable the government to target and prosecute those who organize protests or criticize governmental actions. The UN Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and association, Gina Romero, had previously urged against such legislation, warning of its potential to curtail basic rights.
The recent actions of the Angolan government reflect a troubling trend of increasingly restrictive legislation. In January 2017, the administration of then-President José Eduardo dos Santos enacted a media law that curtailed journalistic freedom and prevented reporting on corruption and human rights abuses. A similar trend was seen in May 2023, when a proposed law on NGOs was withdrawn only after facing significant opposition from rights organizations.
Zenaida Machado emphasized the gravity of the situation, stating, “The Angolan government’s persistent disregard for concerns raised by civil society underscores a troubling disregard for citizens’ rights. International partners must urge Angola to align its laws with international human rights standards by repealing or amending these repressive measures.”