What do you have to say about the recent Human Rights Watch report? 

Paradoxically, this report confirms that the country is on the right path.  Human Rights Watch hasn’t found anything new to attack the Angolan government about.  It has limited itself to repeating old accusations, which makes the document devoid of content and even uninteresting from the information point of view.  However, the untrue claims made in the report need to be strongly refuted.  The report is fallacious, it does not tell the truth and, basing itself on false accusations, its sole aim is to denigrate the Angolan government’s image for clearly political and propaganda purposes. 

What do you find most condemnable in the report?

Apart from making a series of false claims, Human Rights Watch arrogantly inveighs against the Angolan government’s sovereign prerogatives, by questioning - without any grounds for doing so - its commitment to creating conditions for the electoral process and the legitimacy of Angola contracting a loan from another  sovereign country, in this case China.  As I said, these are the inalienable prerogatives of a sovereign state like Angola.

The funds from the Chinese government are duly accounted for and are used to rehabilitate facilities in transport, energy, housing and other areas destroyed by the war, with a view to the economic and social development of the country.

What, in your view, is the purpose of the report?

The report is totally unrelated to Angolan realities and an attempt to minimise important gains made by the Angolan people themselves, without the help of other countries, like successfully achieving peace and macro-economic stability, like the sharp fall in the inflation rate and the high levels of economic growth we have been registering.  We think the only reason for the false claims made by Human Rights Watch is that the organisation has to show that it is doing something, so as to continue to warrant receiving large amounts of funds from its donors.

What about the claim that there are problems with preparations for elections?

The process can be said to be going normally.  The legislation has been passed, the National Electoral Commission, a non-party body, is already working, and provincial commissions and municipal offices are being established.

Are there constraints on freedom of expression, association and assembly, as Human Rights Watch tries to make out?

Anyone who lives in Angola knows that there is no restriction of any kind on freedom of expression, association or assembly.  To say otherwise is to be slanderous.  It is also a lie to say that the Deputy Minister of Information has threatened journalists from this newspaper.  On the subject of lies, I also refute another false claim.  The PADEPA member Mr Carlos Almeida was detained last August for causing a disturbance in a state institution during a formal meeting.  He was tried by a police court and given a 45-day sentence.  His imprisonment was for a civil offence, not for any political reason.

As for the situation in Cabinda, Human Rights Watch says there is a climate of tension in our northernmost province.

That is not true either. There is not a climate of tension in Cabinda or any of the other provinces in the country, just as there is no policy of the armed forces threatening the civilian population. The armed forces have, on the contrary, been the guarantee of security and stability for the population.  Any possible excesses committed by the armed forces, in Cabinda or any other part of the country, are verified and severely punished in accordance with military law when there is proof of an offence.

Human Rights Watch also says that refugees in neighbouring countries do not want to return to the country owing to an alleged lack of food and medicines.  Is this so?

That is a big lie.  It was estimated that there were about 457,000 Angolan refugees in different countries in 2002.  The government’s repatriation programme, coordinated by the Ministry of Assistance and Social Reintegration, set the return of 400,000 Angolans as the target for the period 2003-2005.  By December last year, 360,000 had already returned to the country, representing 90% of the number forecast.  With regard to the former Unita military forces, about 97,000 ex-servicemen have benefited from the social reintegration programme supported by the government.

Another accusation has to do with the government’s lack of transparency.

That non-governmental organisation is patently showing ill will when it says the government has not made progress in this respect. Angola’s detractors pretend not to know that the country has a public sector budgetary and financial management system through which state funds are allocated.  Furthermore, the law approving the general state budget is passed by the National Assembly.  We have been abiding by the principle of a general budget; that is, there are no parallel budgets.  There are also supplementary mechanisms for controlling public expenditure, like the monthly budget plan, which is approved on the 10^th of each month, and the quarterly budget allocation plan, both of which are submitted for approval by the Council of Ministers.

With regard to additional resources stemming from the increase of oil prices on the international market, which Human Rights Watch accuses the government of not accounting for, what are the facts?

As regards this, the Council of Ministers has already approved a treasury reserve fund which is managed by the National Bank of Angola. Use of these funds depends on approval by the Council of Ministers.