Mozambique’s Administrative Tribunal prevented more than 1.2 billion meticais (€16.1 million) in irregular spending through prior scrutiny of contracts and administrative acts during the first half of the year, more than three times the amount prevented in 2025. “The Administrative Tribunal ensured that more than 1.2 billion meticais was not spent irregularly or illegally (…)… Source
Mozambique’s Administrative Tribunal prevented more than 1.2 billion meticais (€16.1 million) in irregular spending through prior scrutiny of contracts and administrative acts during the first half of the year, more than three times the amount prevented in 2025.
“The Administrative Tribunal ensured that more than 1.2 billion meticais was not spent irregularly or illegally (…) by the Public Administration,” the tribunal’s spokesperson, Arquimedes João Varimelo, said at a press conference in Maputo on the institution’s activities during the first half of 2026.
According to the data presented, the Administrative Tribunal reviewed more than 28,000 cases submitted for prior scrutiny for the granting of approval or registration, of which around 20,000 were found to comply with legal requirements. The remainder were rejected, not registered or returned to Public Administration bodies for further documentation because of irregularities.
The main irregularities identified included a lack of transparency in public tenders, the absence of guarantees from contractors, incompatibility between the subject of contracts and the licences held by the companies awarded the contracts, and what was considered excessive use of direct procurement.
“Direct procurement is an exception to the rule. However, the exception to the rule seems to be becoming the rule,” Varimelo said, also pointing to the excessive use of urgency on grounds of service convenience, a mechanism that allows contracts, under certain circumstances, to be executed before the tribunal’s prior scrutiny.
The scrutiny also identified contracts and administrative acts carried out without prior submission to the tribunal, public funds spent outside the normal public financial management system, payment of allowances for days other than those recorded, and expenditure without the corresponding supporting documents.
In the first half of 2025, the Administrative Tribunal had prevented more than 350 million meticais (€4.7 million) in irregular spending by refusing approvals and returning cases for further documentation.
“In the same period last year, the Administrative Tribunal, through the refusal of approvals and the return of cases for further documentation, prevented more than 350 million meticais from being spent. But this year we are already talking about 1.2 billion meticais, that is, three times the amount prevented last year,” he said.
Under its concurrent and subsequent scrutiny, the tribunal carried out 55 of the 199 audits planned for 2026, identifying further irregularities in the management of public resources. It also received more than 1,925 management accounts, of which 45 were certified and 110 were referred for adjudication because they contained irregularities or indications of illegality.
The tribunal’s intervention enabled more than 88 million meticais (€1.2 million) to be recovered for the state coffers through restitution orders, fines and interest imposed on public officials. In the first half of 2025, the amount recovered had exceeded 50 million meticais (€671,000).
“We found that these worrying situations are, among other things, caused by problems that the Administrative Tribunal has already identified. Some of them are publicly known and, in our view, are structural problems,” the spokesperson said.
Varimelo called for greater training for officials responsible for preparing cases, stronger internal controls and compliance with public procurement and financial management rules, arguing that these measures could reduce the irregularities detected by the tribunal.
In its judicial function, the Administrative Tribunal reduced its case backlog by 20% in the first half of the year, while hearings of administrative, tax, customs and financial cases tripled. The resolution rate exceeded 100%, meaning that more cases were adjudicated than were received during the period.
The institution attributed the improvement to internal reorganisation measures, including the reassignment of deputy advisers to different sections, the creation of new adjudication panels and the setting of targets for its judicial activity.
