Mozambique’s New Decree Effectively Legalises Internet Shutdowns

By Herman Ramos

The Mozambican government has approved a revision of the Telecommunications Traffic Control Regulation, originally established by Decree No. 38/2023 of 3 July, granting the national telecommunications regulator the authority to block or suspend telecommunications networks in situations deemed to pose an “imminent risk” to public security or social order.

Front page of the decree No. 48/2025 document, approved in late 2025

The new decree No. 48/2025, approved in late 2025, revises the 2023 regulation with the stated aim of strengthening its effectiveness and adapting it to evolving technological and security challenges. However, civil society organisations and opposition figures warn that the revised framework effectively legalises internet shutdowns, undermines constitutional rights, and opens the door to arbitrary and politically motivated restrictions on communications.

Expanded Powers for the Telecommunications Regulator

Under the revised decree No. 48/2025, the National Institute of Communications of Mozambique (INCM), the country’s telecommunications regulatory authority, is empowered to enforce court orders suspending or conditioning telecommunications services. Article 5(f) authorises the regulator to execute judicial orders for the interruption or conditioning of telecommunications services, and to block traffic deemed fraudulent, in cases involving suspected criminal activity or threats to state security and public order.

Article 10 of the regulation further specifies that the suspension or blocking of telecommunications traffic constitutes a preventive measure intended to mitigate risks. These measures may be applied totally or partially and can target specific subscribers, devices, or service providers.

The regulation allows the INCM to block voice, data, images, and other forms of communication for up to 48 hours, provided there are clear and well-founded indications of fraudulent activity or situations posing an imminent risk to public security or social order, allegedly based on a judicial order.

In addition, the regulator may determine to immediately suspend telecommunications services if there is a verified or presumed risk of fraud arising from the misuse of telecommunications systems to the detriment of operators, consumers, or the state. While such measures are subject to subsequent judicial validation, critics argue that this post hoc oversight offers little real protection against abuse.

Concerns Over Constitutionality and Arbitrary Enforcement

The Centre for Democracy and Human Rights (CDD) has strongly criticised the revised regulation, warning that it creates space for arbitrary decision-making by failing to establish clear and objective criteria and by lacking guarantees of effective and independent judicial oversight.

According to the CDD, Decree No. 48/2025 directly violates the Constitution of the Republic of Mozambique (CRM), particularly Article 48, which guarantees freedom of expression, freedom of the press, and the right to information, as well as Article 68, which protects the inviolability of private communications and prohibits prior censorship.

“The decree grants the government excessively broad powers to impose total or partial restrictions on access to electronic communications,” the organisation said in a statement. “These restrictions may selectively affect subscribers, devices, or service providers, based on regulatory instructions supported by judicial orders whose nature, scope, and procedural safeguards remain dangerously vague.”

In practice, the CDD argues, the regulation establishes a legal framework that enables the effective suspension of the right to communication, paving the way for administrative arbitrariness and the political instrumentalisation of telecommunications infrastructure.

Limits on Rights Must Be Set by Parliament

The CDD further emphasises that, under the Mozambican Constitution, limitations on fundamental rights, freedoms, and guarantees can only be established by law passed by the Assembly of the Republic, not by government decree. On this basis, the organisation considers the regulation to be materially unconstitutional.

Since 2018, governments led by the ruling Frelimo party have repeatedly resorted to internet and mobile network shutdowns during electoral and post-electoral periods, a practice widely criticised as a means of civic silencing and information control. These shutdowns have prevented citizens from documenting and sharing evidence of electoral fraud, police repression, and human rights violations, undermining the constitutional right to political participation enshrined in Articles 73 and subsequent provisions of the CRM.

Following the 2024 general, legislative, and provincial elections, the government led by then-President Filipe Nyusi imposed internet access restrictions for more than 10 days, affecting operators such as Movitel, Vodacom, and Tmcel, as well as several internet service providers. The measure amounted to a suspension in practice of the right to communication, implemented without recourse to the constitutional regime of a state of siege or emergency, as provided for in Articles 290 and subsequent provisions of the CRM.

Warnings of Democratic Backsliding

For the CDD, the new regulation represents a serious and systematic violation of multiple fundamental rights, including freedom of expression and the press, the right to information, political participation rights, the inviolability of private communications, and the principle of legislative reservation.

The organisation warns that the legalisation of communications shutdowns constitutes a form of social control incompatible with a democratic state governed by the rule of law, placing Mozambique alongside authoritarian regimes that use digital censorship as a political weapon. By allowing broad restrictions without objective criteria, effective judicial safeguards, or independent oversight mechanisms, the regulation creates fertile ground for abuses, political persecution, and repression of journalists, human rights defenders, and activists, contrary to the state’s constitutional duty to respect, protect, and promote human rights under Article 11 of the CRM.

The CDD also stresses that state security cannot be invoked as a blanket justification to nullify fundamental rights and that any limitation must strictly comply with the Constitution and with international treaties ratified by Mozambique, including the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights and the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

Opposition Reaction and Legal Challenge

Venâncio Mondlane, president of the opposition party Anamola and former presidential candidate in the 2025 elections, echoed these concerns, arguing that the decree unlawfully restricts rights protected by the Constitution.

“There is no constitutional provision that allows the government to do what it is doing,” Mondlane said at a press conference in Maputo. “It is violating citizens’ fundamental rights and usurping powers that belong exclusively to the Assembly of the Republic.”

According to Mondlane, only Parliament has the constitutional legitimacy to authorise restrictions on fundamental rights. He recalled that even during exceptional circumstances such as the COVID-19 pandemic, it was the Assembly of the Republic that approved the relevant legal instruments.

“The only institution that can determine restrictions on these rights is the Assembly of the Republic, not the government,” he said, adding that Anamola would submit a proposal to the Constitutional Council seeking a declaration of unconstitutionality.

Mondlane also accused the executive of resorting to repressive measures in response to social dissent, calling on citizens to remain resolute. “These changes are a reaction to the determination of the people. Sovereignty belongs to the people and must be exercised consciously,” he concluded.

Journalist Fernando Lima told MCB TV that governments do have prerogatives regarding internet use, but stressed that it is essential to ensure that such laws do not violate constitutional rights.

According to Lima, Decree No. 48/2025, approved by the Council of Ministers, which authorizes the government to block telecommunications networks in situations deemed to pose an “imminent risk” to public security or social order, must not undermine fundamental constitutional rights, such as freedom of expression and opinion exercised through the internet.

He further argues that the decree seeks to provide a legal framework for interventions similar to those carried out during the 2024 protests, which may recur.

For Lima, only judicial oversight can prevent excesses and abuses in the implementation of such measures.

Sanctions, Impunity, and Broader Impacts

The controversy unfolds against the backdrop of previous telecommunications shutdowns, particularly following the 2024 elections, when internet access was restricted for more than ten days across multiple operators. The revised regulation, in force since December, follows a series of telecommunications blackouts, including restrictions on social media, during protests after the October 2024 elections, which resulted in more than 400 deaths.

At the time, a precautionary injunction filed by civil society organisations was upheld by the Maputo City Judicial Court, which ruled the internet shutdown illegal. However, there are no records of effective sanctions being applied to either the operators or the regulatory authority responsible for ordering the shutdowns.

Beyond its legal and political implications, the new regulation imposes severe financial penalties on telecommunications operators that fail to comply with shutdown orders, with fines reaching up to 1,500 times the public service minimum wage. Critics argue that this provision effectively turns private telecom companies into instruments of state coercion.

Beyond the political and social consequences, the restrictions also entail high economic costs, as internet access and social media platforms are essential not only for communication but also for employment, information access, academic research, and the functioning of the digital economy.