Government of Timor-Leste

Presidency of the Council of Ministers

Spokesperson of the Government of Timor-Leste

Ninth Constitutional Government

.............................................................................................................................

May 14th, 2025

Right of reply  

Right of reply to the article “Financial scandal causes constitutional crisis, Xanana Gusmão's Government accused of wanting to control the judiciary” – published by the newspaper Expresso on May 13^th, 2025

The Government of the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste, through the Spokesperson’s Office, exercises its right of reply to the article published by Expresso on May 13^th, 2025, entitled "Financial scandal causes constitutional crisis, Xanana Gusmão's Government accused of wanting to control judiciary".

This article contains several factual inaccuracies, serious omissions, unfounded interpretations, and relevant errors that must be corrected to uphold the truth and defend Timorese democratic institutions.

1. Misleading and sensationalist title

The article announces a "financial scandal" and a "constitutional crisis" without presenting any concrete facts to support these claims. At no point does the article demonstrate that there is a current financial scandal, nor does it prove the existence of any constitutional violation. It is a sensationalist and speculative formulation that seeks to attract attention at the expense of truthfulness and journalistic rigour.

2. Attempt to control the judiciary - unfounded

Reference is made to an "apparent attempt to control the judiciary" with the aim of pardoning individuals, including the Vice Prime Minister, Francisco Kalbuadi Lay. This allegation is absurd and unfounded:

The authority to grant pardons is an exclusive prerogative of the President of the Republic, not the Court of Appeal.

• Deputy Prime Minister Francisco Kalbuadi Lay has never been convicted of any crime and is therefore not in a position to be pardoned. On the contrary, the refusal of his ministerial appointment by the previous President of the Republic, without any formal charge or judicial process underway, was widely regarded as a violation of the principle of separation of powers and of the Constitution;

• Richard Daschbach has no connection to the Government, and the attempt to associate his name with an alleged strategy of interference in the judiciary is profoundly irresponsible.

3. False statement about replacing all the judges of the Court of Appeal

The article states that "all the judges of the Court of Appeal have been replaced." This statement is factually incorrect and deeply misleading. No judge was dismissed or removed. What has occurred is merely the appointment of a new President of the Court of Appeal, following the expiry of the previous President's term of office and in accordance with the legal and constitutional terms in force.

Additionally, the former President of the Court of Appeal, Dr. Deolindo dos Santos, was appointed a few days before the new President of the Republic took office, which at the time raised legitimate questions about the institutional appropriateness of this decision. In contrast, the current appointment occurred in a regular and transparent manner, following a smooth transition at the end of the mandate, based on legislation approved by the National Parliament and enacted by the President of the Republic.

It should also be made clear that although the Court of Appeal will provisionally exercise the competences attributed to the future Supreme Court of Justice, it is not the Supreme Court of Justice. Therefore, the election rules for that court, namely the internal election of its president by his peers, do not apply to it.

Throughout the Constitution's existence, all Presidents of the Court of Appeal were appointed by the sitting President of the Republic, in accordance with the law. Thus, the appointment of the current President of the Court of Appeal adheres to the same institutional practice established since Timor-Leste's independence.

4. Citation of unidentified and legally weak opinions

The text mentions a legal opinion that allegedly declares the appointment of the new President of the Court of Appeal to be unconstitutional, without, however, identifying the article of the Constitution that would have been violated. On the contrary, Law 4/2025, approved by the National Parliament and enacted by the President of the Republic, clearly states that until the Supreme Court of Justice is established, it is up to the Head of State to appoint the President of the Court of Appeal, provided that he or she has served in the judiciary for at least 20 years – a requirement that Judge Afonso Carmona fully meets, according to official data published in the Official Gazette.

Additionally, the article suggests, without providing any evidence, that the Court of Appeal itself requested the opinion—a claim that is not publicly documented and, if true, would be highly questionable.

5. Veiled attempts to incite instability

The article alludes to the possibility of "popular demonstrations or uprisings" on Independence Restoration Day, without any real evidence to support this claim. This insinuation is irresponsible and lacks a factual basis, especially at a time when Timorese institutions are functioning normally and in an environment of social peace. There are no indicators of any disturbance to public order, and the appointment of the new President of the Court of Appeal occurred calmly, with total respect for the legal order.

6. Serious factual error about the date of independence

It is stated that Independence Day is celebrated on May 28^th. This information is incorrect. Timor-Leste's Restoration of Independence occurred on May 20^th, 2002, a date officially enshrined in the Constitution and recognised as a national holiday.

7. Non-existent right to be heard and dubious sources

Expresso claims to have attempted to contact the government through its delegation in Brussels. It is difficult to understand why an official response was not sought from the government bodies in Dili or from the Presidency of the Republic, which holds the power of appointment. This failure in the right to be heard significantly undermines the article's credibility.

The article also repeatedly refers to anonymous and vague sources — such as “judicial sources”, “military sources”, “unofficial sources”, or “a source close to the matter” — without any effort to verify or contextualise the information. When not accompanied by institutional counterpoints or direct contradictions, this practice promotes a biased and politically slanted narrative and compromises the impartiality and seriousness of journalistic content.

Conclusion

The article published by Expresso on May 13^th, 2025, presents factual errors, biased interpretations, and relevant omissions that harm public understanding and misrepresent the external perception of Timor-Leste's democratic institutions' regular and legitimate functioning.

The new President of the Court of Appeal was appointed in accordance with legislation approved by the National Parliament, fully complying with the Constitution and Timorese institutional practices since independence.

The Government of the Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste reaffirms its commitment to the rule of law, the separation of powers, and the independence of the judiciary. It rejects any attempt to politically instrumentalise the justice system.

Expresso is therefore requested to publish this right of reply in full, with the same prominence given to the original article, for the sake of balance, transparency, and journalistic accountability.

 

Dili, May 14^th, 2025

Office of the Government Spokesperson

Presidency of the Council of Ministers

Democratic Republic of Timor-Leste