The modernisation of the Machipanda border crossing, the largest project on the Beira Corridor, is now before the courts. The US$37 million international public tender has been suspended by a decision of the Maputo City Administrative Court, but the government insists it has not been cancelled.
At issue is the International Public Tender launched by the Ministry of Transport and Logistics for the Development of the Integrated Machipanda Border Project under a public-private partnership (PPP).
The project provides for the construction of an International Freight Terminal, a Passenger Terminal, a new international bridge over the Machipanda River and all the infrastructure for the One-Stop Border Post. The tender was awarded to Union Energy / Zhongmei for US$37 million.
Dissatisfied with the outcome, the competing bidder Safaga International Management, which claims to have invested more than US$5.8 million in its bid, lodged a complaint and subsequently filed an administrative appeal with the Minister of Transport and Logistics.
According to the case records, the appeal was dismissed on the grounds of a procedural omission: the failure to attach the bank guarantee. The bidder then took the matter to the Maputo City Administrative Court, seeking suspension of the effects of the award decision. It alleged irregularities, including insufficient reasoning, inadequate assessment of the criteria, doubts about the technical and financial feasibility of the winning bid, an improperly constituted evaluation panel, and breaches of the principles of equality, transparency and competition.
The Ministry of Transport and Logistics, through Permanent Secretary Irina Amélia Soares Ribeiro, opposed the application, raising objections concerning standing and jurisdiction. It argued that the case should be heard by the First Section of the Administrative Court, since the Minister had issued the final decision.
However, the Maputo City Administrative Court rejected these objections. In its ruling of 24 September 2026, the judges considered that the Minister’s decision had merely confirmed the earlier decision and that the entity named as the respondent was the author of the contested award decision. The court therefore held that it did have jurisdiction.
Accordingly, the court upheld Safaga International Management ‘s application and ordered the suspension of the effects of the administrative decision by which the Ministry had awarded the contract to the competing bidder.
The court also ordered the Ministry to refrain from signing the concession contract, issuing an order to commence work or taking any other implementation measure that could consolidate the effects of the award, until a decision is reached in the main administrative appeal or a court ruling varies or lifts the interim measure. The decision was supported by a favourable opinion from the Public Prosecutor’s Office.
Government denies tender has been cancelled
In a press release issued on Tuesday through the Government Information Office (GABINFO), the government, through the Ministry of Transport and Logistics, clarified that the tender had not been cancelled.
The government explained that an interim injunction is a provisional judicial measure intended to safeguard rights while the matter is being examined. It does not constitute cancellation of the tender or a final ruling on the legality of the procedure.
According to a source familiar with the case, under points (e) and (a) of Article 28 of Law No. 24/2013 of 1 November, as amended by Law No. 7/2015 of 6 October, an application for suspension of the effects of an administrative act must be submitted to the First Section of the Administrative Court, since the final administrative appeal decision was issued by the Minister of Transport and Logistics, a member of the government.
Accordingly, on grounds of subject-matter jurisdiction, the Maputo City Administrative Court is not competent to hear either the administrative appeal or the application for interim relief, in view of the latest administrative decision issued at the stage of the administrative appeal, under Article 101 of the Code of Civil Procedure, read in conjunction with points (a) and (j) of Article 50(1) of Law No. 24/2013 of 1 November, as amended by Law No. 7/2015 of 6 October.
For the same reason — that the Minister is the proper party to the proceedings — jurisdiction to hear the case no longer rests with the Maputo City Administrative Court but, as strictly required by law, with the Administrative Court.
The government reiterates that the process complied with the eligibility, qualification and evaluation criteria established in advance. Given that the project is strategic for the development of the Beira Corridor and for improving the movement of people and goods, the government remains committed to ensuring its implementation under conditions that safeguard the public interest. The government also reiterates its respect for court decisions and its commitment to legality, transparency and the protection of the public interest.
By Francisco Raiva
Source: O País