A request dated 30 June, obtained by Lupa News, reveals that Judge Júlio José Elias, initially appointed to chair the General Assembly of Tazetta Resources, refused to assume the role on the grounds that he did not have access to the essential elements required for the task, including the company’s statutes, corporate agreements and other regulatory instruments governing the company. In the document submitted to the Provincial Judicial Court of Zambezia, the judge raises questions regarding the grounds presented for choosing a person from outside the company, arguing that the law gives preference to the designation of one of the shareholders to chair the General Assembly. The positions expressed in the request add new elements to the debate surrounding the judicial process that resulted in the appointment of Carlos Martins, former President of the Mozambican Bar Association, to lead the transitional management of Tazetta Resources. Meanwhile, journalist and commentator Salomão Moyana believes that Carlos Martins should decline the appointment in order to avoid having his name associated with an increasingly controversial corporate dispute.
The crisis at Tazetta Resources, one of the largest companies in Zambezia Province and the main operator of the Pebane heavy mineral sands project, gained a new public dimension after Salomão Moyana publicly appealed to the former President of the Mozambican Bar Association to decline the invitation to lead the company’s transitional administration.
The position was expressed during a television intervention on MBC, in which Moyana described as “unusual” the judicial decisions that led to the removal of the previous management and the appointment of a new administrative structure by order of the Provincial Judicial Court of Zambezia.
However, according to Moyana, instead of limiting itself to assessing the request presented, Judge Celso Alexandre ordered the termination of the existing administration and appointed a transitional management committee, with Carlos Martins as the name indicated for its leadership. “Based on my opinion, Dr. Carlos Martins would not even get involved in this type of controversy,” Moyana stated, warning that accepting the position could affect the reputation of a figure widely respected in Mozambican society.
According to the commentator, the former President of the Bar Association has built a career of recognized merit in the legal and institutional fields, but risks seeing his name associated with a corporate dispute whose legality and legal basis continue to generate debate. “We should not take an honorable person and place him in a controversy of this nature,” he warned.
Moyana was particularly critical when assessing the effects of the judicial decisions. “More than one thousand people currently have their lives at a standstill,” he stated, arguing that the situation requires urgent attention from the relevant authorities.
Appeal to the Superior Council of the Judiciary
In addition to his appeal directed at Carlos Martins, the commentator urged the Superior Council of the Judiciary to carefully examine the conduct of Judge Celso Alexandre.
In his view, it is necessary to determine whether the decisions taken are fully supported by law or whether they resulted from interpretations capable of affecting predictability and confidence among economic actors.
The concern extends beyond Tazetta Resources. For several observers, the case is increasingly becoming a test of how courts intervene in corporate disputes involving large private companies.
The balance between protecting shareholders’ rights and preserving business stability has now emerged as one of the central issues in the debate.
Judge Refused to Chair General Assembly and Raised Procedural Concerns
The concerns raised by Salomão Moyana have gained new dimensions following the analysis of judicial documents consulted by Lupa News.
One of the most significant episodes involves Judge Júlio José Elias, from the Criminal Instruction Section of the Provincial Judicial Court of Zambezia, who formally refused to assume the chairmanship of the Tazetta Resources General Assembly to which he had been appointed.
In the request submitted to the court, the judge not only declined the appointment but also requested that one of the shareholders be designated to chair the General Assembly, arguing that the applicable legislation gives preference to this solution.
According to the judge, appointing a person external to the company should only occur when there are strong reasons justifying such a choice, and those grounds should be included in the judicial decision.
“The judgment from which the applicant was notified makes no reference whatsoever to the inconvenience of appointing one of the shareholders to chair the General Assembly convened. The judgment merely appointed an outsider to the company (…) without the minimum acceptable justification,” he wrote.
The judge argues that the rationale behind the law is based on the assumption that a shareholder has greater knowledge of the company’s statutes, corporate agreements and operations, and is therefore better positioned to conduct a General Assembly.
Even in cases where it becomes necessary to appoint an external person, he adds, that individual should have basic knowledge of the company’s operations and the instruments regulating its activities.
Júlio José Elias also states that the documents essential for carrying out the role were not made available to him. “No steps were taken to provide the applicant with the companies’ statutes and their respective corporate agreements,” the request states.
The judge adds that all the knowledge he had about Tazetta Resources and its shareholders came only from “basic and superficial information contained in the judgment” made available to him. “The applicant is merely a judge and cannot be expected to have information or instruments regulating the operation of private institutions (…)”, the document states.
In the same submission, the judge emphasizes that chairing a General Assembly, whether ordinary or extraordinary, requires knowledge of the company’s statutes, corporate agreements and internal rules. “To chair a company’s General Assembly, it is essential to have basic knowledge of the company’s operations (…) instruments which the applicant does not possess,” he wrote.
The request also warns about possible difficulties in successfully holding the General Assembly, referring to the “predictability of dissatisfaction by applicant Vasily Trubnikov”.
The request states that Vasily Trubnikov was a co-defendant in proceedings handled by Júlio José Elias in 2025, in which the decision led the businessman to file an appeal after considering that the outcome was not in his favour.
“The likelihood of dissatisfaction by the applicant Vasily Trubnikov, due to the appointment of an outsider (the applicant) to chair the General Assembly of the company in which he is a shareholder, arises from the fact that he was a co-defendant in proceedings handled by the applicant in 2025, whose decision was not favourable to the applicant Vasily Trubnikov, a circumstance that gave rise to an appeal. A copy of the order admitting the appeal is attached, and after being admitted, the appeal was forwarded to the Nampula Court of Appeal, where a decision is still pending.”
According to Júlio José Elias, because he had no access to the main case file, he was unaware of the positions taken by the parties and possible reactions to his appointment, circumstances that could compromise acceptance of any resolutions adopted at the meeting.
Carlos Martins Admits He Does Not Know the Company
“I am not a shareholder of the company,” he declared.
Although these statements do not undermine his professional integrity, they have contributed to the ongoing debate regarding the criteria used to select the person appointed to temporarily lead one of the most important companies in Zambezia Province.
A Case That Goes Beyond the Company’s Walls
As legal proceedings continue, the Tazetta Resources crisis is gradually becoming a matter of national interest.
The refusal by a judge to chair a General Assembly due to insufficient information, the appointment of a transitional management structure whose proposed leader acknowledges having no prior knowledge of the company, and salary delays affecting hundreds of families together create a scenario that raises questions about corporate governance, legal certainty and investor confidence.
Strategic Company at Risk of Paralysis
For Salomão Moyana, the consequences of the crisis have already gone beyond a simple dispute between shareholders.
Tazetta Resources is currently considered one of the largest employers in Zambezia Province, with more than one thousand workers directly dependent on its mining operations in Pebane and exploration projects developed in the Macuse region.
According to information gathered by Lupa News, salaries corresponding to the month of June remain outstanding, increasing anxiety among workers and their families.
The uncertainty is also beginning to affect operational and financial commitments previously undertaken by the former administration, in a context where the company remains without a definitive solution to the corporate dispute.
Meanwhile, Salomão Moyana’s appeal remains at the centre of the debate. For the commentator, Carlos Martins still has the opportunity to distance himself from a controversy that threatens to continue unfolding in the courts and in the public arena.
For the more than one thousand workers of Tazetta Resources, expectations remain focused on a swift solution capable of restoring stability to the company and preventing a corporate dispute from escalating into a broader social crisis.
Lupa News – Journalism in Detail