more to institutional practices than to the unfounded fears of individual media professionals. In addition, participants reairmed the indings of previous rounds of the AMB, on regional diferences in the exercise of freedom of expression. hey reiterated that freedom of expression decreases the further one goes from the country’s main urban centresi.e. Maputo, Beira and Nampula. Citizens’ close physical proximity to local authorities, in contrast to the distance that permits anonymity in large cities, diminishes the practice of freedom of expression. Participants cited as an example, the case of presidential visits to the districts. It is during these visits that people usually complain about abuse by local State representatives. hey only reach the Head of State because people are afraid to express their opinions to local authorities. Scores: Individual scores: 1 Country does not meet indicator 2 Country meets only a few aspects of indicator 3 Country meets some aspects of indicator 4 Country meets most aspects of indicator 5 Country meets all aspects of the indicator Average score: 2.6 (2005 = 3.0; 2007 = 2.9; 2009 = 3.0) 1.3 There are no laws or parts of laws restricting freedom of expression such as excessive oficial secrets or libel acts, or laws that unreasonably interfere with the responsibilities of media. here are laws that restrict freedom of expression in Mozambique, including provisions in the Penal and Civil Codes. hree laws in particular, all adopted during the single party period and that also relects the conditions of a country at war, are especially restrictive. hey are: • 80 Law 19/91, of 18 August (Law on State Security). Under this law (Article 22), the defamation of certain senior igures – i.e. President of the Republic, Members of Parliament, senior judges and secretary generals of political parties – is considered a crime against state security. AFRICAN MEDIA BAROMETER MOZAMBIQUE 2011