Lisbon, June 29, 2026 (Lusa) - Analysts interviewed by Lusa to mark the 30th anniversary of the CPLP acknowledged that the organisation’s mobility agreement had been undermined by the member states themselves, particularly by Portugal, despite it being in force.
On 17 July 2021, on the organisation’s 25th anniversary, during the 13th Conference of Heads of State and Government in Luanda, Angola, the “Agreement on Mobility between Member States of the Community of Portuguese Language Countries [CPLP]” was adopted.
However, in Portugal, the law on foreign nationals, passed in July last year, has altered the entry requirements for Portuguese-speaking citizens, who must now apply for a work or residence visa in their country of origin in order to obtain a residence permit.
The Portuguese analyst Fernando Jorge Cardoso describes the CPLP mobility agreement as the community's greatest achievement.
When asked about Portugal’s backtracking on this issue, he explained that this was due to a change in the ruling party, the Socialist Party led by António Costa, which governed until 2024, was one of the agreement’s staunchest supporters, and to the fact that this is a political trend currently prevailing in the international context.
“Portugal is constrained not only by its domestic policy but also by the rules of the Schengen Area,” he explained.
However, he stressed that Portugal has not scrapped the agreement.
Angolan political scientist Almeida Henriques argued that Portugal “needs to be more visionary” on the issue of mobility and that the restrictions “do not help and demotivate citizens of the community”.
Meanwhile, the president of Lusíada University in Sao Tome and Príncipe, Liberato Moniz, lamented that free movement has hardly been implemented within the Portuguese-language bloc and is instead used only when there is a need for labour, citing the Portuguese case in particular.
For Redy Lima, a Cape Verde analyst, the problem is more structural.
“Visa facilitation ultimately amounts to a neocolonial idea: Portugal needs labour and makes it easier for people to go and work there, but Cape Verdeans who want to go on holiday or visit family continue to face difficulties,” lamented the sociologist.
In his view, and he describes himself as sceptical of the organisation, “the CPLP project has failed, and the mobility agreement reflects the unequal relationship between member states”.
Elísio Macamo, a Mozambican university lecturer based in Switzerland, reported that the mobility agreement had had “absolutely no impact on his life” and that this is “perhaps the most disappointing aspect”, as it demonstrates “the limitations of this Portuguese-language world”, in which “many initiatives have run aground”.
On the other hand, he explained that, for example, Portugal, as a member of the European Union, and Brazil, as part of Mercosur, are limited in what they can do regarding mobility.
“Even on the African side, there isn’t much flexibility to facilitate the entry of Portuguese or Brazilian nationals,” he acknowledged.
Adriano de Freixo, a Brazilian analyst of Portuguese descent with dual nationality, stated that, in his view, the issue of mobility has had no impact, and reported that friends and colleagues of his have told him that the queues at Portuguese airports for CPLP citizens are sometimes longer than those for citizens of other nationalities.
Redy Lima argued that over the next decade, the CPLP should focus on mobility and consolidate it.
“Making progress on the issue of mobility would be half the battle won for the CPLP to consolidate itself. People need to feel the CPLP. If it manages to overcome this obstacle, it will open up other opportunities,” he said.
For his part, Almeida Henriques called for “liberalisation in terms of mobility within the CPLP area”.
The CPLP, which marks its 30th anniversary on 17 July, comprises Angola, Brazil, Cabo Verde, Guinea-Bissau, Equatorial Guinea, Mozambique, Portugal, Sao Tome and Príncipe, and Timor-Leste.
NYC/ADB // ADB.
Lusa
