2025 country profile

How democratic is
Mozambique?

Mozambique scores 43.2 out of 100 and ranks 117 of 179 in our independent 2025 democracy measure. Its lowest-scoring test is free and fair elections. Explore the evidence and history below.

Democracys.org beta estimate, derived from V-Dem v16. A measure of political institutions and conditions—not a percentage of democracy or a judgment of people.

Printable country brief Compare this country

DEMOCRACYS SCORE

43.2out of 100Major democratic constraints

2025 rank117 of 179

10-year change−10.9

25-year change−9.7

Source-bound range35.8–49.9

Weakest areaElections

The source-bound range is an uncertainty guide, not a confidence interval for this combined score. How to read the range →

SCORE HISTORY

Mozambique, 1975–2025

The shaded area is a plain-language uncertainty guide. Treat small score differences cautiously.

About uncertainty

BEYOND THE NUMBERS

What changed on the ground?

A documented development to help interpret the institutions behind the score.

2025 context · Freedom House assessment

A new opposition party gained room to organize

A leading opposition figure registered a new party that enrolled members and held public events without official interference, according to Freedom House. This was a specific opening for political organization. It should not erase the violence and restrictions reported around the preceding disputed election.

Read the country report · Freedom in the World 2026

AI-assisted source summary · not independently expert-reviewed

What this context does—and does not—explain

This is a selected development, not a complete political history. Its date may differ from the selected comparison period. It is not evidence that one event caused a particular number of points, and it may describe progress even when this index declines.

The scores use V-Dem. The narrative summarizes a separate assessment by Freedom House, whose definitions and coverage differ. Neither organization endorses this website. The summary is AI-assisted, source-linked, and has not received independent country-expert review. Source checked October 5, 2026.

Why democracy measures can disagree →

UNDERSTAND THE CHANGE

What drove the score?

2015–2025 · the measured story

The score for Mozambique fell 10.9 points, from 54.1 to 43.2 between 2015 and 2025. 1 of the five areas improved while 4 worsened, so the headline combines competing movements. Elections contributed the largest downward push in the score calculation.

Read the political context ↓

Largest influence on the calculation

Elections

The evidence rates electoral choice, voting rights, political organization, and the space for open debate less favorably.

Area score: 43.7 → 27.9
Approx. contribution to overall change: −3.7 points

Moving in the other direction

Participation

The evidence rates opportunities to participate through civic organizations, direct democracy, and local or regional institutions more favorably.

Area score: 52.8 → 53.2
Approx. contribution to overall change: +0.1 points

These contributions explain the calculation—not the causes. The five area scores combine several indicators; they do not identify which individual law, election, or event changed.

When did the biggest shifts appear?

The largest year-to-year movements within this period. These are changes in annual estimates, not precise dates of political events.

2018–2019−2.2 points
The overall score fell from 52.2 to 50.0. Participation supplied the largest downward contribution to that year’s calculated change.
2020–2021+1.9 points
The overall score rose from 48.9 to 50.8. Participation supplied the largest upward contribution to that year’s calculated change.
2023–2024−4.8 points
The overall score fell from 48.2 to 43.4. Public reasoning supplied the largest downward contribution to that year’s calculated change.

Highest published score in this window: 54.1 in 2015. Small differences may fall within the source’s uncertainty.

See all five areas and how contributions are calculated

Changes in inputs versus contributions to the overall score
Area	2015	2025	Input change	Approx. contribution
Elections	43.7	27.9	−15.8	−3.7
Public reasoning	59.6	44.0	−15.6	−3.0
Rights and checks	60.4	44.7	−15.7	−3.0
Political equality	54.7	48.7	−6.0	−1.2
Participation	52.8	53.2	+0.4	+0.1

We change the five inputs from their starting to ending values in every possible order, then average each area’s effect on the formula. This distributes the formula’s interactions (a Shapley allocation). It is a mathematical attribution, not a causal estimate.

Inputs and published scores are rounded, so contributions are approximate and may not add exactly to the displayed total. No significance test is implied. Read the full scoring method →

BENEATH THE SCORE

Five dimensions of democracy

The headline score cannot show where a political system is strong or constrained. These five tests can. Each has equal weight in the beta standard.

Free and fair elections

Can people choose their leaders through broad voting rights, honest elections, free political groups, and open public debate?

27.9

Rights and checks on power

Are basic freedoms protected, laws applied fairly, courts independent, and leaders prevented from abusing power?

44.7

Public participation

Can people shape public life through civic groups, direct voting, and meaningful local and regional government?

53.2

Public reasoning

Do leaders explain decisions, consult the public, answer opposing arguments, and consider the common good?

44.0

Political equality

Do different social groups have equal rights, access, resources, and a real chance to influence political power?

48.7

HOW TO READ THIS PROFILE

Two kinds of evidence.
One clearer picture.

The score breakdown identifies which parts of the measure changed most. The country report adds documented political context. Together they help explain the institutions at stake—but they do not prove that a specific event produced a specific number of points.

Why this score differs from other democracy indices →

What a declining score can—and cannot—tell us about democratic backsliding

A recent improvement can coexist with a long-term decline. Always compare the dates, check the linked source, and consider developments the selected narrative does not cover.

ANNUAL DATA

Mozambique score table

Download Mozambique CSV

Year	Score	Source-bound range	Elections	Rights & checks	Participation	Reasoning	Equality
2025	43.2	35.8–49.9	27.9	44.7	53.2	44.0	48.7
2024	43.4	35.7–50.5	31.0	45.5	51.6	42.1	48.6
2023	48.2	40.7–55.4	35.1	50.7	52.6	53.2	50.6
2022	49.1	41.4–56.3	36.6	53.7	51.8	53.2	51.4
2021	50.8	44.4–58.4	36.7	54.4	55.5	57.4	51.4
2020	48.9	42.0–56.6	36.4	53.3	49.0	55.4	51.5
2019	50.0	42.9–57.6	39.7	53.9	49.5	56.5	51.2
2018	52.2	45.0–59.6	40.0	56.0	53.8	58.4	53.9
2017	53.4	46.1–60.6	40.8	57.7	54.0	62.3	53.4
2016	53.8	47.1–61.6	43.3	58.7	54.2	60.5	53.4
2015	54.1	46.9–61.9	43.7	60.4	52.8	59.6	54.7
2014	54.9	48.0–62.9	43.0	61.2	52.8	61.6	57.3
2013	54.4	47.2–62.0	43.7	60.9	52.5	58.8	57.2
2012	55.5	48.2–62.7	42.7	60.8	52.9	63.9	58.7
2011	55.2	47.9–62.7	42.7	60.6	52.9	62.3	58.9
2010	54.5	47.5–62.3	42.5	60.5	52.9	59.8	58.1
2009	55.5	48.6–63.4	45.3	60.0	52.6	65.4	55.5
2008	55.4	48.3–63.4	45.6	60.2	52.6	63.2	56.2
2007	55.5	48.3–63.3	46.4	60.1	52.6	63.2	55.8
2006	55.6	48.3–63.2	46.4	60.1	52.6	63.0	56.6
2005	55.7	48.5–63.3	46.3	60.1	52.6	63.5	56.6
2004	55.3	48.4–62.7	42.5	61.1	52.7	63.5	57.9
2003	55.4	48.3–62.6	42.2	61.9	52.9	63.5	57.9
2002	54.8	47.4–62.1	41.9	61.3	52.9	61.3	57.9
2001	54.3	47.1–61.8	41.9	62.0	52.9	58.2	57.9
2000	52.9	45.8–61.0	41.9	62.0	51.8	52.0	57.9
1999	52.8	45.0–60.8	45.3	57.6	51.5	53.4	56.8
1998	52.6	44.6–60.8	46.0	57.6	51.5	53.4	54.8
1997	47.9	39.9–56.1	45.7	57.6	30.7	53.4	54.8
1996	48.0	40.3–56.5	45.7	58.3	30.7	53.4	54.8
1995	44.4	36.9–53.0	46.3	58.3	24.3	43.2	54.8
1994	38.5	31.7–45.7	24.6	56.4	24.3	40.8	52.3
1993	35.1	28.2–41.9	22.0	44.6	24.8	35.3	53.5
1992	32.8	25.8–39.3	18.3	42.8	24.8	32.3	51.0
1991	31.2	24.3–37.5	16.0	42.5	23.1	30.4	50.3
1990	25.6	18.8–31.4	12.3	37.8	16.5	20.4	49.7
1989	18.3	12.4–22.7	8.1	17.7	10.4	15.2	50.0
1988	18.1	12.2–22.4	8.1	17.7	10.4	14.2	50.0
1987	18.0	12.1–22.3	8.1	17.4	10.4	14.2	49.9
1986	18.1	12.1–22.5	8.0	16.7	10.4	15.4	50.3
1985	18.1	12.1–22.5	8.0	16.7	10.4	15.4	50.3
1984	18.1	12.1–22.5	8.0	16.7	10.4	15.4	50.3
1983	18.5	12.4–22.8	8.0	16.7	10.4	15.4	52.8
1982	18.6	12.6–23.1	8.0	16.7	10.4	15.4	53.9
1981	18.6	12.6–23.1	8.0	16.7	10.4	15.4	53.9
1980	18.6	12.6–23.1	8.0	16.7	10.4	15.4	53.9
1979	18.7	12.9–23.5	8.0	17.1	10.4	15.4	53.9
1978	18.7	12.9–23.5	8.0	17.1	10.4	15.4	53.9
1977	18.7	12.9–23.5	8.0	17.1	10.4	15.4	53.9
1976	18.9	13.0–23.5	8.0	18.1	10.4	15.4	53.9
1975	14.7	9.5–18.8	2.4	19.1	7.5	13.5	46.1
1974	6.6	2.8–9.0	3.4	11.4	3.3	4.6	13.4
1973	7.4	3.4–10.2	5.0	12.2	3.0	6.1	13.4
1972	6.4	2.7–8.8	2.7	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.3
1971	6.4	2.7–8.9	2.7	7.9	3.0	8.0	13.1
1970	6.4	2.7–8.9	2.7	7.8	3.0	8.0	13.1
1969	6.3	2.6–8.8	2.7	7.6	3.0	8.0	13.1
1968	6.3	2.6–8.8	2.7	7.6	3.0	8.0	13.1
1967	6.3	2.6–8.8	2.7	7.6	3.0	8.0	13.1
1966	6.3	2.6–8.8	2.7	7.6	3.0	8.0	13.1
1965	6.3	2.6–8.8	2.7	7.6	3.0	8.0	13.1
1964	6.3	2.6–8.8	2.7	7.6	3.0	8.0	13.1
1963	6.3	2.6–8.8	2.7	7.6	3.0	8.0	13.1
1962	6.3	2.6–8.8	2.7	7.6	3.0	8.0	13.1
1961	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.6	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1960	6.4	2.7–8.8	2.6	8.0	3.0	8.0	13.1
1959	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.6	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1958	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.6	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1957	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.6	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1956	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.6	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1955	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.6	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1954	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.6	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1953	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.6	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1952	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.6	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1951	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.6	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1950	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.6	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1949	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.6	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1948	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.6	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1947	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.6	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1946	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.6	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1945	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.6	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1944	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.7	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1943	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.7	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1942	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.7	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1941	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.7	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1940	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.7	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1939	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.7	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1938	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.7	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1937	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.7	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1936	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.7	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1935	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.7	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1934	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.7	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1933	6.3	2.7–8.8	2.7	7.7	3.0	8.0	13.1
1932	6.4	2.6–8.8	2.7	7.9	3.0	8.0	13.1
1931	6.4	2.6–8.8	2.7	7.9	3.0	8.0	13.1
1930	6.4	2.6–8.8	2.7	7.9	3.0	8.0	13.1
1929	6.5	2.8–8.9	2.8	8.2	3.0	8.0	13.1
1928	6.5	2.8–8.9	2.8	8.2	3.0	8.0	13.1
1927	6.5	2.8–8.9	2.8	8.2	3.0	8.0	13.1
1926	6.5	2.8–8.9	2.8	8.2	3.0	8.0	13.1
1925	6.5	2.8–9.0	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	13.1
1924	6.5	2.8–9.0	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	13.1
1923	6.5	2.9–9.0	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	13.1
1922	6.5	2.9–9.0	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	13.1
1921	6.5	2.9–9.0	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	13.1
1920	6.5	2.9–9.0	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	13.1
1919	6.5	2.9–9.0	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	13.1
1918	6.5	2.9–9.0	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	13.1
1917	6.5	2.9–9.0	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	13.1
1916	6.3	2.5–8.6	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	11.5
1915	6.3	2.5–8.6	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	11.5
1914	6.3	2.5–8.6	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	11.5
1913	6.3	2.5–8.6	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	11.5
1912	6.3	2.5–8.6	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	11.5
1911	6.3	2.5–8.6	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	11.5
1910	6.3	2.5–8.6	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	11.5
1909	6.3	2.5–8.6	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	11.5
1908	6.3	2.5–8.6	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	11.5
1907	6.3	2.5–8.6	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	11.5
1906	6.3	2.5–8.6	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	11.5
1905	6.3	2.5–8.6	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	11.5
1904	6.3	2.5–8.6	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	11.5
1903	6.3	2.5–8.6	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	11.5
1902	6.3	2.5–8.6	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	11.5
1901	6.3	2.5–8.6	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	11.5
1900	6.3	2.5–8.6	2.9	8.2	3.0	8.0	11.5

CITE THIS PROFILE

Source and attribution

Democracys.org (2026), “Mozambique Democracy Score, 1900–2025,” Democracys Standard v1.0 beta; derived from Coppedge et al. (2026), V-Dem Country-Year Dataset v16.

Open source DOI

NEARBY IN THE 2025 RANKING

#115Mali46.6 #116Thailand44.3 #118Vietnam41.7 #119Zimbabwe41.5

All rankings

How democratic isMozambique?