Mauritius News
Change for the sake of Change
Written by Editor Thursday, 22 December 2011 23:47
READ CURRENT EDITION ON LINE––Click on 'Electronic MN' on menu bar above
This article from the editor was published in Le Mauricien of 30.01.12
Electoral Reform Fever
If we are not for ourselves who will be for us? (Dravidian saying)
Mauritius has been suffering for the past few months from a severe spell of electoral reform fever. Everyone is talking about it at home and even overseas.
Every member of every community has every right to lobby for his or her own community, especially in Parliament, as highlighted by Harish Boodhoo that “chaque jacot protège so mantagne.” Harish Boodhoo, in this simple statement of fact, defines with great precision the mental make-up and political inclination of the nation when it comes to the concern of one own’s interests. No amount of denial from anyone will wipe out this truth, which is almost an axiom––a self-evident truth that demands no proof.
We say again that the word communalism should not be given a bad name. But as a matter of fact what is the meaning of the word itself that strikes terror in the hearts of so many Mauritians? To begin with, it is a word that cannot be found in any dictionary except perhaps in Hoomooksing/Baker’s Creole dictionary? From where does that word come? What is its origin in terms of being racist or sectarian?
The more we analyse this word the more we can’t find it to be totally wrong especially when it indicates a necessity to be ‘solidaire’ to protect oneself against domination and exploitation. This may give rise to the wrong idea that being concerned about one own community’s welfare and advancement is a form of communalism. In that respect, all Mauritians are communalists, but not necessarily in any bad sense. On the other hand, only those who practise favouritism in whatever form should be chastised.
In fact, the Mauritian word communalism may find its root in the 1950s/1960s groundless fear of domination/hegemony that was instilled in the mind of the nation to fight independence of the island. It was coined by one section of the community, especially by political leaders, to denigrate and expose the alleged clannish mentality of another section of the community. Another word associated with communalism was ‘koonism’, coined the same way. Communalism was coined to create fear in the mind of the nation, and is probably still being used for the same purpose.
However, it was the fear of that hegemony that every community needed safeguard to protect their rights. Safeguard was essential at the time of independence in 1968, and the same safeguard is essential in 2012. The population is still made up of Indo-Mauritians (Hindus and Muslims), Creoles, Sino-Mauritians, Franco- Mauritians, not much has changed. Are we all communalists for that matter?
The same safeguard is demanded by every section of the Mauritian community as embodied in the Constitution of the country. This Constitution was not obtained on a plate or at the drop of a hat. It was given to Mauritius after protracted negotiations extending over several years involving all the political parties under the leadership SSR. SSR put his reputation on the line for this Constitution as a package to the independence of Mauritius. SSR is to this day blamed for the Chagos excision that was allegedly agreed during the constitutional talks in London.
We can sympathise with members of the Muslim community who understand the importance of the guarantee provided by the much denigrated Best Loser System embodied in the Constitution. They understand that what they have was fought for by the first leader of the CAM, Sir Abdul Razack Mohamed (SARM). SARM was denied the same guarantee by former political friends. He found a soul mate in SSR and he gave his party’s support to the independence movement. Had he, as leader of a minority, refused to trust SSR and turned the other way, independence could have been denied in the 1960s, and delayed for many years at a time of serious racial tension in the country. It is a great tribute to SARM’s memory that on the stèle at Place d’Armes dedicated to him, we read his historical declaration:
Independence is historically
Inevitable and it will unlock
The potential of our nation
Let us not therefore oppose
It but make a virtue
And
A success of it.
The constitutional reform must be done to safeguard the interests of the different races (human of course) making up the Mauritian nation. It should not be for the benefit of politicians in the race to the National Assembly. The practice of First Past the Post is considered unfair, the politicians want even those who never make it to the finishing line to enter the Assembly.
It is good to learn that here in the UK one of the Olympic Games’ leitmotifs will be to celebrate the diversity of Great Britain. Instead of celebrating diversity in Mauritius they want to push it under the carpet. One wonders as to how will they ever be able to implement the Equality legislation if the ethnicity of the nation already causes the country so much headache. Ethnic monitoring is the most important ingredient in the application of any equal opportunities policy. We can sort of foresee the South Indians (Tamils and Telegus) wanting to be identified as such. As regards the North Indians, the Marathis, the Gujuratis, the Singhs etc may want to stand up and be counted. It’s probably better to leave the lid on this can of worms.
Peter Chellen
225th birth anniversary of Chettiar Rama Tiroumoudy
Written by Editor Tuesday, 12 July 2011 11:14
The Mauritian archives indicate that many Tamilians came to the island from Pondicherry in the early years of the French occupation. These first Pondicherians landed in Isle de France from “Le Sirène” in July 1730. They were brought to the island for their craftsmanship as skilful stonecutters, masons and bricklayers. (1)
This trend continued throughout the 18th century with Mahé de La Bourdonnais and Pierre Poivre. The two administrators recruited Tamilian masons, carpenters and ironsmiths for construction and reconstruction works in Port Louis where “le génie dravidien se manifesta par la symétrie de leurs travaux.” (Ibid) Several monuments still testify of the building genius of these artisans. “Des exemples d’architecture laissés par ces ouvriers sont entre autres l’Hôtel du gouvernement, la Citadelle, des églises et autres édifices.”(Ibid)
Read more: 225th birth anniversary of Chettiar Rama Tiroumoudy
The power game and points to ponder over the electoral reform
Written by Editor Friday, 18 November 2011 22:32
(See also 'Electronic MN' on the menu bar above)
In previous articles, especially at the time of the last election, MN analysed the possibility of an alliance between the Labour Party of Navin Ramgoolam (PM) and either the MSM of Pravind Jugnauth or the MMM of Paul Bérenger.
It was almost certain that Navin Ramgoolam would go the Bérenger way, but at the 11th hour he allied himself with Pravind leaving Bérenger by the wayside. Navin and Pravind, two strange bedfellows, and like all alliances their union was bound to fail, and it did in September over the MedPoint scandal, a private medical concern partly owned by the relatives of the Jugnauths allegedly sold to Government at an inflated price over an original quote.
The case was brought to the consideration of ICAC (Independent Commission Against Corruption.) MMM and Opposition leader Paul Bérenger was most vociferous in attacking the Government of which the Jugnauths were part and parcel. “Scandal of the Century”, was his condemnation of the purchase of the MedPoint clinic at 144 million rupees when it was first quoted at 75 million rupees.
MSM/MMM alliance
A rumour has widely been circulating in Mauritius that to unseat Navin Ramgoolam (déboulonner Ramgoolam as they did in 2000), Paul Bérenger is now allying himself with the MSM of the Jugnauths with the prospect of Jugnauth, The Elder (80 years’ old and now President of the Republic) will come back into active politics to take over the reins of Prime Minister once more for three years in a power-sharing government with the MMM, and Paul Bérenger will be PM for the remaining two years. A similar scenario between the two leaders took place in 2000.
This time, though, Ramgoolam may have a trump card in his hand. How will Paul Bérenger explain to the electorate the fact that only yesterday he was vehemently chastising Jugnauth, The Younger, Finance Minister in the Labour/MSM government for approving the government purchase of the MedPoint clinic in which his close relatives are said to hold the majority shares. Earlier this century, Jugnauth senior as PM and Paul Bérenger as Finance Minister were highly criticised by Navin Ramgoolam, Opposition leader then, for the sale of the former Delphis Bank at a derisory price. Ramgoolam said that he would set up a Commission of Inquiry into the Delphis saga if ever he came to power.
What a campaign it could well be as regards the next ekection. Many in London see in any MSM/ MMM alliance an end to Ramgoolam’s reign. Is it so?
Electoral Reform
This is an opportunity, as any other, to talk of the Electoral Reform on which we elaborated in our previous issue under the headline “Mauritian expatriates want the Right to Vote in Mauritius”. Incidentally, we wonder what the Mauritius Government will do for the Diaspora now that they (the Diaspora) are being officially solicited to invest in Mauritius.
Anyway, our present point about the prospective electoral reform is about legislation to forbid alliances between political parties before an election, as advocated in the past by MMM leader Paul Bérenger himself. Any coalition of parties should take place after election results are known. This will be fair to the electorate who will not have to be subjected to the party leaders’ policy of Kiss and Kick i.e. Kiss today and Kick tomorrow (and vice versa). Such politics is most unfair on the electorate who must put up with the whims of the leaders to suit their own convenience during an election campaign, and even afterwards.
Electoral Reform: Proposals by Guy Ollivry and Rama Sithanen
Now let us talk about electoral reform again. In a paper that he submitted to press a decade ago, Guy Ollivry, leader of the UDM (a party that never made any impact on the political scene), made a plea in favour of Proportional Representation on the ground that it would prevent the 60-0 phenomenon that occurred twice in Mauritius. In 1982, the MMM (with Anerood Jugnauth on board) on its own steam won all the 60 seats of the National Assembly. The ruling Labour Party went into disarray for several years. Even the party’s leader and PM, SSR (Father of the Nation), was not re-elected in his cherished constituency of Triolet.
Labour was not to recover from this disaster until some party stalwarts, in the early 1990s, came and fetched a reluctant Navin Ramgoolam, son of SSR, from London to be the new party leader. Well, in 1995, the new Labour leader, in alliance with the MMM of Paul Bérenger, took all the seats in the Assembly leaving none to their political adversaries, the ruling MSM of Sir Anerood Jugnauth who left the MMM in 1983 to create his own party.
Mr Ollivry believes that PR would rid the country of this 60-0 phenomenon. Unfortunately, the fact is that, in spite of some cliché, people vote essentially for the party and not necessarily for the individual MP. It has been said in Mauritius that an out-and-out partisan will vote even for a monkey if such an animal is fielded by his party as a candidate. It must be an enormous pleasure for the electors to witness the total wipe out of a party, with all its members, when it has lost all sense of direction. Mr Ollivry says that this is not good. Under the PR system, the hated party (or coalition) must still have some MPs in the House, in accordance with the votes obtained, he reckons. This could be thwarting the wishes of the electorate.
Communalism
The paper submitted to the press by Rama Sithanen, (a former Labour Finance Minister who failed to obtain a Party ticket at the last election) argued for a modicum of PR to eliminate the Best Loser System, which he said, encouraged communalism. (In our October issue we elaborated on this system).
What is communalism and how does one define it? Communalism has to do with community, purely and simply. In France, they have a new word for this communal spirit that they refer to as ‘communautarism’.
Communalism may be used both to mean a state of togetherness, and to demean the same state of togetherness. In the positive sense it can mean service to a community or within a community. In the negative sense, it can mean service to one community at the expense of, or disregarding, all other communities, tantamount to favouritism. One can imagine the state of affairs in multiracial Mauritius under any regime.
We will not shout loud enough to say that communalism is ingrained in the Mauritian psyche, i.e. in the Mauritian way of life, culturally, religiously, politically, etc., etc. Senior posts, be it in Government or the private sector are NORMALLY effected on the basis of communal consideration (Police chief, Service Commissions chairman, Cabinet Secretary, etc and etc). If we have a look at appointments in the Mauritius Diplomatic Service under whatever government we can see that there is yet to be High Commissioner in Australia who is not from the General Population and there is yet to be a High Commissioner in the UK from the same General Population. The same practice may be taking place at the UN and in other embassies. This is the prevailing mentality of our country.
Can Mr Sithanen assure us that any Constitution reform will eliminate the communal spirit in Mauritius? Many members of his own community were convinced that his deselection at the last general election was based on communalism, though we at Mauritius News know it to be otherwise than that.
It may be fair for the Government leaders to have around them people they feel they can rely on unconditionally. Favouritism exists everywhere in the world. JFK employed his brother Robert as Attorney General when he himself became the US President. Many ministers and Permanent Secretaries in Mauritius prefer to have as their PA someone on whom they can rely and whom they can trust implicitly.
Obsession
It is believed that there is too much obsession with the question of communalism in Mauritius. The community spirit is what makes us feel secure and strong in the face of animosity and oppression. Such community confidence starts within our own family in our home and within the relatives around our family, within our religion among similar faithful, then through our friends in our immediate environment, all that blends into the communal group at large, and subsequently into our nationhood that makes our strength and pride.
In the UK we are requested to state our ethnic origin on every official document we fill in. We understand that a Mauritian delegation are appealing to the Privy Council in England with a request to make it unlawful for a parliamentary candidate having to state his communal background on his application form. In the UK such legislation would be defeated, as it is against the Race Equality and Equal Opportunities spirit.
In Mauritius you cannot have a football team with any particular community or religious reference. Such a restriction would be frowned upon as racial discrimination in the UK. Because players of the same community are not allowed to play as a team, football has practically been destroyed in Mauritius. The competition edge has gone out of individual teams.
Mixed Mauritius is a different kettle of fish from Mixed Britannia, (BBC programme presented in October by George Allagiah). In a next issue we may dwell on the difference between the community mix in Mauritius and the community mix in the UK.
Peter Chellen
Mauritian expatriates want right to vote in Mauritius
Written by Editor Thursday, 06 October 2011 11:23
Electoral Reform
There is a lot of talk these days about electoral reform in Mauritius. Consultations have been taking place of late between Prime Minister Navin Ramgoolam and the leaders of the other political parties for a consensus about the changes to be introduced
On the opening of the present Parliament, in his speech outlining the Programme of Government for the fresh mandate, Prime Minister Navin Ramgoolam told the House that legislation would be introduced for the reform of the electoral system in Mauritius.
A similar pledge was made by the MSM/MMM coalition government of 2000 in their parliamentary programme resulting in the Sachs Commission in 2001, whose recommendations have never been implemented.
It has been reported that the present PM, Navin Ramgoolam, will set up a new commission under the chairmanship of French Law Professor Guy Garcassonne (?) to make a study of the country’s electoral system, taking into consideration the Sachs report, and to propose up-to-date recommendations.
In view of this new electoral commission, we take the opportunity, as expatriates, to reiterate to the Mauritius government our request for the Right to Vote in Mauritius to be extended to Mauritian citizens living overseas, i.e. in the UK, Europe, Australia, United States, Canada etc. Those Mauritian nationals should not be ignored at election time.
The terms of reference of the new electoral reform commission could comprise the studying and reporting on a case for the overseas Mauritian citizens to be included on the Mauritian register of electors.
Present Electoral System
The Mauritius electoral system handed over to the colony by Britain on its accession to independence in 1968 has worked well so far with the First Past The Post (FPTP) application.
It has worked well essentially in safeguarding the interests of every ethnic group making up the Mauritian nation. Why de we have to tamper with it now? The argument is that it perpetuates the concept of sectarianism in Mauritius through what is termed the Best Loser system. The fact is that this very Best Loser system, a corrective measure to ensure adequate representation in Parliament of every ethnic of the country, has satisfied the Constitutional needs of Mauritius for the past 43 years that it enjoys the sovereignty status.
Sectarianism is a pejorative word but it cannot be denied that Mauritians are labelled in accordance with their cultural background and even fragmented into religious denominations within one single ethnic community. For example, the majority Hindu community itself is fragmented into the Bhramin, Rajput, Vaish, Marathi, Gujurati, Telegu and Tamil identities, among others, and each group wants to be sure that its aspirations are not trampled upon. Under these circumstances, sectarianism in Mauritius cannot be destroyed, however how much we dislike it. “Chaque jacot protège so montagne”, is the motto of the Mauritian people.
Rainbow Nation
We pride ourselves to be a rainbow nation but we refuse to accept the fact that this rainbow is made up of many colours. We are multiracial for the mere fact that the people of the island originated from various parts of the world and the citizens of Mauritius will never deny their cultural background to satisfy the whims and dictates of politicians. (Only the Dodo was the true Mauritian, said eminent personality Malcolm de Chazal).
Does Mauritius need an executive president like America, or is the country happy with a president like the Indian one without any executive power? Do we need a Head of State à la française, a system whereby the president shares power with a prime minister? All these systems of government have been explored by Mauritian politicians, who also talk of a president of the Israel style.
Does Mauritius need the Proportional Representation (PR) system that is being talked about in the context of the electoral reform? The Mauritius Labour Party fought tooth and nail in the 1960s against the introduction of PR in Mauritius as demanded by some political parties before Independence.
Labour mounted a gigantic island-wide campaign to prevent the British government from ramming PR down the throat of the country. “Over my dead body shall we have PR in Mauritius” said, campaigner Renganaden Seeneevassen, an eminent lawyer and a senior figure of the Labour Party, who with Labour leader Sir Seewoosagur Ramgoolam (first PM) stood firm their ground. The country got independence without PR.
Today, even the Labour Party is talking of an electoral provision combining the FPTP application, consisting of the existing 62 MPs, plus an element of PR application with an additional number of MPs (likely to be an increase of the number of parliamentarians by one-third). Will the PR introduction result in a modification of the electoral boundaries and an increase in the number of constituencies? How much will the extra MPs cost the country? The extra MP will enhance the strength of political parties in every respect but is the additional cost justified at a time of world economic crisis?
FPTP/PR combination
Thus, with the combination of FPTP and PR, the country will rid itself Best Loser system. (It may be remembered the British people turned down PR––Alternative Vote–– through the recent referendum).
The other reason for the electoral revision is that the existing system has outlived its purpose, the politicians say. It seems therefore to be a case of change for the sake of change. Because it’s old we must get rid of it. On the other hand, there is a feeling it’s all a political manoeuvre on which agree all the political parties. It may enhance the powers of the President of the Republic for the next incumbent.
It must be agreed that there is a case for a revision of the system without its demolition, e.g. to ensure adequate female representation in the National Assembly, to prevent influential rich people and businesses to gain political favours in funding election campaigns, etc.
There is also a case for the RIGHT TO VOTE to be extended to the Mauritian citizens living in other countries. How many times have we heard politicians say that they would like to tap into the resources available within the Mauritian Diaspora. The Diaspora should therefore not be ignored.
Peter Chellen
Corruption, Corruption, Corruption
Written by Administrator Sunday, 04 September 2011 20:50
The whole world is the grip of corruption if we are to pay credit to all the allegations being made right, left and centre
Everywhere you come across the same phenomenon. In England, to this day there are MPs serving time for falsifying their expenses claims. In the Newscorp scandal senior police officers are said to have received illegal payments. Once Lord Scarman allegedly told the court in the case of ex MP Hamilton v/s Al Fayed “they are all on the take”.
In France, at the very moment former President Chirac is being brought to justice to answer charges of corruption during his tenure of office. Allegations of improper practice have even been levelled against President Nicolas Sarkosy in connection with election campaign funding.
In India, one man, Anna Hazare, standing against widespread corruption among politicians wanted, in August, to starve himself to death in the style of the Mahatma. We are repeatedly told in that country nothing moves unless ‘brown envelopes’ change hands. Even in that innocent television documentary ‘India on Four Wheels’ we are reminded of this fact by Indians interviewed for the programme.
How can we imagine that it would be different in the tiny island of Mauritius! In our last issue we informed readers of the political upheaval taking place in the country as a result of the resignation of Health Minister Maya Hanoomanjee who is under investigation by the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC). Her resignation brought about a rift in the Alliance Government to which her party, the MSM, was part and parcel.
Five other MSM ministers, including the party’s leader Pravind Jugnauth, holding the deputy PM and Finance portfolios followed Mrs Hanoomanjee’s example and tendered their resignation in protest against the way she was being treated by ICAC. Corruption for corruption Mr Jugnauth has promised to make more revelations of corruption he witnessed in government.
Peter Chellen
SCANDALS WORSE THAN MEDPOINT TO BE REVEALED
Scandals, involving the government, worse than MedPoint will allegedly be revealed soon by Pravind Jugnauth, Ex-Finance Minister and Leader of the MSM, who recently with five of his ministers resigned collectively from the Government of Ramgoolam. Mr Jugnauth has told the press that in due course he would reveal the scandals that will shock the nation.
The scandals alleged by Pravind Jugnauth are about certain projects approved by the government to foreigners. He is reported to have quoted the NeoTown (Les Salines) project, in which the government has given 60 acres of land for peanuts to an Indian company; the Jen Fei Development at Riche Terre where about 400 acres of land are given to a private Chinese company to develop as a business park. Other alleged scandals concern lands at Rose-Belle. (MN note: To understand the extent of the lands involved it may be borne in mind that the whole of the Champ de Mars race course area in Port Louis is of 40 acres).
THE BOIS DE ROSE SCANDAL
‘Bois de Rose’ is a type of wood endemic to Madagascar and is forbidden by international consensus for use to manufacture furniture. It has been classified as world heritage, protected under Forestry and Conservations regulations.
Bois de Rose is considered as a disappearing species and is extremely expensive. It has been alleged that a former Mauritian government minister is involved in a transaction in which two containers of this wood arrived in Mauritius, but were sent back to Madagascar. A Malagasy politician also involved in this transaction has allegedly been convicted and jailed in his country.
The name of the ex-Mauritian minister has been mentioned but public opinion is prudent about this allegation, which is reported to be in the pipeline of ICAC.
Ahmad Macky
More Articles...
Page 1 of 2
