Africa-Press – Mauritius. In the face of the media hype in connection with the Kistnen affairs, and the statements of the “Avengers” and the opposition, the atmosphere is not relaxed.
In fact, the mentor minister himself has stepped out of the shadows to hit the airwaves. However, if this was part of a communication exercise, then some people talk about a bad strategy or an incomprehensible strategy.
At the same time, the information is worrying about our institutions governed by archaic, old-fashioned and inappropriate regulations in the contemporary world.
Rabin Bhujun gives us his opinion. Mauritius Times: “We are no longer on the brink, but at the bottom of the abyss,” Antoine Domingue said in an interview with Défi Plus recently.
We do not know if it is also the feeling – both of anger but also of helplessness – shared by the vast majority of Mauritians, in front of the display of details in relation to all these cases of contracts, death of men in mysterious circumstances that have dominated the news for some time.
What do you think ? Rabin Bhujun: Me Domingue may be going quickly. It’s almost encouraging to hear that you’ve hit rock bottom because then you can only hope to come back.
But let us not underestimate the capacity of those who have the destiny of the country in hand. Do not underestimate their ability to do worse. This is what happens when you get drunk on a cocktail of arrogance, infallibility and electoral cynicism.
When we transcribe, in the Mauritian context, the policy practiced by Trump: “Us and our people against them”. There is, in fact, a climate of concern – an absence of serenity – which sets in for a long time.
The economy is slowing down; Mauritians are guessing – without putting this sentiment into words – that 2021 is unlikely to be much better than 2020. I have such a feeling for the first time: Mauritius is not good these days. The grass isn’t greener elsewhere, I also readily admit.
* the approach of the former Prime Minister, Sir Anerood Jugnauth, to come out of his silence to defend the government led by Pravind Jugnauth and Minister Sawmynaden, in an interview with Défi Quotidien and the MBC, reflects a feeling of concern within power.
Do you think we have come to the point where the course of events is starting to get out of government control? You talk about SAJ’s “approach”, but nothing says that the initiative was hers.
Since the legislative campaign of 2019, the former prime minister has been a kind of neatly tidy accessory; that we go out for a single purpose: To hold a marked speech in a particular tone with the aim of reassuring or galvanizing part of the population. So what have we learned from SAJ’s media release? First, the feeling that he is rushing to rescue his son.
What would Solskjær’s leadership look like if he asked Ferguson to answer for him following a number of poor Manchester United games? Second, there is nothing spontaneous about the exercise in its form, with the former MSM boss forcing himself to painfully read a script he was probably asked to follow to the letter.
Finally, on the merits, SAJ serves us as the sub-SAJ. Diminished, the old rogue lacks panache, has lost his sense of repartee. If he wanted to be persuasive, the former mentor won over only those who were already convinced.
In other words, the exercise is a failure. Getting back to your question, I have the impression that those who advise the Prime Minister are mostly misguided. While they rightly felt that the mood in the country was deteriorating, the PR Stunt they used was particularly poorly thought out.
Recently, the Prime Minister’s team of communicators has been receiving help from people who are said to usually defend the interests of large private clients. Despite this external perspective, we were served the usual indigestible soup.
* However, Sir Anerood Jugnauth is right about one point: the right of every citizen, including Minister Sawmynaden, to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.
There is, at this point, no confirmed and sufficient evidence to rule out the presumption of innocence, right?
When I listened to this talk from SAJ, I couldn’t help but think of Ivan Collendavelloo.
The former government number two must have appreciated the irony of former Minister Mentor’s attachment to the presumption of innocence. There is no provisional or formal charge against Yogida Sawmynaden.
This is also the case for Ivan Collendavelloo in the Burmeister & Wain case. Nonetheless, the prime minister’s running mate remains in place as Jugnauth’s alliance partner has been forced to resign.
Why double standards? Is it because Sawmynaden is a friend and an indispensable ally? Or was the Burmeister & Wain case a godsend to sideline Collendavelloo?
As for the presumption of innocence, you are right, in a rule of law, everyone is entitled to it. Even the person accused of the most atrocious crime.
However, the fictitious employment case concerns me. The fact that the suspicious death of Soopramanien Kistnen was treated so lightly by the police also raises legitimate questions. But neither do I give in to the temptation to link half a dozen deaths to a sprawling political conspiracy.
* What is your opinion, as a former journalist, of the press coverage and investigations into the Kistnen case and also of the ‘pro bono’ involvement of the so-called ‘Avengers’ lawyers in this case? Antoine Domingue said in the Défi Plus interview that a lawyer should not exceed his legal mandate .
.
. you cannot use the interests of a client to promote his “political” aims . . .
Although my main activity is now business advice and media training, I write from time to time for foreign newspapers. I will always be a journalist at heart.
Let’s start with the press. Journalists are within their rights and they obey their professional obligation by investigating the various aspects of this affair.
It is of public interest. However, they are also required to have a certain balance in their approach. However, two things worry me about the media coverage.
On the one hand, the case seems settled to a number of media outlets which present the arguments almost exclusively from a prosecution perspective. On the other hand, these media are bottle-fed by the lawyers we are talking about.
While the journalist has the obligation to take a step back from his sources. To question their motivation. To sniff out and avoid any attempt at manipulation.
Do the “investigators” of the press take sufficient precautions in this direction? We can doubt that, given the almost servile relationship they have with certain sources and which they have gladly accepted to transform into superheroes by calling them the “Avengers” in their reports and accounts.
We are, however, not dealing with superheroes, but with very fallible humans who kissed their leader the day before yesterday and yesterday hoped to be rescued by those in power.
Others are now criticizing those they would have continued to praise if they had won a nomination in the last legislative elections. A few may be frustrated that they were not duly recognized and rewarded for services rendered in the 2019 election campaign.
Let’s not talk about the one who is now the actor-clown in a video circulating on whatsapp. I wonder what the Bar Council thinks about this! Political motivations are pervasive within this group of lawyers.
Nevertheless, the work they are putting down remains useful: helping the courts to establish the truth about what happened in the Kistnen cases is a task of public interest. You just have to never see them as selfless superheroes. They are politicians first and foremost . . . in some cases poor politicians, by the way.
There is not only the murder case of Soopramanien Kistnen, there is also the even more serious case of the ‘Kistnen Papers’ which would report the election expenses of elected officials at No. 8 in November 2019, documents authenticated by a certain “Jules”.
The Electoral Commissioner reportedly told the leader of Resistans ek Alternativ that “the law is not good! And the Electoral Supervisory Commission, meanwhile, called on police to investigate allegations of illegal electoral practices. Do you expect the police to be diligent? The Electoral Commissioner offered what might be called a token victory to Rezistans ek Alternativ (ReA).
However, the Electoral Commissioner or the ESC could very well have referred ReA to the police, asking them to go and make a formal complaint because, under the terms of the ‘Representation of the People Act’ (RPA), neither has the capacity to act in this scenario.
In the wake of the “Kistnen Papers”, new criticisms have been rained against the ESC and the Election Commission. Somehow, it’s because we don’t know much about RPA and the First Schedule of our Constitution.
But there is worse: this permanent lawsuit that we bring – for basely political reasons – to these two institutions since the last legislative elections. The damage is already done and it is lasting.
We would not allow ourselves to criticize a judge or the Supreme Court in the tone used towards the Electoral Commissioner because the offense of contempt of court exists.
In a way, however, the Election Commission is as important an institution as our courts; being responsible for a crucial part of our democratic life: the organization of elections. It is now the subject of untimely criticism and some Mauritians are starting to think that they are all justified.
Yes, there were hiccups during the last legislative elections: two ballots ended up in the wild, some Mauritians discovered that they were not on the electoral list although they had voted previously.
The system can be improved, but the Election Commission has an obligation to operate within an outdated and archaic legal framework. Irfan Rahman is therefore right to suggest that our electoral law is outdated.
It’s not the first time he’s said this. Those who read the Sachs report will realize that the same thing has been said for 19 years! * Back to the police investigation .
.
. The police will undoubtedly ask ReA to lodge a complaint in due form, to support its claims with evidence. ReA is currently based on photocopies of an account book.
We still have to find the original; certify its origin and authenticity and then establish precisely what expenses were incurred during the MSM election campaign in Moka / Quartier-Militaire in 2019; by whom and for whom.
It’s not as straightforward an investigation as you might think. Would the investigators be willing to kill themselves with the task . . . ? To conclude on election expenses, let’s not be hypocritical.
All the mainstream parties blithely exceed the authorized threshold per candidate. The political leaders readily admit it in private, even on record, like Ramgoolam during an interview he gave me in 2015. But they are unable to agree to change the legal framework governing party funding. politics and election expenses.
* It is not only the Kistnen affair that has demonstrated this to us, it has been going on for months already: the time that certain institutions or departments within these institutions, supposed to apply the laws, to carry out certain investigations considered delicate , it seems – and continue these ‘to their logical conclusion’… How do you react to that?
If you are referring to the Anti-Corruption Commission, I share your feelings, which are also those of the general public.
The institution was demonetized and turned into a political tool under the successive governments of Ramgoolam and the two Jugnauths. One gets the impression that the interests of the ICAC and those of power are aligned.
In the case of the Electoral Commissioner, we have the right person at the head of an institution operating within an outdated legal framework. For the ICAC, the legal framework is quite good, but the institution is unable to embody an image of impartiality. For some, it is nevertheless a certificate of competence, which may even entitle you to a contract renewal!
* In addition, if the opposition was more discreet and even more measured in its interventions in relation to the Kistnen cases, we saw Bruneau Laurette once again, after a few months of hibernation since his gatherings in Port Louis and Mahebourg, in front of the crowds in front of the district court of Port Louis during the appearances of Minister Sawmynaden.
What is your analysis of Mr. Laurette’s agenda? A few days after the monster demonstration of August 29, 2020, I asked the question of “What next? Of Bruneau Laurette’s movement, even if it means being considered a killjoy in the climate of excitement and hope of the time.
I’m still waiting to understand what this collective mood swift has produced in terms of coherent initiatives and organization. Bruneau Laurette appears more like a professional voice-giver now; it is the rebellious service in the face of the real drifts of power.
That’s nice. It’s romantic. But it’s a bit short. And certainly not revolutionary! There is also his attitude. Already in August, he had not appreciated that the Church maintained an event – long planned – on the day of the march.
He got it to be shifted. Since then, I have had the impression that Laurette, to use our local expression, has won grander lakour, believing, for example, that he could make St Louis Cathedral – not just the forecourt, apparently – a branch of his action.
I find that Vicar General Labor has sent a strong and clear signal of the Church’s will not to allow itself to be exploited or drawn into a fight of which we only know the slogan and not really the ins and outs.
The Church already has enough to do with her singing priests and those who assert themselves in action to have to worry about a new messiah as well. * The opposition itself, or more precisely ‘The Entente’ PTr, MMM and PMSD appears to be still in its infancy.
For a successful rally to be organized by these parties, Navin Ramgoolam believes “everyone should put their ego aside” and, on the municipal side, he said “the opposition must not be divided.
” Either the conviction is not there within the Entente, or one stumbles on the fundamental question – the leadership of this “Entente”.
Your opinion ? Already, I must admit that I was wrong about one thing: The MMM-PMSD agreement is going much better than I expected. It is moved by young people, who are not paralyzed by historical resentments.
Reason also dictates this precise agreement because, in urban areas, the mauves and blues are doomed to work together to succeed in the face of the means of the orange machine.
The harmonious MMM-Labor Party agreement is far from certain! Paul Bérenger is an open book. Let’s read it. Recently he made us realize that it is Ramgoolam’s leadership that is the problem.
What did the leader of the MMM say? That we must first clear and seal the terms of a PTr-MMM-PMSD agreement for the legislative elections and then lead to the terms of formal collaboration during the municipal elections to come.
We know that the MMM – and Bérenger himself – does not want Ramgoolam to be presented as the prime minister of the opposition alliance. It is therefore understandable that the Mauves want this element of the electoral package to be acquired and publicly announced before throwing all their weight behind this alliance.
But I suspect Ramgoolam won’t be gotten rid of so easily. He also blows hot and cold on his retirement as leader. I note that, by magic, the “confidential” sections now all speak of a colt from the leader of the reds.
It is astonishing that the next generation seems to be served on a plate like this when the MMM does not want to hear about Ramgoolam as future Prime Minister in case of victory.
I wouldn’t be surprised if you use a foal as bait in a shark fishery. Just to give the impression that the change will take place. But we also often fish with lures!
In any case, on the Angus Road side, there is a strong wish for Ramgoolam’s fishing to be successful. A Ramgoolam presented as Prime Minister remains, to this day, one of the main guarantees of legislative success for Pravind Jugnauth.
