The Public Inquiries Bill is replacing the old Commissions of Inquiry Act of 1944. It introduces a new structure, the Board of Inquiry, with extensive powers to conduct public enquiries.
The Bill ensures open public hearings , mandatory publication of reports and strict deadlines for the submission of findings. It also guarantees fundamental rights including a fair hearing, legal representation and witness immunity . The aim is to enhance efficiency, transparency, and legal robustness to meet contemporary challenges.
But section 32(2) of the bill is unequivocal: all commissions of enquiry launched under the old law will be rendered null and void as soon as the new law takes effect.
This pertains to two high-profile cases: the committee of enquiry into Betamax, which is investigating the circumstances leading to a terminated contract that has already resulted in substantial financial losses for the state, and the committee into the Missie Moustass affair, linked to leaks of sensitive data and allegations of illegal surveillance.
Is section 32(2) politically motivated ?
Government is trying to justify this repeal in the name of reform. However, several observers see less overt reasons.
Firstly, to prevent embarrassing revelations . The Betamax investigation could raise questions about past political decisions and connections. ……… We recall that at that time one commentator had noted that when the deal was hastily signed with the Bhunjun group in November 2009 – allegedly even before the ministerial committee chaired by Xavier Duval was able to submit its recommendations — there were several other actors besides Navin Ramgoolam and the Jugnauths: Labour Ministers Anil Bachoo and Mahen Gowressoo (who were at loggerheads on the issue), the Minister of Finance was Rama Sithanen and the Attorney General, Rama Valayden. The MSM did not say a word at the time because there was a “rapprochement” with the PTr in the wake of the 2010 elections. The population is not that dupe. Its verdict is that: “They were all guilty.”
Secondly, to strengthen the executive’s control, only the Prime Minister will now be permitted to initiate or terminate an investigation. The judiciary will be excluded from the process, unlike before when independent magistrates often headed commissions.
Parliamentary power is being used for specific interests -to camouflage the whole shenanigan and scheming of the Betamax affair.
And even on the National Agency for Drug Control Bill, we see a centralisation of powers -The Prime Minister appoints the Chief Executive Officer, chairs the National Drug Control Commission and approves the members of the Board of Directors and the representatives from civil society.
Is that what the Alliance du Changement had promised ? More of centralisation of powers ; the more power is concentrated in PM’s office, the more scope for the Prime Minister to use power unwisely and with greater consequences…. Is that what we fought and voted for ?
What about the different partners in the Alliance du Changement , especially ReA, why are they silent on that ? they have nothing to say !!!!!
They will need to have some solid explanation at hand for our frustrated voters at the forthcoming municipal elections ….Sey sa réform !
(Do read in the comments below, Jasodanand's article in L'express of June 2021)
AuthorPlease read top journalist Narain Jasodanand's article in L’express of 30 June 2021 titled “Une loi de 2008 condamnait d’avance tout contestation d’une décision arbitrale". Extracts :" .....depuis 2008, dans les litiges arbitraux, la non-intervention prime - comprenez par-là celle de la Cour suprême— et que la décision d'un tribunal arbitral est finale et contraignante (binding), donc sans appel possible. Sauf en cas de fraude et corruption. Mais cela n'a pas pu être prouvé dans le cas de Betamax par nos valeureux policiers, y compris la fameuse enveloppe de Rs 80 millions retrouvée dans un coffre-fort en 2015 avec un certain nom griffonné là -dessus." ..........................available at https://www.dropbox.com/.../hi3fat.../Affaire-Betamax.pdf......
DROPBOX.COM
Affaire Betamax.pdf
Affaire Betamax.pdf
- Reply
- Remove Preview
- Edited
Prak Nee
Beyond the principle of centralization of powers, the fundamental question is: what do commissions of enquiry accomplish in Mauritius? Except for the two commissions of enquiry on drugs (Rault in 1990 and Lam Shang Leen in 2017), all commissions of enquiry have been political instruments of the ruling party to pass the buck to others and blame them for its inaction and incompetence. Even the reports of the two commissions on drugs were disputed in Court and subsequent judicial review exonerated some people who had been mentioned as implicated in drug trafficking. There was no proper follow up on those reports. As for the commission on Betamax, I doubt its usefulness considering that the Privy Council upheld the contract between the State and the company, leading to Rs 5.4 billion in damages paid by the STC to the company. After this PC ruling, the msm government sets up the commission to settle its score with the Labour Party. What happened to the commission on Britam, whose report is disputed in Court by Roshi Badain? What happened to the commission on ex president AGF? And the commission on leaks from missie moustache was just a reaction to damning revelations about State capture by unelected people. Its terms of reference were limited allowing no proper enquiry on phone tapping. Finally all these commissions are a poor substitute for government inaction in critical areas. It’s a waste of time and money. In Anglo-Saxon countries a royal commission of enquiry is a very rare development. It happens only when a national issue requires in-depth investigation across political or ideological lines.
- Reply
Nalini Burn
Prak Nee but the centralisation of powers has carried on during the last two terms. A govt which got to power, because so many of us feared the previous 60-0 to be's declared intention to grant powers and immunity, if elected....10 years later 60-0 is upon us. And portofolios are cumulated, PM, interior, finance.
Removing the role of the judiciary is worrying.
- Reply
Moochooram Kishore Kumar
Kan kritiqer banne "Lever Pavillon " appelle sa chatwa.
- Reply
AuthorMoochooram Kishore Kumar Ek zot dir ki nou ban kaser nissa! Après dix ans zot fin vinn au pouvoir , zot inpé affamé, let zot enjoy inpé !
