It was with that unwavering smile which is his trademark that the former president greeted us. He stood up as soon as we entered the room – you are either a gentleman or you are not.

My first question was about his feelings on national day.

When you look at this 48-year-old son or daughter, how do you feel?

Having been deeply involved as a youth in those days in, I wouldn’t say the struggle, but the fight for independence, it is with a lot of pride that I’ve witnessed what we’ve gone through. And also, a lot of sadness because we could have done so much more. This country today could have been among the best in the world had we taken the necessary steps to put into practice what we have promised the people that we would do.

And what did we promise the people?

We promised to give them happiness, contentment and these are unfortunately absent. Some people may have become rich but there are a lot of poor people around. Poverty is so rampant now that it has become visible. If your car stops near the State Bank, for example, you will see people coming to you begging for money. This didn’t exist in Mauritius.

How recent is this?

I think this is something that has been happening for a year or so.

There was a change in government and people had high hopes. There was a feel-good factor. Hasn’t that made any difference?

The change in government was looked upon as such a hopeful event. People were expecting so much that there has been total disappointment, not to say deception. 

Is the disappointment due to the expectations which were too high or to the fact that the government did not deliver?

Both. Expectations were very high. People thought that really, there would be change in their lives, that everybody would be able to get a job and everyone would be happy. This is one side of it. The other side is that the government has not been able to deliver at all and, in one year, nothing concrete has been done, except for the British American Investment (BAI) that has been decimated.

We haven’t heard your views about the BAI saga. How do you feel?

I think it is a tragedy. The way that this has been handled is terrible. People have been very, very hurt. There are other ways of doing things. You cannot put somebody who is new and with no experience in political life, with no experience at all in fact, at the head of a ministry responsible for scrapping an institution like the BAI.It’s not a question of governance only. It’s more than that. There are social, humanitarian and economic implications, global repercussions. This should have been the job of a prime ministerial committee. Or, a ministerial committee headed by a senior member of government, not a newcomer however intelligent he might appear to be.

I could not miss the opportunity to jump on this statement.

You say “appear to be”.

He spelled it out:I say “appear to be” because I haven’t yet had proof of his intelligence.

The government’s point is that there was a Ponzi scheme and the more they let it run, the worse it would have got and it would have cost the country a lot more. Is that a view that you share?

I don’t share it! But let us assume that this is true and correct. This is not the way to go about doing it. This is my point.

“We didn’t vote for cleaners to sit in parliament and be ministers.”

Then, what do you do in such a situation?

In such a situation, you take all the different parameters into account. Did we have to close the Bramer Bank, for instance? Did we have to remove all the funds that were invested in that bank overnight? Government should bear the responsibility for it.

That is why the government is taking the responsibility of paying back those who invested in the BAI.

Yes, but this is creating a very bad precedent. This is not the way to go about it. What we see now is a fight between institutions. Institution A is fighting Institution B, which is fighting Institution C. No one knows exactly what is going to happen next. The government has given so much hope to the people. I remember the prime minister’s first comment: Who told them to invest? I didn’t tell them to invest. They were couillons. Mo couyon moi? As soon as I learned, I took out my money. He shouldn’t have, as a prime minister. This isn’t giving a good example.

There was a case lodged against the prime minister for drawing a pension as a past president at the same time as drawing a salary as prime minister. Do you, as a past president, have an issue with that?

Here he takes some time to reminisce the past. At one time, I was thinking seriously of going back into politics. That was a few months after I had resigned as president of the republic. There was such an outcry among some of the political people that I had no right to do that and that if I did, I would have to give away my pension and all the “privileges” that I enjoyed as a past president. So, I said it publicly that if I had to join politics again, I would give up the pension and any privilege that is attached to the post. My interpretation of the legislation is that former presidents should not take any remuneration. A past president shouldn’t take a post with remuneration. The question is going to be perhaps decided by the court and it’s good that we are all clear about it.

Does the socio-economic situation today make you smile, frown or does it bring tears to your eyes?

His answer was immediate. It makes any sensible person sad. Our society is sick and we are going from bad to worse. Unless steps are taken, the situation will become untenable in the future. Socially, there are so many unemployed people around. Doctors, degree-holders, postgraduates. Some of them are working as hawkers to earn a living.

“I would probably have resigned over the Good Governance and Integrity Reporting Act”

Why?

Because the country is not developing at all. There has been no development since this government has taken over. The main thing that they are doing is that they are cleaning up. Cleaning up. We didn’t vote for cleaners to sit in parliament and be ministers. Cleaners do a very important job but they do not run the country. We elected people who have come with a programme who have given so much hope to us all. And yet, today nothing has been delivered as of yet.

Wasn’t the cleaning necessary?

But almost nothing has been done yet, even on the side of the cleaning! Our institutions have been maintained as they were and the situation is even worse in some cases. What did Lepep say on the electoral platform? That the institutions will be given their independence. The institutions will be autonomously run. The institutions will be run by the right people. There will be the right man in the right place. But instead of that, there is a lot of interference, no autonomy and the cronyism is worse than before.

So, it’s the status-quo, is it?

It’s not only the status-quo. In certain cases, there has been a change for the worse.

What about the police? I personally from memory can’t remember the police barging into people’s houses with a police warrant and taking them to a police station, keeping them overnight or for days. Is it a new trend or is it my memory which is failing?

His comments on the police were honest and uncompromising. This is a new trend. The police never acted this way before to the best of my knowledge. Never before was there so much interference in the police force than there is today. Whatever the commissioner of police might say, everywhere the answer that you get is “I have received orders from above”. The commissioner of police knows that he is protected by the constitution and can act in all independence. He defends the state; he does not defend the government. Take the case of Hassenjee Ruhomally, for example. This has never been seen before. A minister just gives a statement to the police and the police comes and arrests you with your wife. These are responsible and respectable people of the society. I know the family quite well. I know the father who is a medical practitioner and they have a certain status in society. And here, as a result of somebody making a statement to the police… about what? About something which has appeared in the papers, something that has appeared in other posts on Facebook. He picks and chooses this one and this one to goes to prison. This is unacceptable. The police have to realise that they cannot continue to make this country like a police state.

“You cannot put somebody who is new and with no experience in political life, with no experience at all in fact, at the head of a ministry responsible for scrapping an institution like the BAI.”

You are using very strong terms, aren’t you?

We have almost become a police state. A minister goes and makes a statement and the police act immediately without giving a second thought as if they are being instructed to do so. This is not what the police is expected to do. It should be at the service of the people of the country and defend the state and not the government, not the ministers. I make an appeal also the prime minister and to the ministers to stop this country from continuing on the path they are taking it. We will no longer be in a democracy soon.

One of the good things that this government has done, according to the prime minister, is the appointment of a female president and a female speaker. Do you share that opinion?

Here you have to read between the lines as he has recourse to subtlety to convey his message. Well, it's a step forward, I must say. There are more honorary positions but they do have influence and they can use this influence to improve democracy in parliament on one hand and in the country on the other. I think they can give a good example.

Are they giving a good example?

There are a lot of reservations expressed about the way that parliament is run and some decisions taken by the Speaker. The Speaker is in a very delicate situation. It is not easy to handle 60 people when they become rowdy. I have been a parliamentarian myself for a number of years and I know how tough the job can be. The best speaker that we have ever had was Sir Harilal Vaghjee, a man of experience, great intellectual calibre and humour. He could diffuse the situation. These are some of the qualities that are needed by someone who presides over the national assembly. She should hear as much as she ought but not as much as she can. She should see as much as she ought, not as much as she can. She should speak as much as she ought, not as much as she can. These are the words of wisdom one may say. But it's a tough job.

“My interpretation of the legislation is that former presidents should not take any remuneration.”

How about the president?

I have always said that I do not comment on my successors at the State House. They have their own ways of doing things.

I thought I’d try a different approach: Would you have done things the same way?

Some of the things, yes but not all.

You resigned from the presidency because you refused to sign the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA). Would you have signed the Good Governance and Integrity Reporting Act, for example?

I think this act is as bad as the PoTA because it takes away powers from the judiciary and places them in the hands of the executive. I don't think I would have agreed to the fact that a minister takes upon himself the responsibility that usually should be given to the judiciary. I wouldn't have done it.

Would you have resigned?

That's a hypothetical question.

Time to mellow it down: Would you probably have resigned?

Thank you for the word ‘probably’. Yes, I would probably have resigned.

What is your take on the situation of the minister of finance who has been suffering from bronchitis for weeks?

His smile tells the whole story.I have suffered from this situation too. Fortunately, it lasted for a maximum of one week. I have a very good family doctor who looks after me properly. I have known very few cases of people for whom bronchitis lasts for weeks. I would advise my friend to look for a doctor. But perhaps there are other things aggravating the situation and this should be addressed. I won’t dare to say this is a diplomatic illness but if it is, the symptoms have to be addressed.

Has the mini-reshuffle brought an end to the crisis?

No, not at all. At his recent press conference, the prime minister wants us to believe that he is not aware of the existence of any crisis in his government. On the other hand, Minister Roshi Bhadain denies on radio having any problem with ‘Vishnu’.  Yet, everybody else knows the fundamental differences between the two main protagonists and the tug of war and the below-the-belt blows given or exchanged. Such a mini-reshuffle, which leaves untouched those fundamental differences and issues can only serve to postpone the inevitable end of the ‘drama’.

“Never before was there so much interference in the police force than there is today.”

The prime minister said that Vishnu Lutchmeenaraidoo had asked to be shifted to foreign affairs whereas the latter on his Facebook page said it was the prime minister who decided to give him that portfolio. Who, according to you, is telling the truth?

The diplomatic language used on his Facebook page by Vishnu Lutchmeenaraidoo even before he assumed office as the head of our diplomacy leaves us with no doubt that he has had to bow down to what can be qualified as an act of summoning of the like of ‘accept or perish’ on the part of Sir Anerood Jugnauth. Half-truths on either side!

Roshi Bhadain finds himself with only one ministry. What is your evaluation of the prime minister’s move?

The prime minister couldn’t be seen to favour one to the detriment of the other. So, he has craftily come up with a solution that makes Vishnu’s demotion less hurtful or more palatable if you wish.

We talked about government and what it should do but civil society also has a role to play. What is your evaluation of civil society today?

Civil society is almost inexistent. There are a few NGOs doing some very good work but there are some so-called NGOs which are only interested in promoting themselves and travelling, attending conferences and doing nothing. Civil society as we know it does not exist in Mauritius. This is the sad part of it. In all democracies, more and more civil society is the driving force. People should group together to make society move forward. It should play a leading role. It is civil society which can stand up and talk. There are a few people who have been trying – I must say – through Le Parlement Populaire for example – but it is very tough and obtaining support is difficult. We have to change our attitude and more and more people should come forward and stand together to prevent this country from going to the dogs and prevent democracy from going towards this dangerous path which is dictatorship. When we talked about the situation in the country as being sick, basic institutions are not taking their responsibility. The family has resigned. The school has resigned. The churches, mosques and temples as well as the police and other basic institutions have failed. Unless something is done for them to wake up and take their responsibility, this country is going to continue going from bad to worse. Psychologists, sociologists, social workers, pedagogues should all put their heads together – they are the societal doctors – and prescribe the appropriate medication to heal our society!

“The commissioner of police defends the state; he does not defend the government.”

What exactly is the problem?

The problem is that there is no government to initiate the actions that are needed. There are four political leaders but no leadership.No one is taking the leadership. Who is leading this country? Individual ministers. I will not name them, but everyone will know who I mean.

Ministers or minister?

 (Long pause) I’d say ministers. They are leading the country, and unfortunately, the prime minister cannot talk them into reason.

Why can’t he?

Well, I think he’s overwhelmed. I think that he cannot cope. It’s not his fault; everybody at a certain age can only do so much and not more. And to run a government, one needs to have the energy necessary to control, but there is no one to do it. This is why people in government can control the police. It is not the prime minister who controls the police. Orders come from above but not necessarily from the prime minister. It is a situation of near chaos.

As Uteem walked us to the door, I remembered that he had given up the title “Your Excellency” when he was president. Some things you either have or you don’t.

For more views and in-depth analysis of current issues, subscribe to Weekly for as little as Rs110 a month. Free delivery to your door. Contact us: touria.prayag@lexpress.mu