Many people have intervened on the highly controversial “Good Governance and Integrity Reporting (GGIR) Bill” but no one seems to have paid attention to the fact that it does not form part of the Legislative Programme read by the former President of the Republic at the beginning of 2015. This Bill is NOT mentioned a SINGLE TIME, says the author.

“Lex iniusta non est lex”- (An unjust law is no law at all)

The GGIR Bill has been decried and pursuant to this some amendments have been brought. The proposed Bill and its amendments are now quite familiar to the Mauritian public since they have been presented many times in different media spaces. I shall therefore spare you from hearing about them yet again, at least here. What is important to reiterate however, is that the fundamentals, particularly as regards certain sections of our Constitution, are provoking a lot of fear and uncertainty amongst citizens. The ambiguity, lack of clarity and the many interrogations that this Bill raises justify this fear. But some choose to call the people’s fear hystery.

When Ramgoolam and Bérenger attempted to mess up our lives by trying to change the Constitution to achieve their own ends, many of us rejected their proposals vehemently. Driven by their intelligence and the predisposition to believe in the promises made to them by l’alliance Lepep, the population voted for SAJ and his team. Mauritians have the ability to discern right from wrong, to differentiate between morality and immorality. Contexts and circumstances play a big role in citizens’ decision making; often one has to choose the lesser evil. SAJ was preferred to the “dictatorial regime” that one could detect in two men’s subterfuge.

L’alliance Lepep was democratically elected but the writings of a dictatorial regime “à la mauricienne” are on the walls again. Is our democracyturning into what Lord Hailsham calls an “elective dictatorship”? A couple of questions worth posing include: Does “political efficacy” require ethical compromising? Is morality compatible with realpolitik? And where does the much searched for integrity fit intothe puzzle?

Imbalances in Mauritian Society

The argument often put forward by those defending the GGIR Bill is that it will assist in producing a more equitable platform and remove the imbalances prevailing in Mauritian society. Imbalances in Mauritian society result from poverty and inequality, absence of a living wage, lack of decent housing, the rapidly deteriorating eco system, the encroachment of public space by unregulated private business, unemployment particularly pronounced amongst women and youth, illiteracy amongst the poor and the deprived, street children, young people falling in the abyss of drugs, gender based violence, human trafficking, lack of facilities and jobs for the disabled and the rapidly growing debt level.

These are pressing issues which speak directly to good governance. The latter does not only mean transparency of public action, control of corruption, and using pieces of legislation that can be brandished in international fora to receive a round of applause and hoping to attract FDIs. But good governance also means managing the affairs of the state in such a manner that the issues/ problems mentioned above are adequately addressed, thus ensuring that human rights inclusive of socio economic rights are protected and promoted. In so doing democracy will be consolidated.

Has the Parliament made up of people full of “integrity” suddenly decided that the Integrity Bill (absent from the Legislative Programme) is a priority contrary to many other bills such as the Disability Bill, Climate Change Bill, Children’s Consolidated Bill, Higher Education Bill, Property Valuation Bill and Police and Criminal Evidence Act- PACE to mention just a few? The PACE has become even more pertinent in the wake of the uproar provoked by the arrest of Shakeel Mohamed. Perhaps this should be a priority since there are also many other ordinary citizens (often the victims of several imbalances referred to earlier), without the profile and stature of Shakeel Mohamed, who are thrown in prison unjustly. Legislations such as the Police and Criminal Evidence Act and the new legal framework proposed in Para 140 and 141 aim at “… eliminating structural barriers and reviewing sentencing practices” and “… the proper management of juveniles in custody”. These can go a long way in addressing the imbalances of Mauritian society.

Why is the Leader of the Opposition right?

The Leader of the Opposition is absolutely right in suggesting that the GCIR be postponed. Passing legislations in the midst of such controversy and when debates are not sufficiently infused with intellectual honesty can be very dangerous to our society. Societal imbalances can easily divide us as a nation. The risk of further polarisation settles in when young Mauritians struggling for a Mauritian identity hear the PM refer to 21st century Mauritius as “Little India” during his recent visit to the sub continent. Nothing justifies the sale of our identity nor our integrity. We are Mauritians imbued with the different cultures of the world but we are Mauritians – not Indians...

I would go further than the Leader of the Opposition in suggesting that consideration be given to pull out this bill altogether for now. Let us give priority to some of the policies/legislations that were mentioned in the Legislative Programme titled “Achieving Meaningful Change” and in so doing assist in making Mauritian society more cohesive, inclusive and equitable. Extracts from the Legislative Programme highlight some of the policies/legislations proposed.

Para 246 states: “Government will relentlessly fight fraud and corruption and financial crime… an apex body to oversee the ICAC, the FIU and the Enforcement Department of the Financial Services Commission…” Para 248 notes: “Government will eradicate fraud, corruption, malpractices and irregularities in all aspects of public life and restore our moral values. To this end, a new Declaration of Assets Act for MPs and high ranking public officers and a Financing of Political Parties Act will be enacted. A new Code of conduct will be introduced for all MPs and Public officers.”

It is not enough to have a Declaration of Assets Act without a Freedom of Information Act. Citizens need to know and be sure that those who govern the country are people of integrity.

Para249 states: … “The Prevention of Corruption Act will be amended to enable more effective tracking and curbing of money laundering and accumulation of wealth through back door mechanisms”. With such an arsenal of instruments, it should not be too difficult to find the “unexplained/ illicit accumulated wealth” including that which has left our shores, lying in some safe havens elsewhere. In the first few pages, the Legislative Programme also

speaks of the “…adoption of a transparent and merit based recruitment and appointment policy” as well as the “restructuring of the National Empowerment Foundation with the view of rendering it more proactive to improve service delivery to the poor”. Perhaps the poor are still waiting for the findings of the study of the five consultants that were brought in from overseas to look into poverty on our local front. And while they wait they wonder what the millions given to the private sector (Re: Lovebridge programme) for and how would they benefit. The “privatisation of poverty” was also not part of the Legislative Programme!

Conclusion

There can be no good governance when the legitimate expectations and aspirations of the people are thwarted. Good governance is certainly not about having a Ministry with the wordings “good governance” in its appellation, but about preparing and implementing legislations which can truly transform lives of people and about knowing how to prioritise. Good governance is also about ensuring the good and independent functioning of our institutions, with full respect of the principle of separation of powers.

Many of the bills mentioned earlier, if prepared and/ or reviewed with rigour and debated with respect and intelligence, keeping the best interests of the public at heart, can go a long way in promoting integrity as well as addressing the imbalances of society. While legislations are necessary they are never sufficient. We need a lot more – in terms of values, sharing, solidarity to consolidate the Mauritian social fabric.

But for now, let us steer clear from allowing the Mauritius jurisdiction become “famous” as a place where “presumption of guilt” can easily become the order of the day! Our image is sufficiently tarnished, let us not vandalise our democracy further. A good place to start is to safeguard our Constitution and preserve the Rule of Law reminding ourselves that the latter “is not a theory of law but a principle of institutional morality inherent in any constitutional democracy”as so aptly phrased by Jeffrey Jowell, Professor of Law.