Since Covid 19 hit the world with its full force and brought it to a grinding halt, those at the helm of countries have been catapulted to the centre stage and are being scrutinised for their ability or inability to manage the pandemic and its fallouts. Most of us are regularly glued to international and national information outlets pumping out news and opinions on the state of Covid 19 bringing a mixture of hope and trepidation.

Crisis, wars, state of emergencies are moments in time that are often trying and have in the process shown the mettle behind true leaders. We are reminded of both inspiring and comforting fire chat conversations of President Roosevelt during the Great Depression, Prime Minister Churchill’s ‘their finest hour’ speech or General de Gaulle’s leadership during the war. In more recent times, George W Bush’s second term as President of the U.S. was to a large extent due to his leadership of the post 9/11 terror attack. We will also fondly remember the gracious and selflessness leadership of President Mandela during the immediate post-apartheid years. What about current leadership during the Covid 19 pandemic? Well, it has been quite a mix bag with some who have really demarcated themselves and have publicly demonstrated leadership, fortitude and empathy in steering their country. President Macron’s multiple addresses to the French nation were applauded for their tone of sincerity, sense of empathy and ability to federate people. Jacinda Arden, now considered to be a rockstar among current political leaders is feted by international media for her sobering, balanced and no-nonsense leadership style. Similar examples can be found in a number of African countries namely the political leaders of South Africa, Ghana and Senegal.

What about Mauritius? How is the small island handling the pandemic? Has political leadership been able to transcend partisan politics? Do we feel sufficiently united as a nation? Is there clarity and direction in leadership at the top? What are the right steps that have been taken and the blatant gaps?

The Importance of Trust

In a recent article for The Atlantic, Francis Fukuyama spoke of the notion of trust especially in the face of so much trauma, uncertainty and panic caused by Covid 19. He emphasises on “the state’s capacity and above all trust in government” as well as “the capacity of people at the top and their judgement to determine whether outcomes are good or bad”. We are aware that in the last decade or so there has been a general thinning down of trust across the world and this has been particularly visible when it comes to political leadership. In the case of Mauritius, the most recent Afrobarometer Survey for Mauritius puts trust in top political leadership namely the President, Prime Minister and National Assembly at a very low end. In fact, around 2 in 3 respondents interviewed said that they had ‘not at all or just a little’ trust in those above-mentioned positions/institutions. The questions that we should ask ourselves are: What is the current level of trust in the country? Is there this belief among the population that the top end of the hierarchy is delivering and exercising the best available judgements?

The Art of Communication: Transparency and Accountability not Propaganda

The notion of trust and the manner in which it is metered to a certain extent depends on the process of communication. Mention was made earlier that some of the most inspiring leaders were also great communicators. Since the outbreak of the pandemic on the island the one glaring element that one has observed is the manner in which the Prime Minister communicates with the nation. His addresses are short, often vague and rarely confer a sense of value-added information.

Comparing with other world political leaders - Macron, Ramophosa or Arden where the emphasis is on having a real national conversation where explicit details concerning the methodology used to manage the pandemic are shared, use of empathy to reach out to citizens and a well-defined plan to deal with post-Covid is discussed.

Communication during a time of crisis inevitably puts the spotlight on public media. It is important to reflect on the role that the MBC is playing. Unfortunately, it is missing a golden opportunity to rid itself of its political bias and continues to be a propaganda box for the Government. In fact, we have not seen either the Leader of the Opposition or any Opposition party members be given air time since the pandemic hit us and we went into lockdown. On the contrary, we have seen the various social media platforms namely Facebook used extensively by the Opposition parties to communicate with citizens. This is both scandalous and saddening that the MBC that perceives a fair portion of its revenue from the compulsory licence fee levied on the majority of Mauritian households does not deem it necessary during such trying moments to ensure that the voices of the Opposition is included.

We are instead served on a daily basis the press briefings of the National Communication Committee that have become both drab, predictable and smack more of a PR exercise than public accountability. In fact, ever since journalists’ physical presence at those briefings were discontinued and despite frequent reminders of a special partnership between Mauritius Telecom, MBC and the Government Information Service in creating a unique platform for interactive questions - the most pertinent questions are often dodged! We are here reminded of the much-promised Freedom of Information Act that would have no doubt help in ensuring due scrutiny and accountability from those in power.

The Functioning of Institutions

Diamond and Fukuyama have in their work emphasised on the importance of institutions in the proper functioning of a democracy. Effective and efficient institutions act as both vertical and horizontal forms of accountability and in the process reign in any possible abuse of power. Since the outbreak of Covid 19 and its accelerated spread across the world, we have witnessed the rise in what is termed as the absolute power of the executive. Such stepping up of power by the executive is not uncommon in times of crisis but it depends on how that power is used. The most recent edition of The Economist carries a long read on ‘Covid 19 and Autocracy’ and sheds light on how full-fledged and budding autocrats in a number of countries are using an arsenal of legal tools to rule by decree. In fact, the pandemic is bad news for the state of democracy across the world as it is further fragilising an already fragile concept.

In the case of Mauritius - a country often celebrated for its democratic credentials we have witnessed a number of unsettling events. Firstly, the Executive acted in a very solo approach in the early days of the pandemic ignoring the various public messages made by the Leader of the Opposition and leaders of Opposition parties. Secondly, many of us were taken aback by the arbitrary methods employed by the IBA (Independent Broadcasting Authority) and ICTA (Information and Communication Technologies Authority) which left us with the feeling that freedom of expression is being culled. However, the main bone of contention was the suspension of Parliament ‘sine die’ and dropped on all of us as a fait accompli. Decried as illegal, arbitrary and dangerous by the Leader of the Opposition, Opposition parties and other stakeholders - this in fact starves us of one of the key oversight bodies against the executive. Mention was made earlier of the urgency around public accountability when it comes to the manner and methodology in which the pandemic is being managed and it is only in parliament that the Executive has the duty to respond.

The UK is experimenting with what is called a ‘hybrid parliament’ - a mix between a virtual and a physical parliament where MPs have the choice of ‘zooming in’ or physically coming to Westminster. This decision to allow Parliament to reconvene after the Easter break despite the pandemic has won applause from pundits as a clear example of scrutiny in British politics. In fact, parliament gave the opportunity for the number of urgent unanswered questions that had piled up during the period of parliamentary inactivity to be answered. It seems that the Executive has come to its senses and one is reassured to hear that Parliament will be reconvened next week. Let us hope that no tactics are used to dodge questions or delay answers and the right to scrutiny is exercised.

These are indeed trying moments that none of us would have ever imagined living through. History books will no doubt tell the story how the pandemic was managed and leaders will be remembered for their demonstration of leadership and vision but also of empathy and reaching across the traditional political divides. What we need is not about making the government of the day look good with the sole aim of political scoring but ensure that the politics of the common good is practised.