Rédaction Africa Links 24 with Sarah Jane Lebrasse
Published on 2024-04-17 16:00:15
Even before the end of yesterday’s Question Time in the National Assembly session, the reconfigured opposition found itself decimated by decisions made by the Speaker, Sooroojdev Phokeer. The casualties were heavy, with six opposition parliamentarians receiving sanctions, some of them very severe, as was the case for two veterans, Paul Bérenger and Rajesh Bhagwan, who were suspended for six sessions. If the dissolution occurs before the end of May, they might not be able to return to the chamber for this current session.
On the other hand, Joanna Bérenger was banned from the proceedings of the National Assembly for yesterday’s session and three more. This was because she had addressed the Prime Minister and Leader of the House, Pravind Jugnauth, saying, “limem li’nn touy dimounn.” The Speaker’s attention was drawn by Minister Kalpana Koonjoo-Shah, accusing the MMM parliamentarian of saying “limem li’nn touy Kistnen.” However, an examination of the recording concluded that Joanna Bérenger did not mention Kistnen. Despite this, Sooroojdev Phokeer found the comment objectionable, leading to the suspension.
The Speaker, who had handed over the chair to his deputy, Zahid Nazurally, returned to the chamber to enforce the sentence with the help of Deputy Prime Minister Steven Obeegadoo and the Vice-Prime Minister and Minister of Education. The Deputy Speaker took a lenient approach towards Joanna Bérenger, probably not to the liking of the majority, in order to remove her from the chamber.
During Question Time, Labour MPs Eshan Juman and Stéphanie Anquetil were ordered to withdraw from the House. And to conclude the series, on a Point of Order from Parliamentary Private Secretary Vikash Nuckcheddy, Arianne Navarre-Marie was expelled for calling the Speaker a coward. Upon the Deputy Speaker’s request, the MMM parliamentarian refused to retract her statement, leading to the sanction.
Regarding the case of the safes, even though the matter has been brought before the Financial Crimes Division of the Intermediate Court and will be heard on May 6th, a parliamentary questioning by Joanne Tour allowed Prime Minister Pravind Jugnauth to extensively discuss the case of Navin Ramgoolam’s safes containing Rs 230 million in cash and 27 bank cards. He also revealed that this is “just the tip of the iceberg.”
Pravind Jugnauth recounted the events of that episode with the double raid at Desforges Street and Riverwalk, Floréal, on the night of February 6-7, 2015, during a police operation. The sum of Rs 230 million consisted of $3,161,411.22, £57,956.14, 585,808.19 euros, 73,970 Indian rupees, 52 Malaysian Ringgit, 184 Singaporean dollars, 8,500 Hong Kong dollars, 300 South African rand, 100 Danish crowns, 5 Canadian dollars, 4,000 Australian dollars, 3 United Arab Emirates dirhams, and Rs 102,174,065. The US dollars were made up of 17 bundles of 1,000 notes of 100 USD each.
The police also seized bank cards and other items. Following which, Navin Ramgoolam was arrested on a charge of money laundering and released on bail on February 9, 2015. Pravind Jugnauth mentioned that the police sought the collaboration of the Federal Bureau of Investigation of the United States to trace the new US$100 notes.
The case was then transferred to the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions. Twenty-three charges were brought against Navin Ramgoolam, including “willfully and unlawfully accepting payment in cash on 23 different occasions in breach of Section 5 and the then Sections 7 and 8 of FIAMLA.” The DPP also referred the case to the Integrity Reporting Services Agency and the Mauritius Revenue Authority (MRA). On November 15, 2019, the Intermediate Court dismissed the 23 charges against the leader of the Labour Party, stating, “the prosecution could not provide the particulars of the date of the alleged offences and the identity of the persons who made the payments, and that the charges therefore failed to meet the test of certainty required under the Constitution for the defense to know the case it has to meet and be adequately prepared to meet the case for the prosecution.”
The DPP’s office appealed this decision, and the Supreme Court overturned the Intermediate Court’s decision. The judgment mentioned that the Intermediate Court did not consider the offense under Section 5(1) of FIAMLA, regarding Payment in Cash, among others.
Navin Ramgoolam then applied to the Supreme Court for Leave to appeal to the Privy Council. This request was denied. The case was subsequently referred to the Financial Crimes Division of the Intermediate Court. This was contested by Navin Ramgoolam’s lawyer through a motion presented in court, arguing that the Financial Crimes Division of the Intermediate Court had no jurisdiction to handle this case. “On April 3, 2024, magistrates from the Financial Crimes Division issued their Ruling stating that there was indeed the necessary jurisdiction. The case is now before the Financial Crimes Division of the Intermediate Court and will be heard on May 6th,” clarified Pravind Jugnauth.
**To be continued in the next message due to the word limit.**
Read the original article(French) on Le Mauricien
