[Blog] Democratisation of politics : issues and solutions

This government has been elected on the promise that it would engage in electoral reform and deepen democracy. Reinstating the power of the DPP has already been done, and the FCC will be dismantled in favour of the Serious Fraud Office. It would be interesting to look at the innovations in terms of productivity and cost efficiencies. Our esteemed new Speaker of the House fortunately faces no pressure from a robust opposition compared to her predecessor. 

Far from propagating punditry, this note humbly aims to highlight some issues relating to our political system and propose some solutions. Given that many issues have already been raised in the media by different respected individuals, I am reiterating them once more to motivate a debate among interested readers.

Moreover, the abolition of ethnic declaration is already a victory, especially for the team of Honourable union activist, Mr. Subron. There is a lack of jubilation from the different political parties and the population. The realities of Mauritian politics remain unchanged, with communalism, casteism, the proliferation of dynasties, and the pervasive role of socio-cultural influences and money. Unfortunately, to engage in politics, a closed-shop system has been established for most Mauritians. The only option is to join a mainstream political party either as a member or through a coalition to enter parliament with the blessing of the leaders. Otherwise, the plight of the so-called independents, small parties, or groups, needs no explanation.

Politics is undoubtedly in the DNA of Mauritians given our historical origin as slaves and indentured labour."

Politics is undoubtedly in the DNA of Mauritians, given our historical origin as slaves and indentured labourers. Our forefathers fought for freedom and justice while contributing to the progress of this country by serving the business community and the administrative class. The question is: what are the obstacles preventing most Mauritians from engaging in politics?

Excuse of exigence of duty

Access to politics is first determined by institutional factors like one’s place of employment. The civil service and parastatal bodies have been crucial vehicles for employment creation and social mobility in Mauritius for the majority of the population since independence, despite privatisation strategies in recent decades. In the private sector, the sugar industry and, later, the EPZ served as the engines for mass employment with positive redistributive effects. However, the main bone of contention is the access to politics as a fundamental right to candidacy in district councils, municipal, and general elections — a right that remains obstructed. 

TThere has been a well-organized system since independence to impose all types of barriers to entry into politics for the growing elite from the working class. It is quite unfair to prohibit employees in the public sector from running as candidates unless they resign. Even this right has been banned for university lecturers since 1987 by the PRB. I have campaigned, with the help of many colleagues, to reverse this political decision at the University of Mauritius. 

The irony is that once in government, the excuse of “exigencies of duty” has been prioritized over the democratization of politics. This has led to a concentration of those in liberal professions, such as doctors and lawyers, as well as businessmen, who dominate politics, supporting the dynastic advantage. The collateral damage and risks associated with resignation from a position are costly when the salary is the only source of income.

The trade-off between candidacy and employment is detrimental and automatically blocks entry. It is undeniable that there is a wide range of highly qualified politically motivated Mauritians working in the public sector. However, they have no choice but to bury their ambitions or delay their decision to run for office. Democracy does not only mean the right to vote but also the right to have quality candidates on the electoral list. 

Moreover, the problem is quite different in the private sector. First, some lucky individuals are “parachuted” by major corporations into politics to represent their interests. In contrast, many of those who take the risk are victimized as unelected opposition candidates, left without a job because their employers fear retaliation from the government in power. 

 Given that our PM claims to champion democracy, I suggest urgent action to ensure job security for candidates through the facility of unpaid leave if elected to the National Assembly, and part-time employment for municipal councillors and other officials. With municipal elections approaching, the government should bring the real change anticipated by the population.

There is a wide range of highly qualified Mauritians politically motivated in the public sector but who have no choice but to bury their ambitions or delay their decision to be candidate."

The right to job security would eliminate bootlickers and “yes-men” or women (cronies) in any political party. In politics, we do recognize some genuine individuals following the right path, ready to oppose state capture and economic kleptomania. Job security would ensure both an easy exit and a functioning democracy. 

Musical chair system of government

Linked to job security is the issue of money in politics. Politics has become a fashion and business in Mauritius in recent decades for a select few. Many MPs are involved in business or closely associated with the corporate sector. Drugs, horse racing, gambling, crown lands, state contracts, and other lucrative sectors attract mafias who can easily manipulate the government in power. We have a «musical chairs» system of government, where each leader gets a turn in office after a political cycle. The short memory of the population perpetuates the system, and politics is like a washing machine for past abuses. 

In addition to the democratization of politics, the issue of political party financing and securing a ticket remains a matter of concern. The proposal of an electoral college to appoint the President, thus abolishing the VP office, would surely be part of the reform process.

What about the choice of candidates? I have witnessed the plight of potential candidates at the mercy of party leaders. Financial contributions to the party and the massive costs of political campaigns over the years create major barriers to entry, in addition to personal profile. Established politicians and political dynasties have no real difficulty promoting their relatives. It is common to see more effective and brilliant politicians sacrificed in order to facilitate the rise of family members as future leaders.

Barriers to entry 

Nowadays, as the old generation of politicians phases out, different kinds of entries into politics are manipulated to favor the siblings under the shroud of dynasty. The barriers to entry are strengthened, and what will happen to the new generation of potential candidates? During the recent elections, it is quite encouraging to see a number of new faces joining the democratic process despite the adversity.

Regulating the financing of political parties and, more importantly, decentralizing the choice of candidates would be a solution. We know there are leaders with impotent executive committees as well as political bureaus that justify their decisions through a fake party election. By deepening the real democratization of politics, a genuine change in the political process should occur.

The choice of candidates is also determined by the deleterious role of socio-cultural groups championing communalism and casteism. In Mauritius, we have erected all houses except a ‘Mauritius house’ so far. The subdivision based on religion and castes serves as a fulcrum for politicians to survive through political clientele. There is a stark dichotomy between their rhetoric and actions.

How can we correct the role of socio-cultural organizations? Although I do agree with the principle of representation to ensure communal harmony and maintain the social fabric, our country will not progress if meritocracy and competency are compromised by mediocrity. This is the outcry of our young generation for an overhaul of the system. Our economic progress and social development will continue to be hindered if the right actions are not taken. To this day, we find the list of electoral candidates plagued with communalism, casteism, blood relationships, and money.

Our country would not progress if meritocracy and competency are compromised for mediocrity."

Who will change this system? The system is riddled with the further deepening of these evils in the choice of board members, CEOs, and top positions in the country. Institutions urgently need technicians in the age of artificial intelligence; meritocracy and competency should be our main criteria. I jokingly suggested that we should partially privatize the government and advertise top positions to attain efficiency. A special fund should be established to reward and pay political agents instead of appointing them as board members. I assume it could be a compromised solution to keep political agents away from the administration.

Game changer 

The solutions are clear, and despite the expectations of the population, very few leaders wish to limit the terms of the PM and MPs. A limit of two terms for the PM and three terms for the MPs should become mandatory. I hope this government will bring this historic change. Given communalism, I also suggest that an MP should not be allowed to stand in the same constituency for more than two terms. If an MP is efficient, non-communal, and patriotic, they should have the capacity to be elected in other constituencies. It is unfair to see that some MPs have been elected in the same constituency for decades due to factors other than performance. 

Moreover, the fact that some MPs are elected with only 5,000 votes while others need over 60,000 votes is another unfair situation. Why should members of only one community be elected in some constituencies? We need a game changer in our electoral process so that the right people can represent us in parliament. There should be a review of the constituencies in terms of their population size and ethnic mix to promote communal harmony and nation-building.

The role of socio-cultural groups would be reduced once we stop subsidizing religion in the country and stop giving away taxpayers’ money to NGOs embracing communalism and casteism. The government should enact strict policies to ensure changes in the executive committees of political parties as well as NGOs. A limit on terms of leadership would be the solution, especially when they are funded by taxpayers and benefit from state lands or buildings for their operation. 

Even among trade unionists, presidents of SME organizations, consumer protection groups, and others, all tricks are used to maintain the same executive committees and leaders. These are the same people with interesting narratives in favor of economic justice, Mauritianism, democratization, decentralization, and equal opportunities, but in practice, they seek only their vested interests. 

Democracy

There are also other issues relating to democracy, including the right to information, equal opportunities for women, fiscal responsibility, the role of the press, proportional representation, the best loser system, age limits, and qualifications, including the ethics of politicians. 

Many Mauritians remain victims of the system, and if this government truly serves the people, action is needed. I suggest starting with municipal elections and implementing regulations to curb communalism, casteism, nepotism, and economic kleptomania, thus making Mauritius a true paradise.

I recall the late President Nelson Mandela who, in his speech at the University of Mauritius, eloquently defined democracy as a system in which everyone feels included, so that when looking at a building, they would say, “I am part of this institution.”

The narrative of politicians can be summarized as follows: “... Those who have had their fill speak to the hungry world about the good times to come.” (Unknown author). Hence, I conclude by reiterating that the time for action is now.