Yousuf Mohamed S.C : “Mauritius should be considered as one constituency” 

The Electoral Reform is causing quite a stir among politicians these days. The allocation of additional seats – Best Loser Seats (BLS) in the National Assembly seemingly is to do away with the mandatory declaration of community, tackle a major issue related to the presence of women in politics, in others words, encourage the other half of our (female) population to be more active on the political front so that there is a fairly measurable number that can argue for women’s rights, and last but not the least, be cautious about the so-called “crossing” of floors. These are the major proposed amendments in an electoral reform by the Government. Yousuf Mohamed, former MP and S.C, states that with this proposal, the Government has lost its credibility.  For him, it is time for Mauritius to have a sole constituency. 

Electoral reforms presented at the steps of General elections. Many would consider this as a piece of electioneering, isn’t it?
This government has lost all the credibility among the population. The people expected a more concrete reform that will naturally help all sections of the population and the abolition of Best Loser System. But the government has proposed a system giving political leaders of each party the freedom to choose among the best losers. Currently, with the Best Loser System, candidates who have not been elected are selected by the Electoral Commission to make sure that minorities are fairly represented. When the Best Loser System was devised, it was thought that the members of minorities would represent their communities. But recently, we have seen MPs crossing the floors. So, they do not think of their community right away but rather think in terms of their own security and securing a ticket for elections. If we are going to have such people, better replace it by another system where minorities are represented in parliament. 

This government has lost all the credibility among the population. The people expected a more concrete reform that will naturally help all sections of the population and the abolition of Best Loser System."

Is it a priority for the government to come up with electoral reform at this point of time?
By publishing this current proposal, it is an attempt to hoodwink the population and pacify Rezistans ek Alternativ. Nothing will come from this present proposal, as they cannot get ¾ votes required in the parliament.  

What, do you think, is the greatest weakness of this reform?
The greatest mistake is not being able to find a substitute for the Best Loser and leaving it to the leader to choose. The division of the constituencies will perpetuate communalism and casteism. I would prefer Mauritius to be considered as one constituency where each party can file their candidates. The population can vote whoever they want. In big countries, in one constituency there are millions of voters. It makes sense if communalism and casteism are eliminated. 

Is it realistic for a country like Mauritius to introduce Proportional Representation?
There is no need for Proportional Representation. There are various forms of Proportional Representation. For instance, PR in Rodrigues has not worked. We should not adopt the same system in Mauritius. 

If this reform is accepted, the number of MPs will rise from 70 to 81? Is this too much for a small country like Mauritius?
It is not a necessity to increase the number of MPs. Instead, it is time to reduce the number of MPs and Ministers. Mauritius cannot afford 81 MPs. Already, Mauritius is suffering with so much MPs, ministers and advisors. The more ministers and MPs would mean more duty-free cars, escorted by police officers and expenses. In some countries, MPs uses common public transport. We are bankrupting our country. We are in a financial constraint. We are indebted up to the root of our hair on our heads. We have mortgaged the future of our grand children to foreign countries like India, China and Saudi Arabia. 

Replacing the Best Loser System with an additional seating system, could this bring prejudices to minorities of the country?
It is better to have only one constituency in Mauritius to avoid unfairness. It is good to abandon the Best Loser System but we should also abandon the possibility of communalism. This will be more equitable. 

This current system perpetrates also jobs and promotions being in the hands of particular groups. Mauritius is suffering economically andsocially because of the absence of meritocracy. Meritocracy should be paramount."

Otherwise, is it correct to give political leaders the power to pool out losing candidates?
If you give political leaders power to retrieve candidates, there will be kissing of feet and begging to be in parliament. There will be more ‘yes men’. Candidates should be elected and not selected. We do not need slaves in parliament. We already have famous examples of this kind of slavery and there is no need for Mauritius to have more like these. 

The Electoral Reform proposes that 1/3 of candidates should be women. In your opinion, is it a good measure?
There should be more women in parliament. Why limited to one-third only? If they are good, there should be no limits. I am for women rights and women in power. 

The leader of the Opposition and Rama Sithanen have already tabled to the Electoral Boundaries Commission. Do you think we should re-align our electoral boundaries? 
If they want to maintain the system, go towards new boundaries with less number of constituencies. Too many constituencies perpetrate communalism. It should not be giving one community the assurance that the Government is in their favour. There should not be any kind of domination. Elected people should serve the country, not a religion. This current system perpetrates also jobs and promotions being in the hands of particular groups. Mauritius is suffering economically and socially because of the absence of meritocracy. Meritocracy should be paramount.