Mauritius: Party system and campaigns

Extracted from: Rouikaya Kasenally 2009 "Chapter 8: Mauritius" IN Denis Kadima and Susan Booysen (eds) Compendium of Elections in Southern Africa 1989-2009: 20 Years of Multiparty Democracy, EISA, Johannesburg, 281-283.

Political parties in Mauritius are structured entities and have developed their own mechanisms of organisation and control. In fact, the mainstream / larger political parties have their own constitution which is supposed to dictate party conduct. Party membership is encouraged and is reflected by the broad-based membership that constitutes the different decentralised units of the party. Despite the emphasis on decentralisation, many political parties in Mauritius remain highly leader-centric, as most of the key decisions such as party strategy and financing are made by the leader.

Despite having a well-established presence, these political parties are not bound by any specific electoral or political party law. Legally, political parties are required to register with the ESC as stipulated by the constitution (see section on election management). It should be noted that the above-mentioned registration rules and regulations apply solely during election periods, outside of which political parties are completely unregulated and the only form of regulation emanates from within the party itself (Bunwaree & Kasenally 2005).

Elections are competitive and potential candidates have first to be nominated by their respective parties (if they are part of a given party) before they can proceed with their official nomination. It is equally important to note that candidates can stand as independents and do not require any party affiliation or nomination. The National Assembly Elections Act, 1968, in section 12 requires that the candidate fulfils a number of criteria, such as his/her nomination being supported by eight registered electors of the constituency for which the candidate is seeking to be elected (subsection 2), that s/he declares to be qualified to be elected a member of the Legislative Assembly (subsection 4 (a)), declares the party to which s/he belongs (subsection 4 (b)) and declares the community - Muslim, Hindu, Chinese or General Population - to which s/he belongs.

The criterion dealing with community is further reinforced in section 3 of the first schedule of the constitution, which deals with the official publication of the nominated candidate's community, and the subsequent bearing on the candidate if the validity of the claim is contested. In fact, the official requirement of nominated candidates having to disclose their community has been the subject of numerous contestations by smaller political parties, such as Lalit and Resistanz Ek Alternativ, as it is believed in certain quarters to reinforce the notion of ethnic politics bent on segregation. Two cases filed by the above-mentioned political parties in the Mauritian Court in 2000 and 2005 (prior to the general elections) produced the 'Seetulsing Judgement' (2000) and the 'Balancy Judgement' (2005), which acknowledged the narrowness of the ethnic classification of Mauritian society. In 2006, Resistanz Ek Alternativ wrote to the United Nations Human Rights Commission to demand that the latter pronounces itself on the unconstitutionality of the first schedule of the Mauritian constitution.

In principle, electoral manifestos are supposed to be a sort of social / political / economic contract which a party or coalition party 'sells' or markets to the voters. A close study of the different electoral manifestos produced by the different political parties and coalitions over the last three general elections (1995, 2000 and 2005) shows an uncanny resemblance in relation to the terminology used and the themes covered. In fact, the economy, education, agriculture, health, the preservation of the welfare state and job creation have been the 'do list' of those seeking election or re-election.

There is no doubt that considerable effort and time is invested in the 'manufacturing' of the electoral manifestos. However, the question that must be asked is whether they really matter to the political parties and to the voters in general. In the last three general elections (1995, 2000 and 2005) electoral manifestos were released only a week prior to polling day. The lack of information and communication in terms of time and space concerning the political offerings of those contesting elections throws light on the type of democracy Mauritians live in. Certain observers go to the extent of minimising the value and importance of such an exercise. In this opinion, it is tantamount to a mere showcasing strategy. The following observation made by an influential columnist in one of the mainstream newspaper expresses this sentiment:

In Mauritius as in other parts of the world, the content of electoral manifestos has no real impact on the choices / behaviour of voters. Very few of them read them. Political parties very often give minimal importance to such a document and most of the time it is done as a mere ritual. This light touch approach can be explained by the fact that voters have a greater tendency to identify with a political party leader than with the 'boring' details of an electoral manifesto (L'Express, 3 September 2000).

Reference

BUNWAREE, S & KASENALLY, R 2005 Political Parties and Democracy in Mauritius [PDF document], EISA Research Report No 19.