Pagetemplate

HOW INDEPENDENT IS SEYCHELLES?

In 1976 Seychelles attained its independence from the British Government. “Independence” is defined as being “free from the influence, guidance, or control of another or others”. From that point on, the People of Seychelles were able to determine the form of its Government. In a sense Seychelles became self-governing that is, not governed by a foreign power.

What is Government?

It is the political system by which a nation or community is administered and regulated. Governments come in several shapes and sizes; for example, monarchies, oligarchies, aristocracies, democracies, dictatorships, etc. ...

A Totalitarian Dictatorship is perhaps the most distinctive form of Government. Generally a dictatorship is established in a country when an organized minority seizes power by force or fraud and rapidly assumes complete control over the Government. A Mass Party grows out of this original group which looks to such Mass Party for the ‘reconstruction’ of society. It is the existence of this Mass Party that distinguishes these Governments from historical tyrannies or absolutist states. Opposition to the dictator is stifled by the imposition of state control over all form of expression including science, religion and the arts; the institution of secret police and spy networks and the suppression or destruction of all opposing political parties. Sounds familiar? Today, Seychelles calls itself a “Constitutional Democracy” but does it have a constitutional Government?

Features of a Constitutional Government

Virtually all contemporary governments have constitutions. Written constitutions normally provide the standard by which legitimacy of governmental actions is judged. The mere possession and publication of a constitution does not per se make a Government constitutional. When a new constitutional democracy is adopted as was the case in Seychelles in 1993 a gap may develop between constitutionality prescribed and actually practiced. This in turn renders the government susceptible to criticism and attack by opposition groups. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica a Constitutional Government is in fact comprised of the following elements:

1) Procedural stability

Certain fundamental procedures must not be subject to frequent or arbitrary change. Citizens must know the basic rules according to which politics are conducted. Stable procedures of government provide citizens with adequate knowledge of the probable consequences of their actions. By contrast, under many non-constitutional regimes, such as Hitler’s in Germany and Stalin’s in the Soviet Union, individuals, including high government officials, never knew from one day to the next whether the whim of the dictator’s will would not turn today’s hero into tomorrow’s public enemy.

2) Accountability

Under a constitutional government, those who govern are regularly accountable to at least a portion of the governed. In a constitutional democracy, this accountability is owed to the electorate by all persons in government. Accountability can be enforced through a great variety of regular procedures, including elections, systems of promotion and discipline, fiscal accounting, recall, and referendums. In constitutional democracies, the accountability of government officials to the citizenry makes possible the citizens’ responsibility for the acts of government. The most obvious example of this two-directional flow of responsibility and accountability is the electoral process. A member of the legislature or the head of government is elected by adult citizens and is thereby invested with authority and power in order that he may try to achieve those goals to which he committed himself in his program. At the end of his term of office, the electorate has the opportunity to judge his performance and to re-elect him or dismiss him from office. The official has thus rendered his account and has been held accountable.

3) Representation

Those in office must conduct themselves as the representatives of their constituents. To represent means to be present on behalf of someone else who is absent. Elections, of course, are not the only means of securing representation or of ensuring the representativeness of a government. In medieval times, kings considered themselves, and were generally considered by their subjects, to be representatives of their societies. Of the social contract theorists only Rousseau denied the feasibility of representation for purposes of legislation. The elected status of officeholders is sometimes considered no guarantee that they will be “existentially representative” of their constituents, unless they share with the latter certain other vital characteristics such as race, religion, sex, or age. The problems of representation are in fact more closely related to democratic than to constitutionalist criteria of government: a regime that would be considered quite unrepresentative by modern standards could still be regarded as constitutional so long as it provided procedural stability and the accountability of officeholders to some but not all of the governed and so long as the governors were representative of the best or the most important elements in the body politic.

4) Openness and disclosure

Democracy rests upon popular participation in government, constitutionalism upon disclosure of, and openness about the affairs of government. In this sense, constitutionalism is a prerequisite of a successful democracy, since the people cannot participate rationally in government unless they are adequately informed of its workings. Originally, because they were concerned with secrets of state, bureaucracies surrounded their activities with a veil of secrecy. The ruler himself always retained full access to administrative secrets and often to the private affairs of his subjects, into which bureaucrats such as tax collectors and the police could legally pry. But when both administrators and rulers were subjected to constitutional restraints, it became necessary that they disclose the content of their official activities (by means such as televised debates) to the public to which they owed accountability. This explains the provision contained in most constitutions obliging the legislature to publish a record of its debates.

5) Division of power

Constitutional government requires a division of power among several organs of the body politic. Pre-constitutionalist governments, such as the absolute monarchies of Europe in the 18th century, frequently concentrated all power in the hands of a single person. The same has been true in modern dictatorships such as Hitler’s in Germany. Constitutionalism, on the other hand, by dividing power — between, for example, local and central government and between the Legislature, Executive, and Judiciary — ensures the presence of restraints and “checks and balances” in the political system where each branch of government polices the other. Citizens are thus able to influence policy by resort to any of several branches of government.

For instance before the Executive can effect new legislation, taxation, or do certain other acts, the legislative branch must approve the new laws, taxes and certain acts following open public debate, due diligence and unrestrained deliberation. A reclusive “rubber-stamp legislature” defeats the intended safeguard and public debate mandates. Any person can challenge the validity of such legislation (e.g. its consistency with The Constitution as the “Supreme Law of the Land”) or can seek an interpretation of new or existing legislation from the Judiciary which is the final guardian, interpreter and adjudicator of the Constitution and all laws, rules and regulations. Sadly in Seychelles that is not the case

It is the role of the free press, among others, to report and to inform the people about the issues at hand and the respective positions of all parties. While one media source may favour one position others may favour another. This enables people to disseminate the information from several media sources and form their own opinion — Public Opinion.

The obstruction or suppression of the free press such as for instance exorbitant broadcasting licensing fees is a serious offense against democracy. The systematic propagation of a doctrine or cause or of information reflecting the views and interests of those people advocating such a doctrine or cause, is called propaganda which serves no purpose other than to obscure the truth and the true state of affairs. The free press is the “Guardian of the Truth”. Only those who have something to hide are afraid of the truth. Any public official who thinks otherwise has no place in the Executive, Legislature or Judiciary of a democratically elected government.

The People must freely express their views and opinions to the executive and their legislative representative free from intimidation and fear of reprisals. If the executive or the legislative representative fails to adhere to his/her constituents’ views and opinions then the constituents can vote the ‘Zonm Sourd’ or ‘Fanm Sourd’ out of office. In the case of violation against the Constitution such as for instance the “Seychellois Charter of Fundamental Human Rights and Freedoms” or gross misconduct elected officials can even be removed from office.

In the absence of free public debate and people’s unhindered participation in government affairs, democracy does not exist because it is not “free from the influence, guidance, or control of another or others” — it is not Independent.

Likewise for a country to call itself “independent”, its Executive, Legislature and Judiciary must be “free from the influence, guidance or control of another or others.” When, as in Seychelles, one of the government’s three branches is controlled entirely by foreigners, or put differently is, under the influence, guidance or control of another or others, can the government really be said to be independent. Hence we must ask ourselves the question: IS SEYCHELLES AN INDEPENDENT NATION?

Members of the Executive have the qualification of being SPPF and Seychellois, in that order. Similarly, to be elected to the Legislature the qualification is to be Seychellois; it “helps” as additional qualification to be SPPF given that 45% of the popular vote have only being allocated 10% of the seats thus furthering the existing degree of influence, guidance or control. By contrast, at present, the peculiar qualification to hold “Judicial Office” in Seychelles is not to be Seychellois.

In Seychelles, candidates for judicial office are discriminated against merely because they are Seychellois. Why is it that members of the other two branches of government are chosen simply because they are Seychellois and yet when it comes to the Judicial branch of the government the fact that one is Seychellois is used to exclude that person from the bench? Why are the reasons used to exclude Seychellois from the bench not used to exclude them from the Executive and the Legislature? Is it not the case that as Seychelles is such a small country everyone in the other two branches of the government knows everybody else ? Could this obvious discrimination against Seychellois candidates be the reason why for the 1998 Opening of the Supreme court 16 lawyers voted with their feet and did not attend the ceremony?

The irony is that the United Nation resolutions specifically state “that a candidate for judicial office must be a national of the country concerned, shall not be considered discriminatory”. In Seychelles the very fact that a person is a national of the country is used to discriminate against him/her instead of that fact being used to positively include them.

The Cabinet in Seychelles is composed of 13 members. The judiciary in Seychelles likewise is comprised of 13 members. What would the Seychellois feel like if the 13 member Cabinet were all foreigners? If it is not acceptable that the entire Cabinet should be “under the influence, guidance and control “of foreigners why should it be acceptable when it comes to the Judiciary? It might be argued by some that three of the foreign judges are now naturalized Seychellois. Someone once said, “a calf born in a pig sty does not become a pig.”

The deliberate exclusion of Seychellois from the judiciary must be seen therefore as a ploy of the Executive and the Legislature to further some secret scheme. The question is WHAT IS THAT SCHEME? Could it be to ensure the total control of the judiciary?

If, that is the case then the constitutional guarantees contained in — Article 19 (1) and Article 19 (7) of the Seychelles Constitution becomes illusory rights because it raises the issue of Impartiality of the Judges.

Article 19(1):

“Every person charged with an offence has the right, unless the charge is withdrawn, to a fair hearing within a reasonable time by an independent and impartial court established by law”;

Article 19 (7):

“Any court or other authority required or empowered by law to determine the existence or extent of any civil right or obligation shall be established by law and shall be independent and impartial; and where proceedings for such a determination are instituted by any person before such a court or other authority the case shall be given a fair hearing within a reasonable time.”

Impartiality is defined as not being partial or biased; unprejudiced, free from bias in judgment, fair, liberal, just, equitable, indifferent, non-partisan, dispassionate and fair-minded. With the court being empowered to decide over the fate of property, and liberties this issue is dear to all people and thus of the utmost significance when the government is a party to a case — such as when the suit is one of past land acquisition or when the (personal) interest of influential members of the Executive (or SPPF members) is at stake. Winning or losing a case is not important, but whether justice has prevailed and justice has been served is important to the People — if the People are to respect the rule of law vs. what is perceived as the undue influence, guidance, or control of another or others by a select few.

If on the other hand a Seychellois is appointed to the bench out goes the contract of employment (with it the allegiance to the Executive branch) because the term of appointment for a Seychellois is contained in Article 131 of the Constitution. A Seychellois appointed under the said Article holds that post for life i.e. has life tenure.

One of the questions to be answered emanating from the above analysis is whether the Government in Seychelles exists for the public good or the self-interest of the Executive? Now that you are informed — YOU — the average Seychellois can answer that question for himself/herself.

Seychelles is once again at a crucial stage in its democratisation in that shortly it has to hold a Presidential election. Do the Seychellois people want an independent and impartial judiciary? The choice is yours. Among several short comings of the SPPF regime, its failure to provide Seychelles with an independent and impartial judiciary must be one of its greatest crimes. When selecting its next bench of judges due consideration needs to be given to local talent whilst bearing in mind the United Nations Basic Principles on the independence of the Judiciary particularly Article 10:

“Persons selected for judicial office shall be individuals of integrity and ability with appropriate training or qualifications in law. Any method of judicial selection shall safeguard against judicial appointments for improper motives. In the selection of judges, there shall be no discrimination against a person on the grounds of race, colour, sex, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or status except that a requirement, that a candidate for judicial office must be a national of the country concerned, shall not be considered discriminatory.”

Whilst the author is aware that the views expressed above will not have a bearing on the final choices made, it is none the less hoped that the external forces that assisted directly or indirectly in bringing about Multi-Party Democracy and in getting the EDA shelved will join the People of Seychelles and help Seychelles attain its true Democratic Independence. Let ‘Zonm Sourd’ as our elected representative hear our voice — loud and clear and remember days past ... “Never, never shall we cease struggling. Equality for all of us! Freedom for ever”!

‘Zonm Lib’ to ‘Zonm Sourd’:

“FOR THIRTY YEARS I HAVE STOOD SHACKLED AND WATCHED ALL OF YOU GO BY. IT IS NOT WREATHS THAT I NEED. PLEASE SET ME FREE.

REMOVE MY SHACKLES!”