Letters to the Editor
A SAD SITUATION FOR
Sir, There has been widespread disenchantment with the so-called high level National Economic Planning Council (NEPC) which President Michel formed recently. The general public has been surprised that there’s no representation from either the Seychelles Chamber of Commerce or indeed from the side of the Opposition. Instead President Michel, although he spoke about getting the Seychellois people to work together in unity and harmony on election night, appears to be playing the one-party card even more than F.A.R ever did. Action, of course, speaks louder than words.
Who constitute the NEPC Council today?
President Michel himself who has been over the years Minister of Finance, Vice-President and is now President (SPPF)
Vice-President Joseph Belmont who certainly qualifies as Minister of Tourism which is a vital part of our economy (SPPF)
Finance Minister Danny Faure (SPPF)
Minister of Investment & Industry Jacquelin Dugasse (SPPF)
Francis Chang-Leng, Governor of Central Bank who for many years has combined this office with that of Principal Secretary in the Ministry of Finance. He is also a Director of the Seychelles Maritime Services Ltd which is a subsidiary of Corvina
Captain David Savy of Air
Captain Guy Adam who besides being head of SEPEC is the Chairman of Corvina.
Jean-Weeling is a Director of several companies run by Corvina
John Esther of Barclays Bank which bank has serious banking relations with most of the Corvina’s listed companies
Mr. K. P. Ho – Chairman of Banyan Tree Holdings – a nationally unknown quantity
Mr. Adolfo Valeschi – Chief Executive of MW Brands who established a good working relationship with Mr. Glenny Savy of Corvina when the latter was Chairman of the Seychelles Fishing Authority and he was Director of H. J Heinz who owned 60% of Indian Ocean Tuna until recently
The composition of the new NEPC has not only shocked the opposition especially after the article in this paper of what Corvina is all about within the framework of our economy but has also brought tremendous dissatisfaction within the SPPF structure with some high ranking members feeling betrayed. Some of these individuals have brought their “bitterness” to the attention of this paper but fear to speak out in the light of receiving the “Radegonde treatment.”
President Michel must come to realize that for a democratic and harmonious environment to come about in
It is a sad situation indeed for
Name withheld
Sir, The front page article from Vol.5 Issue No.30 (September 1 2006) of Le Nouveau Seychelles Weekly moved me, as a person involved with issues related to Human Rights, to question the current Government’s immigration and legal policy with regards to asylum cases. My international experience in the socio-legal field working with refugees brings to light the severity of
Let it be known that
Now Article 3 of the convention clearly states that:
1. No State Party shall expel, return (“refouler”) or extradite a person to another State where there are substantial grounds for believing that he would be in danger of being subjected to torture.
2. For the purpose of determining whether there are such grounds, the competent authorities shall take into account all relevant considerations including, where applicable, the existence in the State concerned of a consistent pattern of gross, flagrant or mass violations of human rights.
There have been various debates on the principle of non-refoulement and I share some of the general ideas so as to highlight the severity of what our country has done with the hope of opening discussions at the least within the (legal) Bar Association of the country and civil societies and NGOs involved in the fight for Human Rights. These were points raised at an international law gathering in 2001 in
1. Non-refoulement is a principle of customary international law.
2. Refugee law is a dynamic body of law, informed by the broad object and purpose of the 1951 Refuge convention and its 1967 protocol as well as by developments in related areas of international law, such as Human rights law and international humanitarian law.
3. Refugees irrespective of their status, once they have expressed the intention to be considered as such, Article 3 covers them as such
4. Every country that ratified the convention has an obligation to abide to the principle of non-refoulement to any territories where the applicant feels that their freedom will be threatened or where he or she is at risk of persecution, including interception, rejection at the frontier or indirect refoulement.
5. The attribution to the state of conduct amounting to refoulement is determined by the principles of law on State responsibility. The international legal responsibility to act in conformity with international obligations wherever they may arise is the overriding consideration. [emphasis added]
6. There is a trend against exceptions to basic Human Rights principles and this influences the interpretation of Article 3 (2). Exceptions are to be interpreted very restrictively, subject to due process safeguards and as a measure of last resort. In case of torture and war-torn situations (as is the case of
According to the Seychelles Immigration Office in
S.P.L
BANS VERSUS THE RIGHTS OF THE INDIVIDUAL
Sir, I am one of the many who has welcomed the news that a new law was gazetted on Tuesday 5th September 2006, prohibiting the importation, sale and wearing of military designed clothes. For too long now those clothes were being used for the wrong purposes and eventually our dedicated and professional army personnel were accused of or blamed for such wrongdoings carried out by those amateur commandoes and self-made Ninjas! I do hope a prompt thorough clean-up will be done in shops and other outlets selling such clothes.
Now that the first ball is rolling, let us look at another type of clothes which is also contributing to much harm and destruction to our society especially our youths….garments and items like caps, necklaces, wristbands etc bearing the Cannabis or Marijuana leaves! Much is being done by Mr. Vel, Mr. Ah-Weng, Mrs. Rene and others at CARE and other NGOs to sensitize our young people and adult addicts about the dangers of drugs. A lot is invested in their rehabilitation by Mr. Dupres and his devoted team at the Mont Royale Centre, yet we are still allowing those gullible businessmen to continue to import and become rich by glorifying and marketing such clothes and accessories!
Some youths who eventually wear such clothes think it’s cool to be seen sporting a Marijuana or cannabis T-shirt, cap or necklace and the package is usually not complete until he or she is also seen smoking the real thing!
May I call on the authorities concerned to seriously consider gazetting another law banning the importation of such ‘drug glorifying’ clothes and accessories. It is also my wish that a clean-up is done in those shops selling such items. It’s a sorry sight to walk into a shop at Providence Industrial Estate or in and around
Gustave Decomarmond
Director of Protocol
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Editor’s note: Who and what is truly contributing to the harm and destruction of our society especially our youths? Is it the importation, sale and wearing of military designed clothes? Is it the glorifying and marketing of garments and items like caps, necklaces, wristbands etc bearing Cannabis or Marijuana leaves? Is applying a ban the right way to address our problems? Once a government starts applying bans to solve problems, where does it stop? Send us your comments at The Editor, Le Nouveau
THERE ARE MORE QUESTIONS THAN ANSWERS!
Sir, two weeks ago in your edition dated August 25th, 2006, you published a letter I sent to you about the real reason behind the construction of the mini port at Bel Ombre, and I quote here part of my letter. “According to a very reliable source the project has been conceived originally for the benefit of none other than ‘Corvina’. ‘Corvina’ is very much involved in the ongoing hotel projects on
Last week Mr. Editor ‘The People’ (31/08/06) publication printed a letter in defence of the allegations I had made in my letter to you. According to ‘Kosto’ the writer behind that letter, “it is true that certain boats carrying workers and visitors to Silhouette are currently using that port too, probably because in this kind of weather it is safer to do it from there and this is no big deal,” Of course Mr Kosto it is no big deal. You and your friends are in charge you can do and say whatever you like. But, how can you justify the size of that development and the surface area being reclaimed at our expense if it was not for anything other than for the fishermen and residents of the district?
News are now filtering down to the residents residing in the flats across the road from the area in question that they will have to be moved to new premises. Because the land where their dwelling houses are is required to build a transit hotel for guests to stay overnight before they can cross over to Silhouette. It is believed that guests to Silhouette arriving late evening in Mahe will have to spend the night on the mainland. Why was this information kept from the residents until after the election Mr. Kosto? Now Mr. Kosto, what have you got to say about that: wool over our eyes or not? You see Mr. K, there are surely more questions than answers.
A native of Bel Ombre