PRESS RELEASE

APPOINTMENT OF POLITICIANS TO PUBLIC SERVICE POSTS VIOLATES PRINCIPLE OF DELINKING

Linyon Demokratik Seselwa expresses its disappointment that President Danny Faure has failed to apply cardinal principles of a democratic system in the appointment of top government officials announced yesterday.

In numerous instances, political figures have been named to positions in the public service, in clear violation of the separation of politics from the structure of the public service. These appointments are unfair to people who have chosen a career in the public service as professionals in that politicians are appointed over their heads, thus depriving them of the opportunity of promotion.

This is the case with the appointments of Mr. Patrick Herminie, Mrs. Marie-Louise Potter and Mr. Dick Esparon as Secretary of State, which is a public service position and presented as such in the announcement. Persons who have held this post up to now have been appointed from the public service and it has been regarded as the top of the career ladder for the public service.

Other political figures have been appointed to positions of Principal Secretary straight from politics. These include Mr. Kevin Vidot and Mrs. Jennifer Jasmin who were both members of the National Assembly for Parti Lepep, and Mr. Fabian Palmyre who was a candidate for the party in the last National Assembly elections. The same criticism applies to a former MNA, Ms. Cheryl Vengadasamy appointed as a Special Advisor, also a public service post, in the Police Department.

The proliferation of Special Advisor posts for persons with previous political connections is also a misuse the public service career structure.

These appointments come after President Faure has expressed his commitment to the delinking process which means the separation of the political and state structures, and also to the creation of a Public Service Commission which would regulate career issues such as promotion. What we are seeing is simply politicians being rewarded with posts in the civil service when the need to depart from such practices has been acknowledged and endorsed.

Roger Mancienne October 31, 2016

Chairman, Linyon Demokratik Seselwa

MONKEY BUSINESS AT THE JUDICIARY

Judiciary is making a mockery of the constitution.

The provisional cause list of the next session of the Seychelles Court of Appeal, which is set for 28 November to 9 December, discloses several cases to be heard by a panel of appeal justices that include Dr. Satyabhooshun Gupt Domah, despite the fact that the second five-year term of the Mauritian national’s appointment came to an end on 4 October 2016.

On 5 September 2011, the President of the Republic of Seychelles appointed Justice Domah for second and last of term of five years. The instrument of appointment reads:

WHEREAS you, SATYABHOOSHUN GUPT DOMAH, have been appointed as a JUSTICE OF APPEAL of the Seychelles Court of Appeal under Article 123 of the Constitution, and the said appointment will expire on the 3rd October 2011,

AND WHEREAS you are not a citizen of Seychelles,

AND WHEREAS further the Constitutional Appointments Authority has recommended to me that there are exceptional circumstances to appoint you as JUSTICE OF APPEAL for a second term of office,

NOW THEREFORE, in exercise of the powers conferred to the President under article 131(4) of the Constitution, I, JAMES ALIX MICHEL, PRESIDENT, appoint you

                        SATYABHOOSHUN GUPT DOMAH

To be a JUSTICE OF APPEAL for a period of five years commencing on 4th October 2011.

GIVEN under my hand and the Public Seal of Seychelles at State House on this 5th day of September 2011.

 Article 131(1)(e) states: a person holding office of Justice of Appeal…….SHALL vacate that office in the case of a person who is not a citizen of Seychelles, at the end of the term for which the person was appointed.

So who authorised his extension to May 2017 in the face of the above. This is effectively a third term which is not allowed under the constitution. According to a communique from the judiciary, “this is due to the fact that a constitutional case delayed the expiry of his term of office. Therefore his term ends in May 2017”; what nonsense!

Did the CAA recommend this term or extension thereof to the President, and did the President re-appoint or extend his term of office until May 2017? Article 131 (4) "The President may, on the recommendation of the CAA in exceptional circumstances, appoint a person who is not a citizen of Seychelles and who has already completed one term of office as a Justice of Appeal or Judge for a second term of office, whether consecutive or not, of not more than seven years."

Barely a month ago, we all saw Mr. Danny Faure swear an oath of Allegiance to the Constitution and now if he allows this monkey business he will be violating his Constitutional and Presidential Oaths(both oaths were taken before the Chief Justice), and the Constitution. It must be remembered that a President can be removed for violation of the constitution. Remember that in 2011 when Mr. Dhanjee challenged Domah's  re-appointment the CAA had only recommended a further TWO years but President Michel gave him a fresh term of FIVE years.

MERITON LAND SCANDAL

Minister Vincent Meriton’s daughter, Vladislava Vincentovna Meriton has bought land at Glacis; she is busy building. Going by her NIN number, she must have been made a citizen of Seychelles only four years ago. It is without doubt that someone high up the echelon of power has been behind the transfer because two portions of land (Parcels H10904 and H10906) had to be amalgamated into one (H10908) to suit lady Meriton. Minister Meriton, the papa of lady Meriton oversaw the whole transaction as per power of attorney vested in him by his daughter. Some people know how to get things done properly.

Was she ever on any list or as suspected did she bypass the list? Some original natural born Seychellois from the same district have been on the land bank list for over 15 years. These ordinary Seychellois were even told 5 years back that there was no government land available in this district; what a miracle for Lady Meriton.

Amalgamated and sold in the same day

There is a well published land allocation policy of the Parti lepep government of one piece of land per person, or if you have (private) land already you cannot get government land. Was this a stealth attempt to bypass this!

While many Seychellois find it hard to buy land from government even if they have the cash, others manage to do so without much hassle. The 1851 square meters of land has been transferred for a sum well below the market value of land. Is this anomaly enough to request the resignation of Minister Meriton?

LAWYER REQUESTS POLICE TO INVESTIGATE JUDGE

Judge Perera accused of the serious crime of forgery but no CAA investigations. This article is from Seychelles Weekly in 2007.

A criminal complaint was lodged with the police this week, against Supreme Court Judge A.R. Perera. The complaint was made by attorney, Mrs Alexia Antao. In her complaint, Mrs Antao has asked the police to conduct a criminal investigation of Judge Perera for forgery. According to the Penal Code anyone found guilty of forgery is liable to imprisonment of up to 3 years if convicted.

Alexia Amesbury then Antao and Judge Perera

 The complaint concerned proceedings and court records in a civil case dating back to October 2006. On October 17th at 10.00 am, court officials called a civil case with lawyer Philippe Boulle representing one party and Mr France Bonte representing the other side. The court record for the proceedings of that particular day was placed before Judge Perera for his signature. We reproduce below that record:

Mr Bonte: Your Lordship may I move in terms of my prayer.

Court (Judge Perera): There was an application for stay by Mr Boulle.

Mr Bonte: Your lordship if he has filed (sic) a reply now we take a date for ruling.

Court (Judge Perera): I will take an order on this. The case is fixed for ruling on 20th October 2006 at 9.00 am.

However, that proceeding does not appear on the records of that case. Instead, we have the following:

Mr Bonte: Your lordship may I move the motion be dismissed for want of appearance.

Court (Judge Perera): There was an application for stay by Mr Boulle.

Mr Bonte: Your lordship if he has failed to support the motion today, I move for dismissal.

Court (Judge Perera): The motion for stay of execution of judgment dated 22nd March 2006 was listed to be supported today. The parties are absent and unrepresented. On the application of counsel for the respondent, the motion is struck out.

This transcript was the one signed by Judge Perera as well as the court reporter. That last document, according to Mrs Antao, is the subject matter of the criminal investigation lodged by her with the police. Mrs Antao cites the Seychelles Penal Code which defines forgery as “the making of a false document with intent to defraud or to deceive”. The code goes on to elaborate what the “making of a false document” entails. Section 333 states:

Any person makes a false document who:

a)      makes a document purporting to be what  in fact it is not;

b)      alters a document without authority in such a manner that if the alteration had been authorised it would have altered the effect of the document;

c)       introduces into a document without authority whilst it is being drawn up matter which if it had been authorised would have altered the effect of the document.

In an exclusive interview, we asked Mrs Antao why she has brought the complaint against the judge when she had not been mentioned in the transcript. “It is precisely because my appearance for Mr Boulle has been removed from the proceedings that alerted me to something drastically wrong had taken place.” She said. According to the cause list, the case was to be heard at 10.30 am not 10.00 am. Below is a transcript of the entire proceeding as it is recorded on the tape:

Mr Bonte: Your Lordship may I move in terms of my prayer.

Court (Judge Perera): Mr Boulle is not here.

Mr Bonte: It is alright, may I move in terms of my prayer. We take a date for judgement.

Court (Judge Perera): There was an application for stay by Mr Boulle.

Mrs Antao:  Is it a case for Mr Boulle?

Court (Judge Perera): Yes

Mrs Antao: Can I stand for him? I am ready, willing and able but un-instructed.

Mr Bonte: Un-instructed. So sit down my friend. Let me go about my business.

Court (Judge Perera): There was an application for stay filed by Mr Boulle.

Mr Bonte: Yes.

Court (Judge Perera): With your reply.

Mr Bonte: Yes. Now we take a date for ruling.

Court: I will make an order on this. The case is fixed for ruling on 20th October at 9.00 am.

Judge Perera, a Sri Lankan by birth, arrived in Seychelles 25 years ago. At the time, the judiciary served the whims and fancy of the one party state dictatorship led by Mr Rene. Under the Constitution of the one-party state introduced in 1979, no one enjoyed the protection of the fundamental rights and freedoms as we do today under the third Republic Constitution. The fundamental law was not even one-party state constitution but the constitution of the SPPF.

During his long career in Seychelles, Perera served a stint as Registrar of the Supreme Court. As a foreigner, Perera could only serve one term of seven years as a Supreme Court judge since, according to the Constitution of the Third Republic, he could not be reappointed. Perera somehow served two stints as Supreme Court Judge while still a foreigner. However, when his second term expired, Perera applied for and was granted citizenship, the consequence of which is life tenure as a Supreme Court judge. This sleight of hand has been condemned by Seychellois lawyers and politicians as an assault on the spirit of the constitution.

This is not the first time that Judge Perera has courted controversy in regard to court proceedings. In 1994 in a civil case brought by Ms Kathleen Pillay against the Russian airline Aeroflot and the Seychelles Government, Judge Perera ruled in favour of the Airline, which was represented by France Bonte. According to sworn affidavits  by two lawyers present in the court,  Ms Pillay stood up and shouted at the judge “Once again you have protected your post” and then stormed our of the court. According to these two lawyers in their affidavits, the lawyer for Aeroflot, Mr Bonte, addressed the court saying “My Lord this is a contempt of court”, to which Judge Perera replied, “I will report this matter to the Chief Justice” and then said to the stenographer, “Make a note of what has been said and I shall refer the matter to the chief Justice to deal with”.

The next day, however, Ms Pillay was served with a notice signed by Judge Perera, to appear before the Supreme Court two days later to show cause why she should not be dealt with for contempt of court.  However, when Ms Pillay applied for the transcript of the proceedings to prepare her defence, court officials informed her that Judge Perera refused to give back the file. Later, however, Ms Pillay received an extract of the proceedings from Judge Perera which had words, “Before I initiate proceedings for contempt” added.  During that time, in a sworn affidavit, Ms Pillay challenged the correctness of the record and said “… the extract provided to her was to the best of her information knowledge and belief, a false record of the proceedings”. Her allegation was further supported by the sworn affidavits of the two lawyers who were present in court on that day.

Earlier this year one of the parties in the case when Mr Boule was not present made a complaint against Judge Perera to the Constitutional Appointments Authority (CAA) to have the judge investigated by a tribunal for his conduct. When the complaint was given publicity by Nouvo  Vizyon Magazine, Perera inexplicably decided to offer an explanation to the magazine in a long letter justifying his action. In this letter, Judge Perera admitted to “recording the proceedings in chambers on the draft of the transcript of the earlier court proceedings.” Again according to him “that was no dishonest or corrupt, nor a falsification of record.”

Referring to her criminal complaint against Judge Perera the attorney, Mrs Antao, said “By his action, in my view, Judge Perera has shown that he has no integrity, is unfit to be a judge and I believe that in the eyes of the Seychellois people he has lost credibility as a judge. How many have won or lost their cases as a result of this kind of conduct. His conduct has further degraded the embattled judiciary. The judge has clearly become an embarrassment to our once reputable institution.”

This newspaper is of the view that if the authority concerned (CAA) does not intervene now and rescue the judiciary from itself, then they too would be responsible for the utter degradation of the judiciary unless such a judiciary serves another agenda contrary to that provided for by the Constitution.

Source: Seychelles Weekly 2007

NOTE:  There was never a tribunal for Judge Perera or any suspension by President James Michel. According to research the Judge was called to answer a few questions secretly behind closed doors by the then CAA Chairman France Bonte; this was a massive conflict of interest as Bonte was also implicated in the case. The investigations were buried even before it started.

LDS CONDENMS SUSPENSION AND INVESTIGATION OF JUDGE KARUNAKARAN

PRESS RELEASE

Linyon Demokratik Seselwa condemns the decision of President James Michel to suspend Judge Durai Karunakaran and to initiate an investigation, through the Constitutional Appointments Authority, into matters which have not been specified relating to his decisions and conduct.

The decision of President Michel, taken at the request of Chief Justice Mathilda Twomey, is an unprecedented and unjustified attempt to subject the Judiciary to the control of the Executive.

LDS considers that the decision is politically motivated and a measure of retaliation because of recent rulings by Judge Karunakaran in controversial cases related to the electoral process which were not in the political interests of President Michel and the Parti Lepep.

Judge Karunakaran has served the country for more than 30 years in an office of great responsibility, as a Judge of the Supreme Court and also as Acting Chief Justice, without any allegation of impropriety or complaint against his professionalism. There is no doubt that the action against him at this time is connected to the recent cases in which he has been involved.

LDS calls on President Michel and all the leadership of Parti Lepep to respect the independence of the Judiciary and refrain from using the power of the Executive and state institutions to further political interests.

Roger Mancienne October 11, 2016

Chairman, Linyon Demokratik Seselwa

SEYCHELLES PAST; THE DARK HISTORY

MASONIC MAFIA LINKED TO EDGWARE MURDER

The machine gunning of exiled Seychelles opposition leader Gerard Hoarau on the steps of his Edgware home last November was widely treated as yet another example of 'International Terrorism' at work. However, new evidence brought to light by French sources lifts the lid on a bizarre conspiracy involving the international heroin trade, the Mafia, a secret Masonic Order, and the would-be assassins of the Pope. Hoarau was the President of the Seychelles National Movement (SNM) and led the guerrilla 'Mouy6ment Pour La Resistance' (MPR), a right wing emigre coalition formed to overthrow the current government of the Indian Ocean micro state and its President France Albert Rene.

Since last February the SNM newspaper, the Seychelles Freedom Herald, published in London and smuggled in quantity to the Seychelles, has been waging a campaign against the influence of the Mafia in the archipelago—which has, been growing with President Rene's blessing. From its own investigations, supported by items in the Italian, American and British press, the SNM has concentrated its at- tack more and more on the man it considers to be the Mafia's key figure in the Seychelles, Mario Ricci.

Mario Ricci

 Aged 55 and a resident of the Seychelles for the past dozen years, Mr Ricci runs a large number of enterprises in the country, including hotels, housing developments and a tea company. Since June 1984 he has been officially accredited as Ambassador of the Order of the Knights Hospitalers of Malta to the Seychelles government. This American order is recognised by hardly any other country and has nothing to do with the charitable Rome-based Order of the Knights of Malta, but through it Mr Ricci enjoys diplomatic status and privileges, including immunity. He is also very close to President Rene, and sees him often.

In its last issue, dated September, the Seychelles Freedom Herald published letters from the Ministry of National Development in the Seychelles capital, Victoria, and from Barclays Bank showing that Mr Ricci had transferred nearly two million Seychelles rupees (about $271,000) to the ruling party, the Seychelles People's Progressive Front, in return for the indemnity of one of his Seychelles companies, Oceangate, received at its nationalisation in 1984. Oceangate, registered in Panama, received a cheque worth $500,000, when the normal practice in the Seychelles is for such indemnities to be paid in Treasury Bonds which cannot be cashed for many years.

The article ended with an announcement that "in a future issue the Herald in conjunction with an internationally famous publication, will expose on of the biggest financial scandals involving Rene and Ricci." Was this threat perhaps at the root of the decision to eliminate Gerard Hoarau? Hoarau knew Mario Ricci well. He spoke fluent Italian and became one of Mr Ricci's best friends when the latter arrived in the Seychelles. Their relationship developed over the years, and when Gerard Hoarau joined the opposition to the Rene regime, Mario Ricci partly funded the MPR, while re- maining on excellent terms with the President.

Albert Rene

At this point some of the wider ramifications became apparent. The MPR is attached to the shadowy French-based organisation, Confire'nce Inter- nationale des Resistances en Pays Occupis (CIRPO) run by extreme right wing publisher Pierre de Villemarest to ferment 'armed struggle' against Communist regimes across the world. It has a strong input from E. European emigre groups—including the current pretender to the throne of Albania—and is in touch with the S. African-backed NRM in Mozambique and the Nicaraguan Contras.

There has been speculation of some CIRPO involvement in the failed Seychelles coup attempt of four years ago.

During the preparations for the plot hatched in Room 412 of the Carlton Hotel in London in 1982, Mario Ricci gave Gerard Hoarau a credit card to enable him to pay expenses. But the room was bugged and in November 1982, the Seychelles radio broadcast recordings of the plotters' conversations. Gerard Hoarau was convinced that Mario Ricci organised the planting of the bugs and then passed on the recordings to President Rene. Even so, the two men continued to see each other regularly, their last meeting taking place in Switzerland a year ago.

However, by now convinced that Ricci was playing a double game, Hoarau must have then fallen out with his colleagues in the MPR and been threatening to expose the Mafiosi's drugs and currency operation in the Seychelles.

Gerard Hoarau had already exposed other scandals, amongst them that of the surprising protection extended by the Seychelles in 1984 to Francesco Pazienza, a Mafia big shot who was sought by the FBI, Interpol and the Italian police in connection with his supposed involvement in the P2 Masonic Lodge scandal and the collapse of the Banco Ambrosiano in Italy and drug dealing in the United States. Pazienza was finally arrested in New York travelling under a false name on a Seychelles passport which he said had been given him by President Rene.

Pazienza was also alleged to be one of the controllers of the crazed Pontificide Mehemet Ali Agca—as part of a wider plot to 'destabilise' Italy in preparation for a fascist takeover, it will be watching his trial with interest.

Nick Reilly

Source: Indian Ocean Newsletter

NTERNATIONALT1MES VOL. 86 No 2. PAGE FOUR

ANTI CORRUPTION COMMISSION

(Section 2 of the Anti-Corruption Act 2016) defines corrupt as follow:

"Corrupt" means the acts of soliciting, accepting, obtaining, giving, promising or offering of a gratification by way of a bribe or inducement, or the misuse or abuse of a public office for advantage or benefit for oneself or for another person, and "corruption" shall be construed accordingly;”

Party Lepep has created an “Anti-Corruption Commission,” to be chaired by none other than Duncan Gaswaga a former Puisne Judge of the Supreme Court of Seychelles. This raises several questions, the first of which is, why a Ugandan Mr. Danny Faure?

Bearing in mind the above definition of “corrupt” I ask the following questions:

If Mr. Gaswaga has acquired Seychellois nationality we need to be informed of that fact, and we also need to know whether it was under section 5 (2) of the Citizenship Act 1994 which gives the President total discretion to grant citizenship to a person who, in his opinion, special circumstances exist even if they are not otherwise entitled or eligible to Seychellois citizenship?

Or, was he granted Seychellois citizenship under section 5 (3) of the Citizenship (Amendment) Act 2013 which curtails the President’s discretion to grant citizenship by the imposition of a “Citizenship Eligibility Committee” to which all applications have to be submitted and which will have to be satisfied that all the criteria set out under the new section 5 (3) are met, especially when bearing in mind that a member of the Citizenship Eligibility Committee is Basil Hoareau who is a partner in the Chetty & Hoareau Chambers, and a member of the Commission emanates from there.

The credibility of the Commission depends on the personal integrity and honesty of its members. It is therefore of paramount importance that the above questions in regards to the Mr. Gaswaga are answered honestly. Secondly, if The Ruling Party is serious about fighting corruption, one of the first pieces of legislation to be brought before the sixth National Assembly is a “Freedom of Information Act”. Article 28 (4) “the State recognises the right of access by the public to information held by a public authority performing a governmental function subject to limitations contained in clause (2) and any law necessary in a democratic society”. And a Whistle Blowers Protection Act. Without these two pieces of legislation there can be no credible war against corruption.

Parti Lepep has given us other “commissions” before, such as the Human Rights Commission which has not been seen or heard of, since its creation. It did not even utter a squeak when Robert Banane was shot and killed in prison. We also have an office of “The Ombudsman” which, to all intents and purposes shut down after Judge Gustave Dodin left the office to become judge, not forgetting the notoriously embattled  Electoral Commission chaired by Mr. Gappy, which is not only  being fought  in court, but also on the Streets of Victoria.

Alexia G. Amesbury

DO WE NEED A VICE PRESIDENT?

Act 14 of 1996 amended the Constitution not only by giving us a new article 55(1) that reads as follows; “Where the President dies, resigns or is removed from office, the Vice-President shall assume the office of President for the unexpired term of the President with effect from the death, resignation or removal from office of the President.” but it also created the post of Vice-President by introducing a new article 66 (A) (1) “There shall be a Vice-President of Seychelles who shall perform the functions assigned to the Vice-President by the Constitution, an Act or the President.”

 However, the ruling party with its majority was not satisfied with this amendment, so in act 7 of 2000 they amended the constitution again. And gave us; Article 52 A (2) “The President may, at any time after the expiration of one year from the commencement of the President's first or second term of office, by Proclamation published in the Gazette, declare the President's intention of appealing to the People for a mandate to hold office, by election for a further term." As Mr. Faure is taking on the unexpired term of Mr James Michel`s mandate the earliest date that he can call for fresh Presidential election would be after December 20th 2016.

If Mr Faure does not get the National Assembly approval for the appointment of a Vice President and a Designated Minister; are we then looking at a scenario where he will run the country without those 2 constitutional appointees until he can have fresh Presidential elections?

Alexia G. Amesbury

OPTIONS FOR DANNY FAURE

The people of Seychelles need to understand the Constitutional status of the country since the President’s announcement of his resignation and no one is filling the information void created.

So let’s see what the Constitution says. Article 55(1) “where the President dies, resigns or is removed from office, the Vice-President shall assume the office of President for the unexpired term of the President with effect from the death, resignation or removal from office of the President”.

Mr. Michel announced his resignation from Office of President on 27th September 2016 which resignation, will take effect on 16th October 2016 and also announced that Mr. Faure will run the country as President for the unexpired term of his presidency.

Article 66 (11) “Where the Vice-President assumes the office of the President under article 55 (1)-

(a)          The President (the new President?) shall, with the approval of the National Assembly, appoint a person to be Vice-President;

(b)          The person who at the time is designated Minister shall immediately cease to be designated Minister and the President (new President) shall designate a person, who may be the first-mentioned person, for approval by the National Assembly as designated Minister.

Two important questions presently preoccupy the people. The first is what happens if before the 16th of October 2016 President Michel dissolves the National Assembly? And the second question is “what will happen if the National Assembly does not give its approval for the appointment of a Vice-President?

The outgoing President cannot dissolve the National Assembly because the Vice-President who assumes the office of President under article 55(1) needs the National Assembly to approve the appointment of a Vice-President and a designated Minister.

The second question is equally clear article 66 (11)(a) “The President shall, (mandatory) with the approval of the National Assembly,….” Which means that the approval of the National Assembly must come before the appointment. So, if the National Assembly does not approve there can be no appointment.

Now for the third question what happens next?  Mr. Faure can break the Check Mate situation by;

(1)          Appointing someone from the Opposition to be his Vice-President who is presently an MNA because under article 66 A (5)  “A person who is a member of the National Assembly or the Judiciary shall upon becoming Vice-President cease to be a member of the National Assembly or Judiciary.”

(2)          Appointing someone from the Opposition who is not an MNA as his Vice-President.

(3)          Going back to the people by declaring another presidential election, because article 66 A (4) says “A candidate at an election for President shall designate a person as the candidate’s Vice-President and on the election of the candidate as President the person designated as Vice-President by the candidate becomes Vice-President”.

Option 3 above is contained in Act 14 of 1996 which allows the President to go back to the people for a fresh mandate before the expiration of the presidential term, and he does not need the approval of the National Assembly for his Vice-President.

Alexia G. Amesbury