Wednesday, May 20, 2015

EMPLOYEE FIRED AND BULLET CASINGS FOUND; SEYCHELLES SKULL CASE

The employee of the landscaping company who found the skull was fired yesterday. She told the police that she had informed her employer after bullet casings and the lower jaw were discovered at the H Resort in Bel Ombre.

The police have recovered three bullet casings from the construction site of H Resort in Bel Ombre, a senior police official confirmed to this newspaper yesterday. The bullet casings, which are essential for the identification of the firearm used in the killing of the person whose skull was found last week, were in fact recovered on Saturday but that information was not relayed to the press.

Patricia Duval was the one who found the skull
.
Sources have also told this newspaper that the Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) for Policing, Reginald Elizabeth, left the country early yesterday morning for an undisclosed destination. The trip is apparently connected to the inquiry that was initiated after the recovery of the skull and the bullet casings.

It has also emerged that the skull was initially found two weeks ago, well before the discovery of the lower jaw and the bullet casings. The person who made the initial discovery, 50 year-old Patricia Duval who was employed by the company responsible for landscaping works at the H Resort, Green Scapes Ltd, was interrogated by the police on Monday on the construction site.

On the same day, just after Ms Duval concluded her statement to the police, she was fired by Green Scapes. In a clumsily worded dismissal letter, Patricia Duval was told that she was being fired because the company had found that she had “great problems with your attitude, gossiping, un-confidential, untrustable, always mangle in not concern matters (sic)”.


It was found that her “lack of responsibility does not give a good picture to the company”. Annabelle Farabeau, the company’s HR manager, denied that the dismissal had anything to do with Ms Duval’s disclosure of the recovery of the skull. She did add however that Ms Duval “took photos of the hotel and this shows a lack of confidentiality”.

Patricia Duval maintains, for her part, that the company is so embarrassed by not having reported the matter to the police that it is looking to scapegoat the employees who helped make the matter public. Mrs Farabeau denies these allegations, adding that it’s not true to say that the onsite supervisor had ordered the workers to bury the skull.

One of the bullet casings next to the lower jaw
Patricia Duval, who has been given seven days’ notice, says she will take the matter up with the Employment Tribunal. Meanwhile she is seeking a meeting with the Commissioner of Police. Speaking to TODAY, she said that at first when they found the skull, “we didn’t take it seriously. It is only when we found the jaw and the bullet casings that we realised things were serious and we reported the matter to the management of Green Scapes”, she said. Ms Duval was also the person who “gave a burial” to the skull.

The lower jaw and the bullet casings, she says, weren’t reburied. “We just left it there and continued with our work”, she confirmed. This is being categorically denied by Green Scapes. “Management was not aware of this; we only found out on Saturday”, Mrs Farabeau said.


Meanwhile, the police have its work cut out for them as procedures for DNA testing are set to begin. These tests cannot be performed locally as Seychelles does not have the facilities but ACP Elizabeth confirmed that determining whether the skull belonged to a man or a woman, as well as it age at the time of death, will be done locally. The police would not confirm whether these procedures have started.

SOURCE:Today

Monday, May 18, 2015

SEARCH FOR IDENTITY BEGINS IN SEYCHELLES SKULL CASE

The bullet casings still haven’t been found by police.

Who does the skull found in Bel Ombre belong to? As the search for missing parts of the body whose skull was first found last Monday goes on at the site of the H Hotel in Bel Ombre, speculations are mounting as to the identity of the “victim”.

While the police say they haven’t recovered any bullet casings so far, sources tell this newspaper that landscape workers on the construction site said they had uncovered “at least ten bullet casings” last Monday. The Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) for Policing, Reginald Elizabeth, told this newspaper on Saturday that the workers had also confirmed the presence of bullet casings but that the police had not yet been able to recover any. Metal detectors are being used to search for the casings.

Forensic digs for skull on Saturday. Inset, when the skull was first found last Monday. Next to it, a piece of blue fabric.

Other police sources say that this difficulty is due to the fact that the crime scene had been tampered with. For instance, workers were told by their landscaping supervisor to bury the skull and the bullet casings as soon as they were find. The supervisor also failed to alert the police of the discovery, an “oversight” that may cause prejudice to the enquiry since the bullet casings haven’t been found yet.

On top of this, the skull was reburied in another location and a tree planted on it. ACP Elizabeth said the workers had “given a burial” to the skull. But had it not been for some workers who decided to take photos of the skull and of the bullet casings to post on social media, asking whether there had been a cemetery at the site, family members of some of the people who have gone missing in the country would never have been able to even contemplate closure.

ACP Elizabeth says the police are still looking for the bullet casings.

For, like ACP Elizabeth confirmed on Saturday, the skull “evidently belongs to a person who had been missing”. The bullet casings as well as the appearance of an entry wound in the jaw, suggest the person was shot dead. It will be up to the police to establish all this by looking at the evidence available. But more importantly, DNA testing will allow family members now – whoever they are – to “make their peace and find closure”.

The Commissioner of police Ernest Quatre was officially informed of the discovery by Seychelles National Party (SNP) leader Wavel Ramkalawan on Friday evening. “I’d just landed in Seychelles when I was informed of this discovery. After I saw the photos, I realized it was something serious and I called the Commissioner of Police to tell him I believed this deserved a full scale criminal investigation, ”Mr Ramkalawan said.

Director of the National Crime Services Division, Bruce Bursik speaks to ACP Elizabeth after the skull was recovered.
He adds that he gave the police a copy of all the photos that had been taken of the skull and the bullet casings the next day. ACP Elizabeth confirmed that, “an individual informed the Commissioner of Police of the matter on Friday evening”, remarking that a team from Forensics arrived at the H hotel in Bel Ombre at about 8am on Saturday.

It didn’t take the police long to find the skull. The police had interviewed the workers who found the skull and they directed the police to the spot where it was reburied. A rather large area of the hotel is still cordoned off as a crime scene and the search will continue today, sources tell this newspaper. There was no search operation yesterday however and as of this morning, no other parts of the skeleton or bullet casings had been found.

A large area of the hotel site has been cordoned off.
The police’s first task is to determine whether the skull belongs to a male or a female as well as the age of the person at the time of his or her death. This, ACP Elizabeth said, will serve to eliminate possibilities. This preliminary investigation can and will be done in Seychelles. Further DNA testing will be done overseas if needed, the head of Policing said.

Asked whether rumours affirming that the remains of a blue t-shirt had also been found were true, Mr Elizabeth replied in the negative. It is not known how long the police will keep the area cordoned off and when landscaping works at the hotel construction site will be allowed to resume. The hotel is supposed to officially open in August.

ABOUT ALTON AH-TIME

Although the police are yet to begin identification process of the skull, sources say there is a strong possibility it could belong of Alton Ah-Time. Mr Ah-Time disappeared on 13 September 1984 after he received a phone call asking him to come to the beach not far from where the skull was found on Monday. He was never seen again but his car was discovered in the vicinity the next day.

Alton Ah-Time aged 25.
Mr Ah-Time was not yet 30 years-old at the time of his disappearance. He was a member of the Mouvement pour la Resistance (MPR) led by the late Gérard Hoarau from London. Mr Hoarau was killed in 1985 by an unidentified gunman on the doorstep of his London home. Mr Ah-Time’s best friend Simon Desnousse was also found dead in 1983, in a burnt car at Anse Forbans.

Mr Ah-Time was presumed dead by his family but his body has never been recovered.


“The police should have a missing persons file and since the skull found shows that the death was not registered, I think it would be safe to say that the police could start with DNA testing so as to proceed by elimination to be able to identify who the skull belongs to. This will allow closure. If it’s not Alton Ah-Time, then it’s not him but if it is him, then the family can do a burial and close that chapter of their life”, Wavel Ramkalawan said.

This newspaper has learnt that there is a possibility that the Commissioner of Police could ask to meet members of the Ah- Time family today but this information remains unconfirmed.

SOURCE:Today

Sunday, May 17, 2015

SULLIVAN GETS JAIL FOR CALLING MORGAN A TRAITOR; HOW ABOUT RENE?


Source: Regar 11-5-10 

Jail for offending Minister Morgan

Hypocrisy. April 2015

                                                                                         
A poster calling him ‘Traitor’ sent a man to jail


Bernard Sullivan has been a staunch defender of the cause of La Misere residents. This earned him 25 hours in jail at police headquarters in Victoria last weekend. According to his lawyer, Antony Derjacques, it was illegal imprisonment since there was no valid basis for the detention. It has raised further questions of Minister Joel Morgan’s use of his authority as Home Affairs Minister.


Last week, Bernard displayed on the rear screen of his car a small poster with the photograph of Joel Morgan, with the caption ‘Traitor’. On Saturday, shortly after noon, police came to arrest him at his home at Beau Vallon, stating that the poster was criminal libel under section 184 of the Penal Code of Seychelles.

Sullivan says the poster was to say that Morgan had betrayed the victims of the water pollution disaster at La Misere, by siding with and protecting those who had been responsible. It was an opinion he was fully entitled to express.

Sullivan was arrested by a squad of police officers at his home and locked up for 25 hours, despite the intervention of lawyers who asked for his release. When he was released on Sunday afternoon, there was no bail required, no charge laid, no request for him to report back. It was as if the police had decided to sentence him to one day’s imprisonment and he had served the sentence. But what it showed was that the police had no serious cause to detain and no charges to bring.

To lawyer Antony Dejacques, who has taken on Sullivan’s case, it is a clear violation of freedom of expression guaranteed under the Constitution. He interprets the police actions to have been initiated by Morgan himself, which would show an inappropriate intervention of the Minister in police matters.

The issues raised, Derjacques says, are the same as in the case of Alain Ernesta, who was arrested under the same section of the Penal Code and had his CDs confiscated on the accusation that he had libelled the President in one of his songs. The Constitutional Court established that the singer’s rights had been violated and an award of R76,000 was made against the police.

Upon Sullivan’s instructions, Derjacques if filing a case before the Constitutional Court against, the Government, the Commissioner of Police and Minister Morgan.

The power of arrest and detention is vested in the Commissioner of Police who is an independent servant of the law and who should not be subject to ministerial interference. It is a mistake Morgan has committed already, when he stated publicly that he had asked for Interpol action in the incident in which Regar published a sketch plan of the proposed Ile Perseverance Coastguard base. Morgan is prone to over-react, as shown in the Regar case. It is time he learned where his ministerial authority ends.



Friday, May 15, 2015

SEYCHELLES COUP D’ÉTAT PAST CATCHING UP?

A local newspaper is reporting news that a human skeleton has been found at Bel Ombre, the paper contacted the District Administration (DA) office and the Beau Vallon Police Station and both denied any knowledge.


As the photo shows the skeleton has been found on the site where a new hotel is under construction at Beau Belle.

The remains have been reburied before the concerned authorities including the police and the Ministry of Health have been informed.

The big question is whose skeleton is it?


 A number of people have disappeared without a trace in the country's recent history, especially during the one-party state era and their whereabouts remain a public interest.


The paper confirmed that at least one family has tried to get a Court order during the day to have the skeleton exhumed so that they can have DNA tests carried out to verify if this is the remains of their loved one.

Apparently more information will follow next week.

Source:LSH

MICHEL’S ELITIST JJ SPIRIT FOUNDATION IS A MINI GOVERNMENT

The Jj Spirit Foundation has signed a memorandum of understanding (MoU) with the Ministry of Industry of Indonesia for technical assistance and support for small and medium industries development for the young entrepreneurs of the foundation. This announcement was made following the visit of an Indonesian delegation to Seychelles.


It is incomprehensible that a government ministry from Indonesia signs an agreement with a supposedly non-governmental organization in Seychelles when the same agreement could have been signed between the government of Seychelles and the government of Indonesia to benefit all young Seychellois rather than the members of the Jj Spirit Foundation only. This is atrocious. The President and his executive Secretary General must be shamed for this act. The patron of the Jj Spirit Foundation, President James Michel and his Secretary General who is the chairperson of the Foundation has shown where their loyalty lies. It is certainly not with the youth of this country unless, of course, one is a member of the Jj Spirit Foundation. “En leker pou tou manm Jj Spirit” is his new motto; “en leker pou tou Seselwa” were never genuine words anyway.

Under the MoU the Jj Spirit Foundation will receive the following benefits:

• Exchange of information about small and medium industry in various fields such as handicraft, fashion, textile, agriculture and fishery;
• Technical assistance and capacity building activities;
• Exchanges and internship of officials and youth between Indonesia and Seychelles;
• Provision of machinery, equipment and tools to expedite the realisation of competitive and quality small and medium industry products;
• Encouraging and facilitating business-to-business cooperation for small and medium industries.

The Jj Spirit Foundation is slowly taking over the role of government agencies. Here it replaces the Ministry of Health
These are all benefits all young Seychellois must have access to and not just a few. Rather than signing the agreement in a government office, the Jj Spirit Foundation headquarters, Espace, was chosen. The reasons are obvious; the assistance under the program will be used to woo young people towards Jj Spirit Foundation which is the organization through which the ruling party recruit new members. Nonmembers will not be able to benefit; the ‘ek nou, pa ek nou’ strategy. We are indeed fortunate Michel hasn’t got enough time left to plant his destructive seed of elitism on Seychellois soil and create a mini government out of his Foundation.

SOURCE:Seyweekly.com

JAMES MICHEL;THE NULL AND VOID PRESIDENT OF THE SEYCHELLES

According to the Seychelles Constitution Schedule 7 between 14th April 2004 and July 30th 2006; Seychelles had an invalid President.


For those 837 days or 2 years, 3months and 16 days everything the null President did including passing of laws was illegal. How did the people of Seychelles allow this to happen? In his infamous speech at the illegal inauguration of 14th April 2004 the void President declared “My government will be one that is dynamic, transparent and accountable”! Now we know why there have not been any of those because those words were spoken by an invalid incumbent President.

The illegal inauguration of 14th April 2004
Did James Michel know he was an illegal President at that time or was his team of corrupt officials’ just plain stupid? Either way, this constant law breaker must be removed at the soonest opportunity.

The rape of Seychelles first Republic

PUBLIC NOTICE FROM SEYCHELLES PARTY FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE & DEMOCRACY

There is a substantial rumour around that when the National Assembly reconvenes after its recess, a Bill to amend the Schedule 3, section 5 of the Constitution which stipulates that a person shall not be elected to the office of President unless he has received more than 50% of the votes, will be presented to the National Assembly asking it to bring this section of the Constitution in line with the required number of votes for a win in National Assembly election, which is the first past the post, meaning that a person could, if the amendment goes through, be elected to the office of President with as little as 30% of the votes cast as long as that candidate polls the highest number of votes amongst all other presidential candidates.



If the above turns out to be true we reproduce below a point in our Party Manifesto which screams out our message.


Thursday, May 14, 2015

ALEXIA G. AMESBURY; A REAL LIFE FAIRYTALE

By Dianne Dalida

Perhaps the toughest thing we learn as we grow up is the harsh reality that ‘life is not fair’. Childhood stories, such as those created by Disneyland cartoons, feed us with expectations that Prince Charming will save us. That the just and kind will always emerge triumphant, and that good will always conquer evil. However, life is no fairytale and for some of us, this is a lesson we learn from very early on.


Alexia G. Amesbury, neé Jumeau and more commonly known as Mrs. Antao through a previous marriage, is one such person.  Growing up in an orphanage with her beloved grandmother; leaving Seychelles upon her death for Kenya to a childhood of physical abuse; being unable to pursue her law career early; a failed marriage and eventually, getting tangled in a socially ‘forbidden’ love affair… Alexia’s life story is not what little girls’ fantasies are made of.

What then, could have possibly happened that upon this interview, Alexia would call herself ‘lucky’ in life? What magic was spun that turned a frightened little girl into one the Seychelles’ toughest and most respected lawyers, and the protector of the weak? Who waved their wand and made a most loving and patient mother from a victim of physical abuse, insisting that the cycle of violence ended with her?

The answers, as we will learn, lies not in a fairy Godmother or several shakes of golden pixie dust. No, they were made of stuff that is so fantastically ‘real’, that they can perhaps inspire the lost little girls in all of us to put pull the sword out the stone with our own two hands… just like Alexia did.

Orphan with a mother
“I was born in the Seychelles… a long time ago,” is how Alexia starts her tale. She grew up in the St. Elizabeth’s Convent; an orphanage ran by nuns, with her grandmother. She was, however, no orphan for she had a mother who lived in Kenya. Upon the death of her grandmother, she and her siblings had to leave the country to be with their mother in Africa. This was around 1961, when she was merely 10 years old.

“The years with my grandmother were good years. We were poor – very, very poor – but I didn’t feel that I was a victim of abuse.”

An abusive childhood in Kenya
Alexia spent practically her entire adult life in Kenya. She married an Englishman, one of her professors, and had five of her six children there, whereas her last was born in the UK.

What was life in Kenya like? She heaves a deep sigh and speaks with difficulty at first.

 “I can’t really… It’s a part of my life - at least the part of my life until I was married, between arrival to Kenya in 1961 until I got married in 1972 – those years that I was supposed to have been with my mother are years that I consciously choose to forget. So I cannot really remember a lot about those things because for me, they were very bad years of my life.”

How traumatizing must her life have been that it induced her to willingly block years of childhood from memory? She saw her marriage as an escape, but her experience left a lasting mark that set her on a life course into becoming the defender of those she deems to be victims, as she once was.

“It was during that time that I formulated the idea that I would like to become a lawyer, because I felt that I was a victim of abuse and I felt that I needed… my calling was to defend people who are abused – to be a voice for the voiceless, is the way I put it. And I single mindedly pursued that objective in school, in everything… I never forgot the side that I wanted to be a lawyer. I felt very strongly that I needed to defend victims of abuse that I do now – human rights abuse or whatever the abuses are – that is why I fight so hard to uphold the constitution. That is why I always seem to be on the ‘other side’ because I have been a victim of abuse so I know what it’s like to be abused by a system or whatever. And I decided to fight for those who see themselves in that position I saw myself in.”

A late career in law
Alexia studied her O and A levels in Kenya, but was unable to attend university there. At the time, one had to either be a Kenyan citizen to do so, or be able to finance their own studies. “I wasn’t in the position to finance myself in university; therefore I decided to go to UK because I was a British national through marriage with a British national who lived in Kenya.”

They went to live in the UK in 1984, when her fifth child was two years old. “I had to wait another two years until she started formal school in order for me to go to University. I was 37.” Commenting on how that was a late age to start a degree in law, she replies: “That’s how focused I was in what I wanted to
be.”
“My fifth child started school in April 1987 and in September 1987, I went to university. I was there for 3 years doing the undergraduate law and as luck would have it – because I am such a lucky person – in my 3rd year in 1990, I became pregnant with my 6th child during my 3rd year of law school. So I took time out. I had the baby. I left the baby home and went to do my final exams in 1991, and not in 1990. And then with the same purpose of mind – the same strong mindedness – I decided at my age it would be better if I became a lecturer of law as opposed to a practitioner of law. So I took a masters degree, and again I had to leave the little one at home in 1992 or ’93, when I went to the London School of Economics and Political Science and I did my master’s in International Law.”

The school was the most prestigious in London, and Alexia attended it under a scholarship funded by the UK government. She used money she had saved from the scholarship to pay for her master’s degree, and was thankful that she benefited from additional funding by the school that helped with childcare.

Mother of six
“I’ve been Mrs. Amesbury since 2008 although I divorced way back in 1998. I didn’t see the need to change the name because every certificate that I have and qualifications, were under that name. It was just laziness on my part really, because I had to go through a long procedure involving the court in order to make the necessary changes. After I got [re]married, I of course didn’t want to be known as Mrs. Antao. Everybody used to remember me as Mrs. Antao, but now, fortunately, they remember me as Mrs. Amesbury, which is good.”

She had six children in her first marriage, five girls and one boy. All of them are qualified professionals, living both in the Seychelles and the UK, some with families of their own.

 “Whatever else I might be or might not be, to me my greatest achievement was raising my 6 children and it will never be surpassed by anything that I do. I invested so much time – maybe not so much money because I didn’t have – but a lot of time because I do not believe in giving my children fish, because they will eat for one day. But if I teach them how to fish, they will have food for the rest of their lives. So I’ve made sure that I taught each one of them how to fish.”

Parenting techniques
“I’m a very patient person. I don’t believe in violence. I don’t believe in abusing the children. I don’t beat, I don’t shout, I don’t punish. I talk. I can talk for days! I talk and I make them understand. I’m very great on stories. I never talk to a child unless I have an actual example from the child’s life that the child can relate to.”

“For example,” Alexia said, “If I say “If you take out something from the fridge, when you’re done with it, put it back in the fridge”. In order for that to go home to the child that that is what is has to be done, I say, “Imagine you take the keys to open the door and you don’t put the keys back to where it’s supposed to be. Then there’s a fire and you have to start looking for the keys. If the keys were back in its place and everybody knows that’s the place for the keys, then we can just take the keys and we can all be saved”. I always use practical examples to bring home my message. I have loads of these little stories.”

I confess to asking some child rearing advice for myself, being a mother to an extremely hyper child who can be, at times, very difficult to handle. “In my experience,” she says thoughtfully, “a child that is hyper is a super intelligent child. And they need to be challenged because their concentration span is quite small. They need to have lots of different things to be doing in order to keep them occupied at all times because their minds are always racing ahead.”

Handling growing-up pains
When asked on how she disciplined her own children, she replied that she “never had a problem of discipline as I can remember.” She tells me another story of how she handled tricky situations with her children.

“My son was around 13 when I got up one night and he was watching a movie rated 18 which was ‘Sex and Violence’, at 2 am, by himself in the living room.” Instead of throwing a fit, Alexia simply told him to turn off the TV, go to bed and that they will talk about it in the morning. The following day, she brought up the topic by asking him to give her an explanation of why he had done what he did.

“Mum, it’s simple,” was her son’s reply. “Everybody in my class was talking about this particular film and since I’d not seen it, I couldn’t be part of the conversation when they were discussing it.” This was her reply: “That’s an answer I can accept. The only thing is next time they are talking about a film and you know that it is not in your age, and you would like to be able to contribute, tell me about it. I will watch the film and I will tell you the story and you will be able to be part of the conversation.”Since then, Alexia has never had to repeat that advice as it never happened again.

Her calm and reasonable approach led to a close relationship between her and her children. As they grew up, they would often bring their friends home, and some of them would turn to Alexia - or ‘Mum’ as they also called her – with their problems.

One of these was an 18 year old young man who was confused about his sexuality and couldn’t figure out if he was “one way or the other”. He couldn’t bring himself to talk to his own mom about his issue and chose to approach Alexia about it instead. So she invited over a female friend of her daughter’s and asked the young man to hold the woman, to hug her and see if it ‘triggered’ something. The two hugged, and Alexia remembers laughing when the girl pulled faces over the guy’s shoulder. When that didn’t help, she encouraged the young man to go to both gay and heterosexual clubs to experience the scene and still nothing happened for him. Then one night, the young man called her from his university and exclaimed excitedly, “Mum, it happened! I know! It’s girls!”

“So I had this kind of relationship with the children,” she says, laughing again with the memory.“We talk about anything and everything. Communication is the key in everything, even marriage.”      

Taboo relationship
After her divorce, Alexia was in the Seychelles and had a career in law. One of her clients was a young man whose case she had handled pro bono. Upon the completion of his case, he thanked her and was on his way out, but stopped when he reached the door of her office. He returned to her and asked if he could give her a hug, which she obliged. He left, but years later, he said that that was the first time in his life that a woman did not ask him for anything in return.
Being the professional that she is, Alexia was highly against developing a romantic relationship with a client. However, when the case was over and they were simply man and woman, their relationship did turn romantic and they ended up living together for a while.
“But then he was extremely young. There he is up there. ” She point to several photos she had on a wall of happy photos of herself with him. “A very young man,” she repeats with a sigh. He was in fact, twenty years her junior, and their unusual relationship borders on taboo in the Seychelles society, as with most societies in the world.
The age difference affected Alexia very much as she feared that he may one day turn on her and blame her for not having accomplished things in his life due to their relationship. This grew into a real fear and eventually, she had to make a difficult decision.

“I told him to live his life. I’ve lived mine. You need to live yours. So as much as we cared for each other, we split up.”

He went to South Africa for six weeks and would call everyday. And each time, he would play one song over the phone, “All I need is the air that I breathe” by Simply Red. He asked her to be at the Seychelles International Airport upon his return, assumingly to rekindle their relationship. Wanting to stick to her decision and at the same time, not trusting herself at the same time to resist the temptation of returning to the man she loved and yet forbidden herself to be with, she asked a friend to lock her up in a room and to not open it, no matter what. When she didn’t turn up at the airport, the split became final.

If you love someone, set them free…
She left for the UK in 1999 for three years, in order to put space between them. She even left her law career she had started in the Seychelles, even though she had attained a license to open her own law firm. “I’m a big believer in a clean break… When I said [to him to] “do your thing”, I was serious and that I’m not going to be calling him.” She thought that was enough time for him to forget her.

However, upon her return in 2002, he was in her office within a week. Still, she pushed him away, telling him to get a life, to find a younger woman, to get married and to have children.

For some reason, he obeyed her wishes. He came back to her office with a girlfriend one day, whom he introduced to her. Then she said to him that it wasn’t enough, and that now he had to know what it meant to be married, as she herself have been through marriage and divorce. Once again, he did as she asked. He married the young woman and informed Alexia two months later that he was leaving the country again. When she said that he didn’t have to go that far, his reply was, “How do you live in Seychelles married to one woman, in love with another woman, and everyday you have to see the woman that you love and you cannot have a life with her?”

Therefore he left. He stayed in the UK for five years with his wife. He and Alexia stayed in touch and when after a year he tells her that his marriage was not working, she insisted that he gave it a chance. He did, but in 2007, he returned to the Seychelles, and to cut a story short, he married the woman he loved, Alexia, in 2008. 

“Yes, he is my husband now,” she says with a grin. “His name is Paul. Paul Amesbury. Like they say, if you love someone, set them free. If they come back…” And that is Alexia Amesbury’s epic love story that has led to her saying today that is “happily married.” When asked if she cops any grief from people regarding her relationship, she says no.

“Maybe it’s just because nobody dares because they’ll get too much if they do. I don’t get any remarks, everybody just seems to accept it, but it doesn’t mean that people do not…” Alexia tries to find the right way to explain her situation. “You know in Seychelles, no marriage is really safe. It’s always open for challenges. Not only marriages, no relationship is really safe because women will always speak freely to approach… so my marriage more than most because of the age gap. It’s had its fair – more than its fair share of challenges. Whatever they do, they try, they talk, but so far it hasn’t worked. I don’t think it will ever work, but then again, I can’t really say this.”

Alexia Amesbury – Attorney at Law
In the midst of her larger-than-life story, Alexia somehow also managed to be one of the country’s top lawyers. She opened her own law practice in 2002. Her office is Victoria on Mahé, and yet she actually lives on Praslin, meaning a daily inter-island commute for her. This she purposely did in order to be able to separate her private life from her demanding job that could be totally consuming should she not be careful.


The lawyer that she is today is a direct result of her life’s circumstances, the lessons she have learnt and the accomplishments she have achieved. Her professional career as criminal lawyer has been surrounded by controversies as she takes on sides that leave people wondering on her purpose and reasons.

“With me, it was never violence that won anything. That’s why I’m so opposed to all these very serious sentences -fifteen years sentence for this, 10 years for that and life sentence for this -you know, this punishment oriented society that I live in. To me, whatever I have been able to gain in my life hasn’t been because of violence or the fear of punishment. It’s been based on communication and understanding and love and humanity. So that is why I am one of those people that many people ask “Why does she fight so hard for the prisoners or whatever?”, because I do not think – at least in my life – if I’ve made any gains, it has not been because of punishment. Because humanity or human beings are more productive, in my view, when the reward is love or there is a positive reward, than to make someone not do something because of a negative, because of punishment. To me, that has never been the way I have done things and in my experience, it doesn’t work.”

She has certain principle that defines on how she handles a case. If her client says that he or she is innocent, then she will fight tooth and nail to defend them. If, however, they admit to be guilty, she will never try to prove otherwise, and will simply represent them in mitigating the best outcome for them. “My conscience and ethics will not permit me to defend a person who has admitted his guilt to me.”

She has handled several high profile cases, such as the case of Mr. Viral Dhanjee, a political hopeful who was prevented from participating in the country’s last Presidential election due to disqualification. He challenged this decision, and Alexia represented him as his lawyer. Although they lost the case, she believes up to this day that the court of appeal’s decision was wrong.

Alexia has a future case in mind that is sure to create waves of controversy and divide the country’s opinion once more. “I’m going to challenge the authorities,” she says, lifting a piece of official document to me. “This is the Misuse of Drugs Amendment Act, and in this Act of 2008, it says that people who are convicted of any drug offences should be... that the imprisonment shall be one of rigorous imprisonment that is with forced or compulsory behavior.” She shows me the last line on the document.

“Now this particular Act,” she continuous as she pulls out a well worn book, “is a direct violation of Article 17:2 of the Constitution which says - and I will quote because I am strong on the Constitution – it says, 17:2 says, “every person has a right not to be compelled to perform forced or compulsory labor.”

“So,” Alexia says with a determined glint in her eyes as she put the documents away, “watch this space, my next case is going to be challenging this act. I can and I will.”

“I’m better because she was bad.”
There is so much to be learnt from Alexia’s life, and deserves a proper book written to do it any justice. Unfortunately, I am limited to several pages and must end this tale sooner than I wish to. As such, I would like to leave one final bit to her story, and let it impart another rousing life lesson and example from this inspiring woman. Not many of us can relate to the Alexia the lawyer, but many of us can as victims of abuse; in our strained relationships with our own parents; as mothers and mostly, as women struggling to figure out how to turn the negative parts of our lives into something positive, not for ourselves, but those around us.

Alexia accomplished all of these by simply having the courage to make decisions in her life to bring about the changes, and the determination to carry them through, no matter what. “As I said, having been a victim of abuse, I made a decision. Several times it has been said that a victim of abuse becomes an abuser. I decided that it was going to end with me. I made a conscious decision that I was not going to abuse my kids. Most people emulate their lives on their mother’s example. I wanted to be as totally different as I could from my mother. I did not want to be anything about my mother.”

Like many people, she did not know her father.  “My father, I didn’t know him. I was an illegitimate child. I lived with my grandmother and I don’t remember happy years with my mother. I used to be beaten seriously, for nothing mostly. Even though I was a victim of abuse and decided to be as different from my mother as I could be, I’m a better mother because my mother was such a bad one. I did not use her example to be a bad mom and say, “Well, I’m bad because she was bad.” I’m better because she was bad.”

That’s something we all ought to learn: we ought to stop making excuses or using the past as an excuse for the wrong we do today. Instead, let us do like Alexia and use our pain to save others from theirs.

“I made several conscious decisions. I decided not to beat my children, to swear at them. To me this has been productive and I’m happy today to see my own children with their children and they too do not beat their children. They too do not swear at their children. To me it makes me feel proud. The violence ended with me and I was able to bring up another generation of people who grew up with no violence.”

SOURCE: 12th August 2012 POTPOURRI



Wednesday, May 13, 2015

SEYCHELLES’ FIRST WOMAN PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE

Seychelles Party for Social Justice and Democracy. Lawyer Alexia Amesbury says it is time for Seychelles to have a President that is “honest, compassionate and has integrity”.

Many were surprised when rumours that well-known human rights lawyer Alexia Amesbury was going to run for elections first started. And then Lalyans Seselwa announced its registration and took centre stage. On Monday afternoon, the Seychelles Party for Social Justice and Democracy led by Mrs Amesbury obtained confirmation of its registration.

Lawyer Alexia Amesbury

And yesterday she came out and said the words: “Alexia Amesbury: Presidential candidate”. But why? Why does a woman who is known chiefly for her uncompromising battles in court – as well as her determination to fight for the underdog – suddenly decide to run for president? “Because it is no longer sufficient to fight injustices through the courts”, she told TODAY. “It is no longer sufficient to fight corruption by denying its existence. The battle must now continue in the political arena.”

But what are her chances as a novice to the political scene? Alexia Amesbury admits she has no money and knows that this is the reason “many thought I would not run”. Then what has changed? What will turn her from lawyer to politician? “I have asked myself this question, I have asked – what is a politician? Somebody who has experience in corruption? Someone who has experience amassing vast amounts of property? Someone who has experience making false promises to the people? I don’t have those. But honesty, integrity and compassion I have and I say now is the time for Seychellois to choose a leader who has compassion”.

Does this mean that she believes that the other politicians in the opposition don’t have the qualities she claims she has? “I am saying this is me, I am not referring to anybody else. I don’t want to offend others”, she says.

A video detailing her party’s manifesto (as opposed to the manifesto for the elections) has already been posted on YouTube. She believes that it explains why she decided to take the leap and the battles she intends to fight: “When we need permission from the Commissioner of Police to have a picnic on the beach, we are not free. When the wealth and riches of our nation is in the custody and possession of all powerfully elected and unelected ruling party, we are destitute. When State media is operated as a party political propaganda machine for the ruling party, we are silenced. When the opposition in the National Assembly is a lackey of the ruling party, the third branch of government is a charade. When judicial appointments are not based on constitutional criteria, we are denied a fair hearing by an independent and impartial judiciary.”

With Something Inside So Strong, the song written by Labi Siffre, playing in the background, the clip goes on to affirm: “When Executive authority is vested in the hands of one person, and that power is abused, we have an ‘elected’ dictatorship. When state institutions are monopolized to enact laws that benefit a select few, our institutions are dysfunctional, and dysfunctional institutions breed corruption. When corruption becomes an acceptable currency for doing business, our economic and fiscal policies are shams. When democracy has been reduced to a tiresome routine that involves electing the same rulers every five years, with the same difference and indignity, our democracy is a façade”.

Yesterday, the leader of the Sychelles National Party (SNP), Wavel Ramakalawan, reacted positively on social media to news of Mrs Amesbury’s new party. “It is a pleasure to welcome another opposition party in the fight for justice and democracy in our country. There are so many ways of skinning a cat in a democratic manner and I have always believed that if everyone put in his/her two cents, we would achieve the ultimate goal and make our country a better place. All the very best Alexia and team”, Mr Ramkalawan said, adding that the SNP had been fighting a lonely battle for too long. “I was getting a little tired of repeating the same credo for change in the country. Now we have Lalyans Seselwa of Ton Pat, a group that was in there telling the people what was happening from within and Alexia, a hard fighter for human rights, taking it from another angle”.


Mrs Amesbury said she was pleased with the SNP’s welcome. “I feel they have accepted me as an equal or someone who will bring change. Maybe they realize what my qualities are. I am surprised and happy”. Asked whether she would consider allying herself at some point to one or more of the opposition parties, Mrs Amesbury said, “it is time for us to focus on things that unite us and forget things that divide us. This is our destination and it should be a joint destination”.

SOURCE: Today


Monday, May 11, 2015

WELCOME! WELCOME! WELCOME

The new political party Lalyans Seselwa comes of age.


Welcome to Lalyans Seselwa. I call on every citizen of the Seychelles to welcome Parti Lalyans Seselwa and other political parties who have recently registered. This is the land of the Free. It is only by individuals exercising their freedoms that our Rights get engraved, never to be lost thus consolidating our democracy.

The more political parties there are the merrier! It is a safe guard for the people.—of course as long as they speak up and take part in elections! Unfortunately most of the 7 parties we now have will NOT be doing so, which really begs the question of their purpose.

The hate and derogatory comments around formation of more opposition parties and on FB these last few weeks has been very disturbing, especially as they mostly came from folks who claim to love freedom; from folks who claim to love democracy. Yet being the land of the free, we must also welcome such hate and derogatory comments as we must also welcome the freedom of the citizens to do what the hell they wish to – as long as these are legal and constitutional.

You have had your first official Press Conference. The people are all attentive to hear you.
Do not let the fact that you have been branded a traitor by 1 person detract you. You know who you are and we the people will make up our own opinion.


I suppose that the real work really starts now   —still warm and freshly baked. Manifestoes and memorandum are easy to download and produce. These, on themselves, have never told the electorate much about a party. You would not have spoken as yet but you would have, by your actions made some very clear statements, which you now definitely need to address if you wish to make any inroad into the political life as a political party and influence the Seychelles political landscape in any way.
Background: You would all be X-SPPF/PL privileged inner circle members who were in general honorably discharged after lengthy period of service or choose to leave because of personality clash (1 case). Meaning that none of you would have left or resigned from or distanced yourselves from your old masters on any matter of principal or policy. Not then and not since have any public statements been made by any of you against the policies and principals your X --SPPF/PL party. You would all have enjoyed your long privileged years, practically a life time, within the despotic government of SPPF/PL….

Yet today you claim to stand as an opposition. Opposed to exactly what? The policies and principals of SPPF/PL , principals and policies that you never ever once, over decades, lifted a finger against or raised a voice against. You give the impression that when you guys were in, all was fine, now that you out all is …..

Or Opposed to the leadership of SPPF/PL?             
              
Can you please spell out and in no uncertain terms, and as a matter of urgency, exactly what your woes and bone of contention against James Michel and those against the SPPF/Pl are.
The political wind of the Seychelles is today dictated by the CHANGE the people want, (and not by what the political parties are offering). A presidential election process will invariably lead to having an elected president at the end of the process. The CHANGE the people seek includes (even if not exhaustively) having a new president and that too, not one from SPPF/PL. Your sudden presence on the political scene and just before an election and an opposition party leads one to understand that you do not approve the current options the people have,-- to choose one such person as their president from the crop of wanabees presidents that have surfaced thus far.

Please spell out what axe to grind you would have against all these existing opposition political parties (especially the SNP) and what axe to grind you would have against the leaders of these opposition parties (especially Rev. Wavel Ramkalawan) that not only would they, (especially Rev. Wavel) not be up to the task of being a president but you are the better choice.

Can you sell us anything that would make us believe in you? Your presence on the scene tells us you think you do. Well, we are all ears.

So far all is very interesting, but I suppose that you would like to know how you are doing thus far. If I may—not unlike an aggrieved partner in a very cosy relationship gone sour! Travail I la. Your work is cut out for you and is very much an uphill task.


Mon pas ou la parol …

Viral Dhanjee

Friday, May 8, 2015

MESSAGE FROM BISHOP FELIX PAUL; SEYCHELLES HISTORY

The first thing SPUP/SPPF/Parti Lepep did on seizing power on 5th June 1977 was to seize all the schools owned by the Catholic Church. James Michel was one of those who carried an AK47 on that day. Later lands belonging to the Catholic Church were seized without compensation! That's how good a Catholic Michel is.

The below message from the first Seychellois Catholic Bishop of Port Victoria, Felix Paul, was first published in 1991. Twenty four years later, it still remains highly relevant. Bishop Paul was a Seychellois who lived through the one party state and witnessed firsthand life at the time. He thought, acted and felt like a Seychellois. Since his retirement and subsequent death, the country is still to have another native Seychellois Catholic bishop.

Extracts from the message

"But does all this suffice to constitute democracy? To guarantee liberty? To speak of unity?
Are we not rather witnesses of certain tensions and divisions, a certain step backwards on the human level and contempt for the rights of man?

Families had to go into exile for political reasons. Citizens have disappeared. There have been assassinations, arbitrary imprisonments, rebellions, and attempts to overthrow the power. An atmosphere of fear has been established paralysing the free expression of the citizens. Men wish to participate in political life but they are prevented or are afraid of being victims of sanctions.
Isn’t it the proof that the totalitarian regime fostered by the one-party is not conformed to the legitimate aspirations of the population?"


For those interested the whole message is published below.

Church Democracy and respect for the rights of man
Dear Brothers and Sisters in Seychelles
1) The actual situation of our country, disturbed by the debate about the freedom of political choice and the establishment of democracy in Seychelles, cannot leave the church indifferent. In fact, she feels herself directly concerned, as always, when the Man's legitimate aspirations, his dignity and his fundamental rights are at stake. On that account i feel it my duty to speak out in order to enlighten the conscience of the faithful and to reply to the question out by numerous citizens of different allegiances, whether religious or cultural. I wish also to speak out because the church feels itself in solidarity with the whole community of Seychelles.

                                TO DEFEND MAN
2) There is no other reason for this statement but the sacred duty to defend man, his rights and his liberty. And so we are in line with the universal church, her social doctrine and the Second Vatican Council, but above all, the last encyclical of John Paul ll, ''Centesimus Annus".
 In this last document, the Pope presents in fact, points for reflection which are fundamental for our church, but also for the whole civil and political society of our country.
Here then is the reflection which I propose for you all and which could help us to get over the present tense situation in country.

                              COLLAPSE OF THE SOCIALIST SYSTEM
3) The socialist system which derives from the Marxist principles has everywhere shown its inability to construct the new society envisaged a century ago.
Against the socialism which proclaims itself atheistic and which loses sight of the sense of common human dignity, the church has affirmed and continues to do so energetically that every man, whatever his personal convictions bears in himself God’s image and so deserves respect.(C.A. n.22)
Marxism, writes the Pope, pledged itself to root out from man’s heart the thirst for God, but the results have shown t to be impossible without disturbing the heart of man. (C.A.n.24)
The denial of God deprives a person of its roots, and so, encourages the reorganisation of the social order without taking account of the person’s dignity and responsibility. (C.A.n.13)
Furthermore the failure of socialism stands as a warning for all those, who in the name of political realism, wish to banish right and morality from politics. (C.A.n.25)


                   THE TOTALITARIAN REGIME’S ERROR
4) The totalitarian regime is the natural consequences of the Marxist system. The Encyclical Centesimus Annus, gives us a picture of this form of totalitarianism. We give it here while remarking that, it treats of the same form of the totalitarian state installed in Seychelles from 1977 to today. In the modern epoch has existed the totalitarianism which in its Marxist-Leninist form, considers that some man, on account of a deeper knowledge of the laws of development of society, or because of their particular class and of their nearness to the more living sources of the collective conscience, are exempt from error and so can arrogate to themselves the exercise of absolute power. (C.A.n.44)

           WHAT THE CHURCH AFFIRMS
5) The church rejects Marxism and every form of totalitarian regime. Therefore we firmly declare that
.every man has been created by God in his image
.every man has been created free
.every man should be respected in his rights and dignity.
That means that the church which carries on Christ’s Mission on earth, has the duty of defending Man, the visible image of the invisible God, while demanding of the Political Power, respect for his rights and liberties. “The rights of Man and his fundamental liberties are inherent in all human beings, inalienable and guaranteed by the law. The first responsibility of governments is to respect, preserve and observe them and to exercise them fully, given their basis in liberty, justice and peace”. (Charter of the European Community) it is only on this condition that one can truly speak of Liberty, Equality and Fraternity.
In a recent publication concerning Church-State relations, the Catholic Bishops of Vietnam, meeting at Hanoi from the 6th to the 12th April 1991, declared: “Always and everywhere people aspire to authentic democracy: that it has rights that has the possibility of giving its own opinion, that it be permitted to manifest its own convictions, that the rights of Man be respected”.                     (Episcopal Conference of Vietnam).

                                MAN AS AN INDIVIDUAL
Man as an individual has the rights to:
.freedom of thought, of conscience, and of religion,
.freedom of expression,
.freedom of association, and of peaceful assembly,
.freedom of movement.
No one shall be subject to arrest or arbitrary detention, to torture or to any other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment.
Every individual has the right to know his rights and have them appreciated; to participate in free and sincere elections; to be judged fairly and publicly if he is accused of a crime: to enjoy his economic, social and cultural rights.

                 MAN AS THE FAMILY
Man as a member of the family, has “ the right to life which forms an integral part of the right to grow in his mother’s womb after his conception, then the  right to live in a united family and a favourable climate for development of his personality; the right to develop his intelligence and his liberty by the search for knowledge and truth; the right to participate in the work of enhancing the goods of the earth and drawing from it his livelihood and that of his relatives; the right to freely found a family; to welcome and bring up children while exercising a responsible sexuality” (C.A.n.47)
“The parents have the first and inalienable right to educate their children…….. they should enjoy a true liberty in the choice of school”. (Council Vatican ll, Declaration on Christian Education, n.6)

              MAN IN SOCIETY
Man, as a member of society, has the right to live in a free community which respects all his rights. For that, “the church appreciates the democratic system, as the system which assures the participation of the citizens in political choices and guarantees the possibility of choosing and controlling their rulers or of replacing them in a peaceful way when that seems opportune”. (C.A.n.46)
At the basis of democracy is the right of all citizens of different opinions without discrimination to participate in the political life and the well-being of the country, whether in freely choosing its rulers or in freely seeking political responsibility. Therefore, democracy really exists in a country when it is shown in the presence of many political parties (Multiparty regime)

DEMOCRACY IN SEYCHELLES FUNDAMENTAL QUESTIONS
Here questions arise: are citizens rights in Seychelles actually respected? Have we true democracy in our country? True liberty?
Let us recognise first of all that our country has certainly made progress in the material domain as regards the standard of living. At the present our community has advantages in the provision of free health care for all; in old-age pensions; improved conditions in work; and effort has been made in the domain of housing. The youth can enjoy sports and the children have classes’ free and free meals.
But does all this suffice to constitute democracy? To guarantee liberty? To speak of unity?
Are we not rather witnesses of certain tensions and divisions, a certain step backwards on the human level and contempt for the rights of man?
Families had to go into exile for political reasons. Citizens have disappeared. There have been assassinations, arbitrary imprisonments, rebellions, and attempts to overthrow the power. An atmosphere of fear has been established paralysing the free expression of the citizens. Men wish to participate in political life but they are prevented or are afraid of being victims of sanctions.
Isn’t it the proof that the totalitarian regime fostered by the one-party is not conformed to the legitimate aspirations of the population?
Material progress is not enough. We must recall what the gospel says; “man does not live by bread alone”. Our country feels the lack of something more essential. It feels that there are values which one has sought to stifle; the liberties and fundamental rights of our society
In fact those who wish to express a political opinion contrary to that of the ruling power are automatically treated as serpents, racists or opportunists seeking their privileges or interests, as traitors or enemies of the people. That goes against true democracy and fundamental rights of man.

           THE CHURCH IS SOLIDLY BEHIND LEGIMTIMATE ASPIRATIONS
7) The situation of dissatisfaction and anxiety manifests the aspiration of the people of Seychelles to become free again, to build its future in true democracy.
 The church welcomes these legitimate aspirations of the people. She also remains attentive to the actual signs which favour the setting up of democracy in the country. On this subject we remark with satisfaction that ray of hope which came for the country in the president of the republic’s address on the 5th June. It is the question of a referendum. Although not recognizing the principle of the referendum, the church sees there are occasion for the expression of their aspirations for a democratic society where there would be a place for the opinions of different political parties. The prolonging of the actual system of one-party. Constitutes an affront to the way rights accrue to the citizens and it would keep the country in situations of injustice and tension.

APPEAL TO THE CONSCIENCE OF ALL
8) We represent these lines of reflections as an expression of our fidelity to the gospel, as love of the truth, as the defence of man to proclaim peace in freedom and to encourage the spiritual moral and material progress of our country.
We are confident of the sense of responsibility of those who rule the country that they may acknowledge that the church in Seychelles is at the service of man, that they may understand that the church’s only intention is to help to promote an irreversible process of democratization which will finally do them honour as rulers and would contribute to the stable welfare, spiritual and human of our people.
May God enlighten all of us church, citizens and rulers.
We ask the Immaculate Virgin Mary, Queen of Seychelles, to obtain for us the grace to be renewed by the Holy Spirit, in our hearts and in our will to choose what is best for Seychelles and to realise it in peace, love and liberty.

Yours devotedly
+FELIX PAUL
Bishop of Port-Victoria