RADIO BROADCAST OF THE COUP D’ETAT

For most Seychellois, the 5th of June 1977 and the days immediately after, were lived in close proximity to an MW radio and through the broadcasts of the national radio station. In those days there was no television, mobile phones and internet. This is for the purpose of the younger generation of what was actually broadcasted.  Let’s take it chronologically:

President James Michel during 5th of June 1977 Coup D`etat against a democratically elected Government

5th June 1977

First there was the communiqué from the putschists read over the radio at 06h30 on that Sunday morning of June 5th 1977, to the effect that, a group of some 200 persons had carried out a coup d’etat during the preceding evening.

There then  followed the announcement that there is a national curfew, that is to say, everyone was to stay at home and no one must be on the public road.

A few hours later, came the justifications for the coup d’etat:

a) Mr Mancham (the President of the country) wanted to postpone national elections for 7 years instead of holding it in 1979 as was due.

b) Mr Mancham spent his time travelling overseas rather than attending to matters of state. Apparently he had not spent 3 consecutive months in the country since Independence. Each day that he spent outside the country, cost the country the equivalent of 3 months’ salary of the average worker.

c) Mr Mancham was more interested in foreigners than in Seychellois.

Some hours yet later, the radio read the announcement that the ‘putshists’ had ‘offered Mr. Albert Rene (the Prime Minister) to govern the country, but Mr Rene had asked for some time to reflect over the offer and to consult members of his party. Note: James Michel has since admitted in his book Distant Horizons that Rene was the architect and always the boss.

Later the radio announced that Mr Rene had accepted the offer on the condition that:

1.  Are respected:

i) Ministers of the ousted government and their families.

ii) Members of the now-defunct National Assembly and their families.

iii) Agreements signed with foreign countries.

2. There be a committee to prepare new elections according to the constitution. (The constitution under reference, the result of the 1975 inter-party consensus following national elections in 1974, would be abolished and a new one promulgated to usher in single party rule)!

The radio further announced that the putschists having accepted these conditions, the Prime Minister was therefore the new President!

Further on in the day, the radio broadcasted the following announcements:

1. Until further notice, sale of alcohol was prohibited.

2. Anyone found breaking and looting will be arrested.

3.  Some foreign nationals, mainly from England and who were working with the Police have been arrested and were to be deported by the Air France flight later in the evening.

Finally, the new President came on the air to repeat much of the former justifications given earlier for the coup d’état with the added twist that the former president had also wanted to be President for Life.

He also requested that everyone obey and abide by the new orders and decrees.

The coup plotters with President James Michel holding AK47

6th June 1977

On the next day, 6th June, two ministers of the deposed government, Mr Philip Moulinié and Mr Justin Pragassen came on the air to request that the people obey the new laws and decrees.

Then the radio announced one of the new decrees, which required that anyone in possession of firearms were to surrender these to the nearest police station. (Basically some ageing .22 and 303s to bring down a few bats for the curry pot!)

During the afternoon, there was a broadcast of the funeral from the cemetery of Anse Louis, of one of the putschists (the only casualty from their ranks)

In the early evening of Monday 6th June, the new President addressed the nation over the radio to announce his government and politics.

The new 7-member cabinet was announced.

As was abolition of housing tax to encourage house construction (a later policy in the form of the Tenant's Rights Act, would come in to effect to stop anyone with any sense from building a house to rent out! This latter Act was apparently only repealed in the late 1990s!)

As was the statement on the necessity for the country to develop all its natural resources, including Agriculture.

The radio then announced partial lift of curfew for the 7th June to be from 08h00 to 16h00 in order to allow families to do their shopping.

7th June 1977

On the 7th June 1977, the radio announced:

a) The nomination of Mr James Pillay as the new Commissioner of Police.

b) A message sent to HM Queen Elizabeth II on the occasion of her Silver Jubilee.

c) That there will henceforth no longer be ‘nennenn’ (nanny) in the country. They will be called Domestic Workers!

d) Another partial lift of curfew for the 8th June to be from 08h00 to 016h00.

e) A statement from the new government that henceforth, the government is there to serve the people and not vice versa as before.

In his book Distant Horizon; President James Michel admits that his predecessor Albert Rene was the chief architect of the darkest day in Seychelles history.

8th June 1977

On the 8th June 1977, the radio announced that the new President had held a press conference where local and foreign journalists had been invited. And where the new president answered all questions that were put forward. (The catch word here is ‘invited’!)

During the day, the radio also announced that the 9^th of  June being Corpus Christi (also public holiday) the curfew would be lifted from 06h00. There would not however, be the customary religious procession. There followed a request for SPUP supporters not to harass those who did not share their political views, because there was not to be any more discrimination in the country, and that this was a promise. (Then of course discrimination came along)

 9th June 1977

On the following day, the 9th of June, the radio announced that the former President had telegrammed the UN Secretary general to allege foreign involvement in the coup d’état and requesting that the matter be put to the UN General Assembly. It was then reported that after the UN Secretary General had conferred with the Chairman of the UN Security Council, it was resolved that the UN would not give any follow-up to the telegram from the former President.

The radio later in the day also reported that:

a) The Commonwealth Conference being held in London had refused both Seychelles representation by the delegation from the former Seychelles regime, already in the country.

b) The new President did not want the honorary title ‘Your Excellency”

c) Curfew would be lifted for 10th June to be from 18h00 to 06h00 so that people could resume work.

There followed another radio address by the new President where he:

i) Called on the people to create a new society.

ii) Announced the creation of a public complaints bureau.

iii) Announced the creation of a ‘People’s Militia’ comprising anyone from 16 to 60 years, to help defend the country against mercenaries that the former President and his rich friends were recruiting.

iv)The setting up of a fund to collect money to help the families of the persons who died during the putsch.

THE DAY OF RECKONING: POA 2013

The pitted, epic and silent battle between the Seychelles Gang of Four and the People of Seychelles, as the people fight to reclaim power, draws to a close as the Constitutional Court is set to deliver judgement today on the Constitutionality of the Public Order Act 2013.

There is plenty of anxiety as to the outcome of the court case, especially as the National Assembly colluded with the Executive to criminalise the fundamental rights and freedom of the citizens, leaving only the judiciary to defend the people. Is the judiciary virtuous and independent? Enough to guarantee the people their fundamental rights and freedom, as given to them by the constitution of the Seychelles?

 When the judicial hammer falls this morning, what will be left of the fundamental human rights and freedom of the people of the Seychelles? Will the Judiciary (along with the National Assembly and the Executive) have crucified the people of Seychelles? Criminalising their fundamental rights and freedom? Would the Seychelles Gang of Four have won? Will the Seychelles Constitutional Court give the Gang of Four (as opposed to the Chinese Gang of Four) the absolute power over the people, power they so badly seek? What, if any, fundamental rights and freedom will the People of Seychelles have left, after the judicial hammer comes down on the morning of 2 June, 2015?

This is a battle between a Law and Order system the Seychelles Gang of Four wants to impose on the people V/S a system where there is the Rule of Law (as long as the laws are legal and constitutional) that the people want, a rule of law that has been promised by the constitution, but that they are not enjoying.

The only thing that is certain at this moment is that the people cannot afford to lose this battle for that would take us back to the dark days of the Second Republic and we guarantee that if necessary we will carry this fight against James Michel, Patrick Herminie, Ronny Govinden and Joel Morgan to the International Courts of Human and People’s Rights and Freedom- but win we will.

If James Michel et al. are so bent on having these extraordinary powers over the citizen, something they clearly badly want to have, then they should have done a Coup d’état: They have the blue print to do so. But there is just no way they will get these extraordinary powers over the people of Seychelles through the POA, legislated and enacted. This is not going to happen!

This case provides the Constitutional Court with the opportunity to showcase itself as being a defender and protector of the Constitution, the people, the weak and the voiceless, whilst by legislating and enacting the POA 2013, both the National Assembly and the Executive were in breach of the Constitution and were antipeople.

Viral Dhanjee

DESROCHES ISLAND RESORT; SOLD!

Prince William and Kate holidayed there twice but the owner of the hotel and villas on the island has sold the property, possibly to a businessman from Gulf.

To the rest of the world, Desroches Island is just another luxury hideaway for the rich and famous renowned as much for its isolation as its opulence. To Seychellois however, it is the main island of the Amirantes group situated 230km to the southwest of Mahé and a symbol of the inaccessibility of a large swathe of the country’s patrimony to most of it citizens. Thus the recent announcement by Desroches Island Lodge (DIL), the owner of the island’s hotel and villas, that it has sold its property to an unnamed buyer, subject to government’s approval, caused little more than a ripple on the main islands. If our attempts to confirm the identity of the buyer were largely unsuccessful, unconfirmed reports suggest that it has been purchased by a businessman from the Gulf and will be managed by Four Seasons. It is uncertain though what this means for DIL’s 150 or so employees.

The statement issued by the company stressed the practical implications of the deal: “Desroches Island Lodge Limited (DIL) are excited to announce that we have concluded negotiations for the sale of the hotel and business situated on Desroches Island, subject to the Government of Seychelles consent and approvals. We will continue to operate, manage and market the hotel in the normal manner for the remainder of 2015, but envisage handing over possession and control to the new owners on 11 January 2016. DIL will therefore not take any further bookings beyond 10 January 2016 accordingly. The new owners will close the hotel for a period during 2016, in order to rebrand, refurbish and enhance the facilities.”

Interestingly, DIL also acquired the management contract of Alphonse Island Resort from Great Plains Seychelles in September 2012. “The aim is to bring the Desroches international managing skills to Alphonse Island Resort and offer an exclusive and diverse range of packages, a combination that both islands will benefit from,” the Islands Development Company (IDC), which administers the islands on behalf of government, said in a statement at the time. IDC was also involved in the construction of luxury villas on the island, some of which are owned by Seychellois while the rest belong to foreigners (villa owners qualify for residency in Seychelles). In fact, the change in ownership has sparked fears that villa management fees will increase significantly.

Aerial of the private villas on the beach

Prior to the sale, the 20 suitehotel and villas were managed by Seasons in Africa, “a South African based premier tourism marketing and management company”. The property belonged however to DIL which in turn is owned by Zabre International Limited (ZIL), a Mauritius based company which increased its effective shareholding in Desroches from 93.8% to 99% in 2014 (thereby possibly clearing the way for the sale). According to the annual report for the year ended February 28 2014 of Collins International Limited, an offshore company which owns ZIL - via Du Preez Limited, a holding company - DIL owned “the leasehold rights to Desroches Island in the Seychelles. It owns the Desroches Island Lodge Hotel as well as the development rights for 22 luxury villas on the island”.

Private Villa on Desroches

One of the directors of Collins International Limited is Kenneth Collins who along with his brother Murray Collins runs the Collins Group, a South African “commercial property development and investment company”. And although the reasons for the sale are still unknown, it has been suggested that a personality clash convinced the brothers to sell DIL when the right offer came along.

Source: Today in Seychelles

NOTE:

The principal activity of IDC, which was leased in 1995 fourteen islands for 99 years at an annual rent of SR1, is to manage those islands on behalf of the government of Seychelles. What is IDC doing sub leasing some of these islands and Desroches to a private Mauritian company? Did the Seychelles government sanction this? There is no transparency as the value of the lease will never be made public.

PATRICK PILLAY CHALLENGES PRESIDENT MICHEL TO A TELEVISED DEBATE

Lalyans Seselwa officially was officially launched on Friday.

“We say there is corruption, President Michel says it’s a perception. I say to President Michel that I’m ready to sit with him for an hour or an hour and a half on his SBC to debate. Let’s sit in front of the cameras and I’ll show you the corruption, I’ll show you how it’s just under your nose. We can talk about the islands, we can talk about many things”, Patrick Pillay, Lalyans Seselwa’s leader, said on Friday evening during the official launching ceremony of the party at the ICCS.

Mr Pillay added that he hopes that President Michel will respond positively to his request “I’m free every day, from Monday through to Sunday, anytime. Whenever he’s ready!” Patrick Pillay’s last words were drowned out by the cheers of his supporters who punctuated their leader’s speech with shouts of “koze Ton Pat, koze Ton Pat”.

Friday’s launch was attended by members of different political parties, excluding the Parti Lepep, the Seychelles National Party (SNP) and the PDM.

Mr Pillay’s speech focused on the fact that “Seychellois are not afraid anymore”. For many years, he said, “this country has been ruled by one man and one party. But never again will we believe that government belongs to just one party. Government has never been about concentration of power. This is called dictatorship. And never again will we allow one man to hold absolute power because it breeds corruption”, he said.

Earlier, the party’s secretary general, Ahmed Afif explained the values the party stood for. “It is only when we have dignity, justice and unity that we can have peace”. Hence, he added, the choice of white as the party’s colour and the choice of a bird flying free as its emblem.

The party leader later said that some members of his committee and himself had served in government in different capacities before “and we are not ashamed of it because we served with honesty. We have nothing to hide. Some of us have been called traitors but we would have been traitors had we chosen not to leave and not to say Mr, you’re going too far”.

Mr Pillay also defended the parry’s treasurer Dr Ramadoss against criticisms from government quarters, saying “when he was on their side, he was perfect, he was a saint and now he’s no good?”

High taxes and interest rates denounced

It befell the party’s secretary general, Ahmed Afif, to present some of the broad strokes of Lalyans Seselwa’s economic programme. Unsurprisingly, the party promised to reduce the tax burden on the population in the event it comes to power, a commitment which never fails to go down well with voters. “There are too many taxes on Seychellois”, Mr Afif affirmed. And how does it propose to fund the fiscal shortfall of such a policy? By reducing corruption and waste, a pledge which was something of a leitmotif of the official launching. Mr Afif also spoke of the need to ensure that the fishing sector brings more revenue into the country, thereby benefitting Seychellois rather than foreign vessels and companies.

The former Principal Secretary of Finance went on to take aim at the banking sector and their high interest rates. “Pirates are not only at sea, but also in banks sometimes”, he said. His party proposes to introduce more competition into the sector as way of bringing interest rates down. He cited the sector’s annual profits of SCR300 million as proof that banks do have some room for manoeuvre when it comes to interest rates. Mr Afif went on to target the Financial Intelligence Unit which, he claimed, has unparalleled power in the sense that it can freeze a person’s account for a full 180 days.

 The rise in the cost of the living was also on the agenda, as was the basic salary which Lalyans Seselwa deems is too low. Mr Afif spoke of the need to bring more foreign currency into the country as a way of countering the cost of living.

Source:Today in Seychelles

ROYAL NAVY SAILOR FOUND DEAD IN SEYCHELLES

Foul play suspected in death in Victoria

Just a few hours after the visiting British Royal Navy frigate HMS Richmond welcomed President Michel and other guests to celebrate the Queen’s birthday on Friday, one of its crewmembers, a 23 year-old Royal Navy sailor, was found dead in Victoria.

His body was discovered behind the National Library, at the ex-children’s playground, by an unknown man at around 6.45am. He then proceeded to alert the police. The circumstances of the death are as yet unclear but police spokesperson Jean Toussaint said that they are treating the death as suspicious.

The man was wearing a light blue shirt and blue jeans at the time of death. He was barefoot and, puzzlingly, his shoes and socks were placed next to him. The posture of the body almost suggested that he was asleep, with one arm on his chest and the other bent at the elbow.

The police also say that there was no “visual” evidence that foul play was involved but that the sheer unnaturalness of the discovery is what is making them treat the death as suspicious.

Matthew Harper from the British High Commission has confirmed that the 23 year-old was serving on HMS Richmond and said that his family in England had already been notified of the death.

HMS Richmond is set to leave Seychelles on Tuesday.

The strange circumstances surrounding the discovery of the body are reminiscent of the death of two security officers on board the Maersk Alabama while it was docked in Victoria last year. After a night out in town, the two men were found dead in their cabin. It was later established that they had overdosed but the people who last saw them before their death - they spent the night at the casino in town - were never identified.

Likewise, little is known about where the British sailor went before his death and who he was with. The police are expected to question other members of the crew of HMS Richmond to try and retrace the 23 year-old’s movements before his death.

In the meantime, it is hoped that the CCTV cameras in town will assist the police in their investigation. Questions however are being asked about whether the police still conduct patrols in town in the evening and the early hours of the morning and whether the patrols should not be more regular, especially on end-of-month weekends.

Source:Today in Seychelles

SPPF GAVE OUR ISLANDS FOR 1 RUPEE TO IDC; SEYCHELLES CORRUPTION

On December 20th, 1994, Francis Chang Sam, drafted a lease for 99 years between the Government of Seychelles and the ISLAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY LIMITED (IDC).

The Managing Director of IDC at the time was Mr. Glenny Savy and he signed the lease on behalf of IDC.  Joseph Nourice, signed on behalf of the Government of Seychelles. Chang Sam who is quiet, but is becoming known to do a lot of these cozy deals for the powerful prepared the lease documents and acted as a Notary.

Shareholders and Directors of IDC

Chang Sam was also a Board member of the Central Bank of Seychelles, long after he departed as Attorney General, and was paid to handle the Lehman Brothers Bond transactions on behalf of the Government of Seychelles. The Bond transactions of course, led to our national bankruptcy as a country in 2008 when Government of Seychelles, defaulted on the Bonds and could not make a $3 Million installment payment.

Lease Term 99 Years at One Go

The lease consideration for a 99 year lease was Rs. 1.00. No other payment was made.

The Lease included all buildings and all existing infrastructure on the following islands, many of which Mr. Savy has gone on to sign off sales and subdivisions and made numerous transactions.

All along, we were given the impression that these islands are being cared for by IDC, for the people of Seychelles.  

Are they being cared for or are they being milked?

Name Those Islands for Rs. 1.00

The islands that went for One Seychelles Rupee in One transaction for 99 years, to one company managed by one man, is as follows according to the transcription Volume TB 8 No. 214 , Registration Vol. B 33 No. 1219 , dated 20th January 1995 are: 1. Silhouette, 2. Ile Platte, 3. Desroches (of the Amirantes Group), 4. Remire (of the Amirantes Group), 5.Marie Louise ( of Amirantes Group), 6. Desnoeufs (of the Amirantes Group), 7. Poivre Atoll, 8. Alphonse and St. Francois Atolls, 9. Providence Atoll, 10. Farquar Group of Islands 11. Cosmoledo Atoll.

Stamp Duty “Free”

To add insult to injury, no valuation of assets on the islands were made. No valuation of the islands themselves made. Finally, no stamp duty was paid. Under the Stamp Duty Ordinance, section 6 and 20 Revenue Stamp it reads: “FREE”.

D’Arros Island Group

In the matter of the Bettencourt properties of the D’Arros Island Group bought from the Palavi Family of Iran, her lawyers had estimated and valued that island group to be worth Euro 1 Billion, and formed a significant portion of her real estate holdings in terms of value.

Given that D’Arros is worth almost Euro 1 Billion, what value could we place on the islands given for 99 years for Rs. 1.00 to IDC, a company that Mr. Savy will likely now try to control for life, for obvious reasons.

Restriction of Assignment

One interesting article of the lease is the restriction of assignment of any interest on these islands without the written permission of the Republic.

Has the Government of Seychelles approved of all the land sales on Desroches Island and the other islands? Why is Glenny Savy also a director of Desroches Island Lodge Ltd; is that not a conflict of interest? Is this the Government of Seychelles policy, to sell interests in the Outer Islands and promise year in and year out to build little self catering huts for local Tourism? Apparently the government pays SR800, 000 per month rent for the use of Marie Louise as a prison holding facility; a nice little earner. The government also pays SR85, 000 to IDC for each flight when transporting prisoners.

Complaining about Glenny Savy Acting like a President on Outer Islands

Those who complain that Glenny Savy acts like the President of the Outer Islands can now stop crying. The deed of Transaction that Albert Rene ordered, before he left, soon after multi party was announced, allows Mr. Savy to do what he wants to the Outer Islands. You will likely have to bring him a tin can of bully beef each time you visit if he so commands you. The Outer Islands and Silhouette have been divested from the People of Seychelles, for 99 years, thank you SPPF.

Now we know why IDC offices are referred to as STATE HOUSE at Newport.

Seychelles Skull Case; DNA TESTS INCONCLUSIVE!

Forensics experts in Mauritius say essential parts for identification are missing.

Forensic tests on the skull found in Bel Ombre at the beginning of the month are said to be inconclusive. This is what official sources in Mauritius told this newspaper yesterday afternoon after they examined the skull. The DNA tests on the skull were supposed to take place yesterday but forensic experts in Mauritius claim that parts which are essential for the identification are missing. They have asked the Seychelles police to come back with the rest of the skull.

Where is the lower jaw?

Information received so far confirms that Assistant Commissioner of Police (ACP) Reginald Elizabeth arrived in Mauritius in possession of the skull, the samples from the three families who have requested that their DNA samples be tested against it as well as bullet casings. The skull was taken to the laboratory on Monday. The bullet casings were also sent to the ballistics department on the same day. Results are still being awaited.

The police in Seychelles gave no indication of whether they had recovered the lower jaw – which is presumably what is missing - found by workers on a construction site in Bel Ombre before being re-interred. It now seems that the jaw will be vital in identifying the person the skull belonged to.

Sources tell this newspaper that the laboratory in Mauritius has been asked to determine conclusively the sex, the age and the race of the skull. It has also been tasked with determining whether it matches any of the DNA samples which have been provided. The Mauritian authorities have also been asked to determine whether the skull presents signs of injuries and it is yet to be determined if this can be done with an incomplete skull.

Bone of contention: The families who lost a loved one years ago, will be crushed by this development.

 The police confirmed on Saturday May 16 that they had recovered the skull after it had been re-interred by workers on a construction site. A few days later, the Commissioner of Police told TODAY that three bullet casings had been recovered on the site but this information was corrected by ACP Elizabeth last Friday during a press conference when he said that five bullet casings had actually been retrieved.

But no information relating to the lower jaw was given and it is not known whether it was recovered and, if so, whether it was sent to Mauritius along with the skull. As a result, forensic sources in Mauritius are saying that nothing more can be done as long as the missing parts are sent to the laboratory. This development will crush the three families that have come forward following the discovery of the skull in the hope that DNA testing could establish whether the skull belonged to one of their lost relatives. Samples have been taken from the relatives by the police for tests.

The discovery of the skull and the police’s subsequent handling of the case has also raised the question of whether all procedures have been followed in a case such as this one. In a Letter to the Editor this newspaper published earlier this week, a reader asked whether a court order for an enquiry had been issued by a judge for the purpose of taking the skull abroad for forensic examinations.

He further observed that a missing person file should have been opened and a court order sought by the police for the removal of the evidence from the country for forensic investigations. More importantly, he asked, “what independent measures have been put in place to protect the authenticity of the skull itself and to ensure that the families’ DNA are not tampered with on its way overseas?”

There has been no reaction from the authorities following the publication of those very valid points.

Source:Today

THE BIG INTERVIEW WITH PATRICK PILLAY

“I am prepared to step aside…”

There is “a big chance” that opposition parties will get together and “strategize” to fight President Michel at the next elections, Lalyans Seselwa leader Patrick Pillay tells TODAY. In the following interview, Mr Pillay makes his mea culpa for not having spoken up when he saw “corruption” when he was in power and explains why he became part of “the system”.

By Deepa Bhookhun

I’d like to start with an unsubstantiated rumour that hasn’t so far been denied by the State House, to the effect that government might be getting ready to present a constitutional amendment to change the mode of election of the President. What’s your take on that?

If this happens, then the different parties will simply have to get together and try and strategize. I personally am not worried about it. I am speaking in my personal capacity and haven’t consulted my executive committee about this but I have heard the rumours and my own personal view is that I wouldn’t worry about it, because even if they amend the Constitution - and they can as they have a majority in the National Assembly – I don’t think it will change the fact that a majority of Seychellois want to see a new government.

 It will however be a clear sign to the nation that the ruling party is in panic mode and is not confident that they can win the elections. If they were so sure of their strength, as the President said earlier this year, why does he have to amend the Constitution? Call the elections tomorrow and we’ll see.

But the political landscape has changed since, hasn’t it? Do you feel that you and your party have had a role in this?

You know, when that statement was made, I wrote an article to say that their confidence came across as arrogance and that, in fact, James Michel was providing a stimulus for the phoenix to come out of the old SPPF and this is what has happened. In actual fact, this statement was one of the catalysts that brought about the creation of our party. We thought we needed to stop this nonsense; to show that we’re not to be taken for granted. We’re not all idiots, you know.

So when the President said that he was so sure to win and could hold the elections at any time, the decision to create Lalyans Seselwa hadn’t been made yet?

No. I actually learnt that the President had said that in TODAY at my home in Morne Blanc. And I thought, ‘well, that’s a little bit rich’. And I’m sure that with hindsight, the President realizes he shouldn’t have said that because it stimulated a lot of people who were almost dormant and all of a sudden we thought no, we have to stop that.

Has the reaction to the creation of your party been what you expected it to be?

Beyond my wildest expectations. So much so that I am supposed to have been kicked out of London for having molested a child, I’m supposed to be in the ICU, I’m supposed to have molested my own child. It’s a sign of panic. I ran five ministries, I worked for government for 40 years and now all this character assassination? I expected it and I won’t react and I won’t crack. I have my mother’s strength and my father’s heart as well as my spiritual strength.

When you announced that you were going to create a new party, many people weren’t sure whether or not this was a ploy to further divide the opposition. The fact that you were very much favoured by the SBC in terms of airtime also did a lot to fuel speculation. Let’s have it out: are you or not an agent of Parti Lepep?

I was actually surprised by the coverage, I must say. I don’t watch the SBC news when I am in it so I didn’t see the coverage but I was told about it. The explanation, I think is that they are in panic mode and they’re trying to show that they’re very democratic by showing Pillay and his group. I think the reason it was aired is so that the President is seen the good guy who is now bringing democracy to the country. It has never been done before and never with the SNP.

But there’s always a first time and at least it’s positive!

Yes. But to answer your question about whether we are an agent of Lepep, the answer is no. We could be said to be an offspring of Lepep but I can say categorically that we are not an arm of Lepep. I can tell you that if one day I come out and say “let’s form an alliance with Parti Lepep” – it’s not going to happen but for argument’s sake, let’s say it does – I think my entire committee would resign and go home. We have no intention of forming any alliance with Lepep. I don’t want to be associated with certain persons in Lepep because they are corrupt to the core.

This is a perception, the President says.

Yes, apparently they’ve been saying, “where’s the evidence?” It’s everywhere. In health, in land. There are ex Ministers who have done things that the whole nation knows about.

You said that you left government in 2009 because the corruption situation had gotten out of control. Why didn’t you denounce it then?

Because there is such a thing as collective responsibility.

But surely not after you left!

No, not after I left. I did not at the time feel comfortable to talk about that for all kinds of reasons. I had been involved in certain things which I will not talk about now but when we set up our anti-corruption commission, I will have certain depositions to make. But when you are a Minister in a government, you need to have a certain amount of loyalty. The serenity prayer - help me to change the things I can and to recognise the things I can’t change - also helped me a lot back then. This has been my guiding principle and I didn’t feel comfortable in talking about what I saw. And I saw a lot.

Then some people may say that your silence made you complicit!

It could well be and if that criticism is levelled at me, then I will accept that maybe I was complicit by virtue of association; that maybe even though there was collective responsibility, I should have stood up against it. That said, I have stood up against a number of things which I won’t talk about now. But like Ahmed Afif said very clearly at our press conference, corruption is not just about stashing money away in foreign accounts, it’s also about the process of decision making which is sometimes skewed. I have fought against that in ways that haven’t been visible. I haven’t disclosed it yet because I don’t want to embarrass some people. Let’s not forget that we’re living in a country where there is a kind of institutionalized fear so you don’t want to say something that will compromise somebody’s situation. So I’d rather be accused of being complicit than saying things that will compromise the position of former colleagues.

This institutionalized fear that you talk about, let’s not forget that you were part of the system that institutionalized the fear!

I was part of the system like we have all been part of the system. What happens is that somebody disappears and then it becomes systematic. When Hassenally disappeared then Alton Ah-Time disappeared and then Sinon Desnousse went, all of us - and me included as a 26 year-old young man - start thinking “am I going to be next?” Will it be my brother next? So, to me it was not a matter of having a revolution: your mind isn’t ready for that, your personality neither; your maturity is not there so we can’t blame each other. What we all did was join the system because you don’t want to be next.

 And that fear is still there. The moment we decided to register our new party, we went to see people to ask for their support. Do you know how many people said that they will vote for us and support us but that they won’t be able to sign our registration papers because they’re scared? Their relatives who work in government might lose their job. That fear, I was telling the bishops the other day, is not going to go away tomorrow.

But things are much better, surely?

Yes things have gotten better otherwise I wouldn’t have been able to stand up and say there was corruption even when I was in government.

How and when did things start getting better?

I think there has been a lot of people who have fought for more openness and we’ve got to give them credit and respect. Wavel Ramkalawan for instance. Some people may not like him but Wavel has shown extreme courage at a time when he was being practically mauled by 33 MNAs in the National Assembly. I’m thinking of journalists in the opposition like Roger Mancienne who was constantly trying to develop that kind of openness in the system so that we have more confidence to say let’s all come out. It’s been a gradual and slow process. I can’t say it started yesterday or that it started with Mr Michel getting in power but I think people are becoming bolder.

But credit where it’s due. Maybe it is President Michel who is more open and has helped the process!

Yes and no. I think he has had no choice. He’s realised that President René had a firm hand. With President René, what he says goes.

Because of the fear?

Fear but also respect because people realised that he was firm-handed and people felt safe with him. But when James Michel came, he realised that that kind of dictatorial approach to government was working against his party and that it was in his advantage to be seen as the person who would loosen the reins a little. And he was bright enough to start doing that slowly, to bring more transparency. But in my view, it is only a perception because I think he has been as hard-handed as President René but in a different style. He has wanted to go to all the funerals, to go and visit the Pope, to visit people whose houses have burnt down. The approach has been different but I don’t think that we can say that under President Michel, the fear has gone away. He has been a little bit more open to the democratic process but there is still victimization under President Michel and, to me, that’s not acceptable.

Before you came out, there were rumours that you had the support of Albert René although he denied it in The People. But you never actually came out and said it clearly. Do you or do you not have his support?

(Hesitates…) No, I don’t think he’s said overtly that he is supporting us and I don’t expect him to. And knowing what I know, I think it’s only natural that he would try and support James Michel. After all, he is his dauphin and his anointed son and I think he sees the demise of Parti Lepep as the SPUP, SPPF before – both of which were his creation - so he doesn’t want to see that happen. He has not actually said to us that he’s supporting us but he has said that he is disappointed with the man he appointed as his successor.

When did he say that?

More than once.

And you’ve said you’ve remained friends with Sarah René. What does she say about it?

She’s very discreet and Sarah was the one who called me to ask if I had seen the article in The People, which I don’t read. I am comfortable with what the old man has said – I don’t have any problem with it.

Even with being called a traitor?

I don’t have any problem with that because I don’t expect him to say otherwise.

So you are saying that Albert Rene has to officially say he’s supporting Parti Lepep’s candidate but that privately, he might feel differently?

Absolutely.

And when you say that, you think this will bring you votes from Parti Lepep followers because it helps you to create the impression that Albert René is supporting you?

No. I thought it would but I am now convinced that it’s a small minority of old people who are SPPF diehards who will be swayed by that. But the majority of young people – those aged between 25 and 35, let’s say– will not be bothered by what Albert René says and in fact I now think that if he endorses us publicly, it will be to the disadvantage of Lalyans Seselwa.

You’re talking of people of a certain age but at your press conference, we didn’t see any spring chickens either!

Absolutely. That criticism is absolutely right and it’s been levelled at me before and I said wait for our line-up of candidates for the National Assembly elections. Wait until you see who comes on the stage when we do our first public meeting on Friday May 29. We have candidates for all districts except Praslin and La Digue, they are all young people and you will be surprised by the number of young professionals supporting us, including former MNAs of Parti Lepep.

Is this why you hinted at your press conference that there could be people in government joining Lalyans Seselwa soon?

Yes, there will be people who will come openly, people who the public would not have expected to see. Bear in mind that many people have too much to lose to come out now – because of their pensions, etc. - and they won’t come out until the end.

There’s a very interesting “engouement” for the upcoming elections. There’s now going to be a few candidates running for President. Is this a good thing?

Yes and no. I think it’s time for us all to meet together and I hope we do soon, to strategize. I don’t personally think it’s a good thing to have so many parties because it can lead to a dispersion of energy, of thought and this will be to the advantage of the monster that we want to get rid of.

Have you spoken to the other opposition parties yet?

I have met up with Alexia Amesbury and we know that we are fighting for the same cause but Alexia had wanted to show that a woman can stand up on her own and say I don’t agree and I want a change. We now have to agree on the next level. If we want a change, how do we strategize to ensure that we win the cause that we are fighting for?

So there is a chance that Lalyans Seselwa, the SNP and Mrs Amesbury’s SPSJD could get together, is that what you are saying?

A big chance. Whether there’s another two that register tomorrow and I’m sure that Parti Lepep is thinking of creating one or two PDMs (laughs…), we will certainly look at joining forces to change the system for the betterment of Seychelles, to have a more open and democratic Seychelles where there is justice.

But the big question is: if the opposition parties get together for the Presidential elections, who will sacrifice himself or herself and who is going to go for it?

I am prepared as party leader to say: look, I am not running after the post of President; if you feel that you are the one who stands the best chance of winning and three or four other parties feel you are the best candidate, I am prepared to step aside and speak for you at rallies and support you because my only wish is to die with one title and that is “Ton Pat”. Nothing less and nothing more. I don’t need titles, I’m not interested in that, I’m interested in seeing a different system where there is justice, dignity and freedom. This is what I worked for.

Have you started discussing this with the opposition parties?

No, not yet. Wavel and I meet often in social functions and we laugh and talk and we say we must talk but we haven’t so far. Alexia and I have talked.

But what you are saying is big. If all the forces of the opposition get together, you could be a force to be reckoned with…

You know, I think all of us in the opposition are wise enough to understand that as long as we remain divided, we are not going to get this man out of office. And if we have this man and his party in office for another five years, Seychelles will be irreparably damaged. We need to get together to ensure that we have a better system.

Many people have been going to the treasurer of your party, Dr Ramadoss, looking for money. Just last week, he published an insert in newspapers with allegations about the health system. Is he acting on your behalf?

The photo of him standing with a group of marginalized people is Dr Ramadoss acting as Dr Ramadoss because, you see, when he was with Parti Lepep, he was the central committee member for Mont Fleuri which is one of the disadvantaged sub districts around Victoria and it has a lot of social problems. Dr Ramadoss’ style has always been to be very kind with money. Nobody can deny that and nobody in Parti Lepep can deny that. I think he got over excited and when people came, he did give them some money but he was acting as Dr Ramadoss and not as the treasurer of Lalyans Seselwa. With regards to the insert he put in newspapers, I spoke to him when I heard of the project and I said to him that he can do what he wants as long as he does it as a medical doctor and not a member of our executive committee. He was insistent and I didn’t have a problem with it although some friends believed we should have stopped it. I am the party leader and I could have stopped it but I didn’t because I don’t think it’s a bad thing that we get people thinking about what’s going on in the dialysis department. Dr Ramadoss believes it has been effective because his message has reached many people: that the dialysis has become a bit of a racket and people get commissions when patients are treated.

How is the party doing for money?

I thought we would have done better but I think my approach was wrong. To tell you frankly, Dr Ramadoss is the one who is funding us and what I do is send my driver and a security guard to go around my districts - we’re each responsible for three districts – and to see who needs help.

 The poverty level in Seychelles is something that has shocked me. I have been in government for 42 years and when I was at the apex, I never realised that in the foothills, it was that bad. There are people who have nothing to give to their children. So what I do is send my security chap and my driver and I give them SCR400 and they take a family to the shop and buy whatever they need. I am giving money in a different way as opposed to giving money when people ask because there are so many drug addicts nowadays.

Your opponents will have more to distribute. Will this be a problem?

Human nature is human nature and people will accept money. So I say to people: take the money but vote for us. I can’t give money the way they will because I earn SCR57 000 a month which includes both my pensions and I don’t have that much money to give. So I tell people to take the money if it’s offered because at the end of the day, it is their money!

And the million dollar question – will the elections be held this year?

 I think so. Around October/ November, I would say. After the Jeux des Iles. I don’t think he’ll be waiting until next year because the party is hemorrhaging too much. The SPPF tactic when a district was hemorrhaging was to remove the candidate and replace him. If Lepep has the same system, then they will stem the hemorrhaging.

Source:Today

THE LA DIGUE LAND SCANDAL REVISITED; SEYCHELLES CORRUPTION

On the 28th February, 1997 forty (40) plots of Government land were transferred to L’Union Estate Company Limited for the nominal sum of Seychelles Rupee one only (SR1/-). The land transfer document was dated 23rd January 1997; signed by Mr. Joseph Nourrice on behalf of the Government and by Mr. Gregoire Payet on behalf of L’Union Estate.

Mr. France Albert Rene was the President in 1997 and Mr. Dolor Ernesta was the Minister for Land Use and Habitat. We have no proof that the said transfer was approved by the Cabinet of Ministers and for what purpose at the time. President Michel formed part of the Cabinet of Ministers in 1997.

James Michel says there is no evidence of corruption; but this information was made public over 2 years ago in a national newspaper. Is this President blind and deaf?The corruption and trickery that went on by people in powerful position to lay their hands on a plot of land out of the said forty plots on La Digue was incredible.

Dolor Ernesta , central committee member for Parti Lepep, made sure that he also benefitted personally in the deal; two beach front plots (LD756 & LD757) with private beach were transferred to his father for seventy five thousand ( R75,000) rupees only. Dolor Ernesta has since sold one of the plots (LD756) to La Passe Corail (PTY) Limited for five million rupees (R5, 000,000). At least this is the price on the transfer document. This is totally unacceptable.

On the 25^th August 1997; LD756 and LD757 was transferred to Mr Alphonse Betsy for SR75,000. It will be interesting to find out where the money to pay for the land came from; was it from his savings account or did Mr Alphonse Betsy take out a bank loan? The title deed of the sale was registered on the3rd of September 1997; a mere eight days after the signature. However by a great coincidence on the 18^th of December 1997, Mr Alphonse Betsy made his will/testament giving Mr Dolor Ernesta all his personal belongings, in particular his properties known as LD756 and LD757. Dolor Ernesta waited eight long years to register this document on 18^th September 2006.

LD756 represents 6022 square metres of land situated at Anse Gaulette, La Digue, by the sea. LD757 represents 1961 square metres land also situated at Anse Gaulette, next to LD756. These are 2 pieces of prime properties going to one man, an old man who happened to be the father of Dolor Ernesta the minister of land at the time. There is something very wrong about this transaction. On the 20^th of March 2012, Dolor Ernesta sold LD756 for 5 million rupees (SR5, 000,000) according to the title deed of sale registered on 22nd March, 2012. This is a piece of land that Dolor Ernesta (former land minister) got for nothing, if we are to believe the many transactions undertaken by him and his lawyers. It seems that not everything was done according to the rules and regulations (Laws of Seychelles).This evidence was completely ignored by President Michel. Dolor Ernesta used his position as minister to engineer the whole transaction for him to get the two plots of land.

MISS SEYCHELLES AND THE FLIP FLOPPING PRESIDENT

The countdown for the fourth Miss Seychelles... Another World, the third type of Miss Seychelles akin to the Third Republic will take place this Saturday at Constance Ephelia Resort with tickets cost an astonishing SR1800. This pageant must be distinguished from the original Miss Seychelles that took place between 1968 and 1976; and 1992 to 1999. Between 2006 and 2008 a second type of Miss Seychelles took place called Miss Seychelles Islands.

The first Miss Seychelles was Marie-France Lablache in 1968 and last was Lynn Gobin in 1976 before independence. The history of the pageant closely mirrors our sad and past political history. The beauty pageant was subsequently banned after the coup d’état and during the one party state era and no contests took place between 1977 and 1991.

It must be therefore recalled that, since the re-introduction of Miss Seychelles...Another World beauty pageant, the winner and princesses are invited to State House to meet the head of State, James Michel. It must also be recalled that President James Michel in 1978, as Minister of Information and Public Administration called the Miss Seychelles beauty pageant “degrading and that it does not conform with our way of life, our customs and traditions!” So they had it banned. What changed in President Michel’s principles and thinking? Will he say and do just about anything to cling on to power?

Or is he just a serial flip flopper in all policies and principles. From now on he should be called President Flip Flop because he is the same person who also said that tourism would destroy our country, the same person that said that the IMF is a monster and would bankrupt Seychelles, the person who did not believe in democracy, the same person who did not believe in free market, the same person who thought that ex President James Mancham was selling our land to Arabs, the same person who did not believe in private schools, the same person that banned football clubs. The list is endless and President James Alix Michel must be so dizzy with all his flip flopping!

By A.Pierre

DID PRESIDENT MICHEL COMMIT A CONSTITUTIONAL FRAUD IN 2004 WHEN HE WAS SWORN IN AS PRESIDENT?

Article 55 (2) of the Constitution states that “where the President ceases to hold office under article 110(3), the Vice President shall discharge the functions of the President until a person is elected under article 51 to the office of President”

Michel inauguration in 2004 

Article 55 (3) “Where the Vice President discharges the functions of the President under clause (2) or article 56 (dealing with discharging the functions of President during illness and absence), the Vice President shall not have power to:

(a)  revoke the appointment of a Minister

(b)  Invoke article 110 (Dissolution of Assembly by President)”

Then in Act 14 of 1996 there was a 4^th Constitutional Amendment the relevant section is under PART IV (2)  “On the resignation of the President- (which is what happened in 2004 when President Rene resigned)

(a)    the person who becomes Vice President as a result of the operation of subsection (1) shall not assume  the office of President under article 55 (1);

(b)    the functions of the office of the President shall be discharged by the incumbent President until the election of the President but the incumbent President shall not have power to revoke the appointment of a Minister or invoke article 110”

And to make sure that there is no ambiguity in the interpretation of the above section a “note” to the amendment says “Act 14 of 1996 further provides that if the incumbent President resigns, the incumbent President shall continue to discharge the functions of President until the holding of the Presidential election but the incumbent President shall not be able to revoke the appointment of a Minister or invoke article 110: the Vice President above-referred does not  assume the office of President as Vice President would ordinarily do under article 55(1).”

Unless a different interpretation can be attributed to a plain reading of the above  sections what does all mean? Firstly the constitution expressly forbids the assumption of Presidential functions by “Pas baton” upon resignation there should be a Presidential Election.

Secondly and of greater importance is the fact that the first two years of Mr. Michel’s “Presidency” was a constitutional nullity or put another way it was a “constitutional  fraud” perpetrated on the people of Seychelles with the participation of the Head of the Judiciary at the time, Chief Justice Vivekanand Alleear, who administered the Presidential Oath, and the Oath of Allegiance during the swearing in ceremony.

Again I repeat unless there is a different interpretation to the above sections then it follows that all laws enacted and assented to, by Mr. Michel during those two years would be null and void  or “no laws” at all. All treaties entered into will equally be a nullity as he was not legally and constitutionally a President.

I am attaching a document which I would like to be reproduced as part of my letter. To all those on facebook at “Lari Bazar” who wants to know why do I want to be President, “am I not the one releasing all those criminals and drug dealers”? I say this. I am a defence Attorney and the only person who can “release” or acquit a criminal or drug dealer is a judge. I will continue to defend criminals and drug dealers until there is one of those Constitutional amendments that Parti LePep is so famous for, that says that criminals and drug dealers do not have a right to be defended by a lawyer of their choice or on legal Aid. I also say this “What was the profession of Presidents Mancham and Albert before they became Presidents? As defence lawyers did they defend criminals or saints?

And if the people of Seychelles decide at the ballot box, to elect me as President they will see that in my hands I only have the tools of my profession. “a piece of paper and a pen”. Based on the content of my letter and the attached document I would like to ask Mr. Michel whether what I have said together with the content of the attached document can be termed “corruption or the perception of corruption?”

Thank you

Alexia G. Amesbury

Seychelles Party for Social Justice and Democracy. (SPSD)

PUBLIC NOTICE FROM SEYCHELLES PARTY FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE & DEMOCRACY (SPSD)

Elections (Amendment) Act 2014 amends sub-section 97 (2) of the Elections Act 1995 by inserting a new sub-section 97 (2 A) which reads “The maximum time that may be allocated by the Electoral Commission under sub-section (2) for free political broadcast shall-

(a)   in the case of the Presidential Election for each candidate, not exceed 134 minutes on television and 149 minutes on radio;

(b)   in the case of the National Assembly Election for each candidate, not exceed 5 minutes on television and 5 minutes on radio.

The question the SPSD is asking is: How many thousands of minutes of airtime has SBC given to Parti LePep over the 11 years that President Michel has been in power? And this allocated airtimes is given to Political Parties once every 5 YEARS.

Our Manifesto:

To return ownership of State Media to the people of Seychelles.