“I will tell people to forgive the people that preceded me”
Lawyer Alexia Amesbury is this week’s guest. She launched
her party, the Seychelles Party for Social Justice and Democracy, last month
and says she is the best candidate for the Presidency. Here’s why she believes
she’s the right person for the job.
You’re the Seychelles’ first woman Presidential candidate as
well as a reputable lawyer. Do you think the country’s ready for you?
I think the country is ready for a change and not just a
change in the sense that they want a woman or a man but in that it needs a
person that is totally removed from past politics: a person who has no
connection with what has happened in the past. But I think it’s fortunate that
I am a woman and it makes it even more historical.
How long did it take you to decide to go for it?
Truth be told, it’s been in my mind for the longest time –
20 odd years, maybe more. I was going through my CV in preparation for this
interview and one of the things that I said 15 years ago, under “achievement”
is the following: raising the awareness of Seychellois women so that they know
that they have rights that are legally enforceable. Under “ambition”, I wrote:
to serve in a high public office in Seychelles, combat human rights violations
wherever they occur. Little did I know then that the moment would come for the
fulfillment of that prophecy.
So you felt there was a void and that the SNP, the SUP and
others did not provide a viable alternative?
Yes and no. We all want to get rid of what we see as a
corrupt regime and to have a new system in place because the system has failed
us. We are united in that.
But do you not feel that your battle might be too
philosophical for people to understand where you are coming from? In a Letter
to the Editor published in TODAY, you yourself say that some people on social
media have accused you of freeing criminals. Doesn’t that show that your battle
for human rights is not understood?
At the moment, that is not the feedback that I am getting
from people and I speak to a lot of people. They do not see me as someone who
releases criminals or drug dealers but they see me as someone who defends
people who, under our Constitution, are innocent before being proven guilty.
That is the way I am seen – doing my job and doing it well. But I think that
what they appreciate a lot more is that I also challenge government on issues
that are perceived to be not only legally wrong but that are causing people to
suffer. For instance, this law that recently gave a high increase to political
appointees. That is morally wrong. Why? Because in a country where we have
people on the breadline, for the government to legislate for itself and its
cronies, such an increase in earnings is an abuse of power. I have calculated
that just the increase in salary is costing the State SCR10 million annually.
Now those SCR10 million could be used to give the pensioners a better life, to
give the low earners a substantial increase in salary without costing the State
anything more because the money is already there.
Is that why you say in your manifesto that the battle you
have been leading in the courts can’t be led there anymore and that it has to
be led in the political arena?
In the court, you fight cases one at a time but many of our
problems need a political solution. And the only way to get a political
solution is to go into the political arena. For example, I am so convinced of
the illegality and the immorality of this huge increase that I feel that if I
were in government, I would legislate away those increases and if I were
President, I would not give myself an increase unless there was enough money to
give the people of Seychelles a salary increase. Because in my book, when we
have only one plate of food, it is not just the parents that eat that plate of
food; they ensure that their children are fed first. This is why I see this law
as a grave abuse of power and it is one that impacts directly on people and is
directly linked to social injustice. And this is why the name of my party is
very important because it has relevance for the local community because they
all know and understand what a party for social justice is and democracy is
about. And it also has relevance for the international community because I
don’t need to explain to them the concepts of social justice and democracy and
we must not forget that today we live in a global village and that we have
international partners who when they see a new party in Seychelles, will go
behind the name and try to find out who is behind that name and when they do
that, they will find a party leader who is an attorney, a barrister of Inner
Temple, qualified to practice in England and Wales, who has studied at the
prestigious London School of Economics. They will see that as a referee, I have
a judge working at The Hague. They will see that I come with a solid package of
credibility. And that I am a breath of fresh air when compared to what we have
now – a bunch of kleptocrats.
I hear you but political leaders aren’t elected because of
their CVs! You say that you don’t have to explain what social justice and
democracy mean to the international community but what matters are the people
who vote. Do you not think that you need to speak their language?
The people who vote already know the meaning of social
justice and the meaning of democracy. Because they have been victims of social
injustice for so long. For example, the President goes up and say “now lafours
inn mir” and they all want a part of it. The fact of the matter is, the people
of Seychelles are tired of living in a country where the President tells them
“lafours inn mir” when they did not even know there was a “lafours” tree. Nor
did they hear the bats who are eating the lafours. We are tired of living in a
country where we need closure because of events that have happened in the past
and, if I am elected President, the very first thing that I will do, will be to
tell the people to forgive the people that preceded me because you will need to
build and to do that we need to be unified. Without closure over what happened
in the past, we can’t be unified. I will not seek revenge but we have at some
point to have an amnesty.
 |
| SPSD |
Since we’re on the matter, do you think it’s possible to get
that closure? We’ve just “celebrated” another 5 June and although there have
been talks of national unity and national reconciliation, they remain just that
– talks.
We need the political will. Remember that the same party
that created the 5 June nightmare is the same party that continues to be in
power and the only way a healing process will begin is if a new government
comes to power. And then we’ll see whether the 5 June should be a national day
or a national day of mourning where we fly the flags at half-mast.
But mourning for whom? The coup d’état happened and then the
government that perpetrated the coup d’état has stayed in power since and was
later democratically elected. So how can it be a day of mourning when a
majority of the voters have voted for this government and given it legitimacy?
We were talking earlier about how having a woman candidate
would be a historic thing. But there’s something else that’s historic in
Seychelles. If we win, the next elections will be the first time in Seychelles’
history where we will have a President whose mandate has started at the ballot
box. James Mancham was not elected to be President. Albert René’s mandate did
not start with an election and James Michel’s mandate did not start with an
election. This time, we want the people to choose their President through the
ballot box so that that mandate starts at the ballot box and not through any
other means. And it is not just a day of mourning because people lost their
lives. Yes, people lost their lives but to me it has a bigger significance. It
was the day that our Constitution was abrogated. It was the death of the
Constitution, to be replaced by a Constitution that was also the Constitution
of the SPPF. There was no demarcation between the party and the State. This is
an abuse and this is why today we have an authoritarian dictatorship in place
despite the fact that we have a codified Constitution created in 1993. But we
have a government who still has the mentality of the “parti unique”.
If it were true that we have an authoritarian dictatorship
in place, there would be no democratic elections, you would not be able to say
what you are saying and we would not be able to publish it!
What is democracy? Is
it just for us to be able to participate in elections? Do you know how many
battles have been fought in court to be able to do exactly that? Do you know
how many Constitutional battles have been fought for us to be able to have that
freedom of expression right now? The government is in abeyance because we have
just asked for the abrogation of the Public Order Act in court. Had we not
challenged it and had the government not been waiting for a decision from the
court, we might not be here. For the moment, it is a stalemate. Despite the
fact that the Constitution says you have the right to assemble and you have the
freedom of expression, the government keeps eroding those rights. And finally
it did the big one. It took all our rights away in 2013 and had we not
challenged it in court, god knows whether we would be here.
But this fight is led by people like you and you form part
of a minority. Why don’t more people protest? Is it the fear or do they not
mind?
People were scared and the minority are still scared but
when you have hunger in your belly and the hunger is such a pressing issue and
you need things to change because you need a better salary, you need housing,
you need a scholarship for your children. At some point you have to put the
fear aside. But why are we so fearful? Because we are the victims of a
government that in years gone by and even till now, has not been opposed to
using terror or violence. We are a peaceful nation but we have been terrorized
over the years. And you know, there are several ways to kill a man. If you take
away his livelihood, have you taken his life? If you take away his house, have
you taken away his shelter? If you refuse to give him a license to do business,
have you killed a man? And nowadays these are the more subtle ways the
government uses to victimize the people. It might not be putting a bullet in
your head but they are still killing the people of Seychelles in vast numbers.
I’ll give you an example: My husband is a fisherman amongst
other things and he applied for a license to operate an ice plant on Praslin
for fishermen but he wasn’t given permission to build an ice plant. They would
rather have their ice plant operate at minimal capacity or not at all, they
would rather have the fishermen from Praslin come to Mahé to get ice but they
would not give him a license to operate an ice plant because he’s perceived as
being an opposition person.
But this is not new, is it? My question is: why do you think
people will react differently this time round? Weren’t they hungry in 2011?
The Seychellois were
very hungry then but now the abuse is more pronounced and we’ve had it for so
long that people are saying enough is enough.
Do you think social media has helped?
Enormously. In 2011, we didn’t have “Seselwa Annou Koze” on Facebook
and SBC and Parti Lepep had control of the media. As a result of social media,
Facebook and “Seselwa Annou Koze”, the Seychellois have found a voice. They have been
able to mobilise the masses and agitate the issues and today everybody is more
empowered to come forward. This is the revolution that Seychelles needed. Not
the kind that comes from the barrel of a gun. We have been given a voice and we
are ready to make it heard to the end.
And you believe that the elections, when they will be held,
will be free and fair?
No. I don’t believe so and I’ll tell you why. In Hendrick
Gappy’s possession is a master disc of the voter register and we also believe
that the Parti Lepep has a copy. Although they tell us that it is one of theirs
and not one they got from the Electoral Commission. Political parties in the
opposition have asked for a copy of that disc because we believe that there is
manipulation of the register because they are people who vote both in Praslin
and Anse aux Pins for instance. But unless we can digitally access it, we are
at a disadvantage to prove it.
But under the new law, isn’t the Electoral Commission
required to provide you with a copy of the voter register?
No, we are only being given access to the hard copies. Mr
Gappy absolutely refuses to give us access to the soft copy and this is why
political parties in the opposition have filed a case asking the court to order
Mr Gappy to give us a soft copy. This is where we believe the rigging takes
place.
Mr Gappy said during a meeting with the press to introduce
the new electoral law that some 72 000 people are registered on the register of
voters. Isn’t that a bit much for a small country like Seychelles?
It’s definitely a lot when you consider that Seychelles has
92 000 inhabitants! But unless we prove that it is strange, we cannot just
establish that it is strange. You know, just like President Michel says that
corruption is a perception, that it’s not real. Well unless we can prove that
vote rigging is real, they will continue saying it’s a perception. But for us
to prove that, we need the documents in their possession.
So you chose to go to court. I’m assuming, being a lawyer
who has recourse to the courts often, that you have confidence in the
independence of the judiciary?
To tell you the truth, I do not think it is possible for any
country to have a judiciary that is 100% independent because of the way State
systems work. However in Seychelles, there is perceived lack of independence
and at times there is actual interference. Partiality or lack of impartiality
have much to do with the way judges are appointed. And when judges are
rewarded, they tend to be more severe in their judgments. This is how for instance
that Seychelles now has a record of two things – the most indebted country in
the world and the country with highest number of prisoners in the world per
capita.
You say that Seychelles is one of the most indebted
countries in the world. What are your plans to make the country solvent?
Seychelles is
indebted to the tune of USD1.8 billion. I believe there is a reason for this. I
think – even though I cannot prove it – that the money the country borrows
somehow finds its way in private accounts belonging to individuals or entities.
The only time that we will know exactly how those things are being done is when
we are in power.
But what if you get to power and you realize that it’s not
that people are stealing, it’s just that the country is spending more, much
more, than it is making?
Seychelles has vast resources. I’ll give you just an
example. We have 115 islands. For whatever reason, it has been decided that 14
of those islands should be given to IDC for 99 years for SCR1. Now there are
instances where IDC has subleased islands to people or entities. If it is
leased to Ithe DC and IDC decides to sublease the island, then where is the
money? To whom do the islands belong? Another one of our islands, D’Arros,
belongs to the Palavis and was valued at 1 billion euros. This is just one
example and we have 115 of them. St Anne is another example. It was transferred
for SCR1 but the annual lease to Beachcomber is USD1 million for 60 years.
Where is the money? Where is all this money going? This shows you that
Seychelles has the resources. Don’t forget that Marie Louise and Coetivy have
also been leased to IDC for SCR1 but we also know that those two islands are
now prisons. So what is the agreement between the prison authorities, the
government and IDC? Is it leased for nothing? Or for SCR1? We also know that
every time prisoners need to come back to Mahé that they have to charter an IDC
plane, it costs SCR300 000 for a trip. Who pays and to whom is it paid?
As soon as you launched your party, you published a public
notice about a rumour that nobody seems to have any confirmation of to the
effect that government is getting ready to amend the constitution to change the
mode of election of the President. What is this about?
In law, failure to deny means you acquiesce and an
acquiescence is an admission. The fact that State House has not denied the
rumour means they have admitted that it is on the cards. Maybe because we have
outsmarted them for now, it will take a while for them to come with the
amendment. If that one goes in, who is to say that they will not amend the
constitution further to the effect that the President can have a fourth term?
But it doesn’t make sense for government to do the first
amendment because it would be an admission of weakness, would it not be?
Of course, it’s an admission of weakness but we have a
government that is not into recognizing the need to make admissions. Even when
the State failed in 2008, until today the President still hasn’t come out and
said that there was a meltdown and we failed and the IMF had to bail us out.
They are incapable of facing the truth, incapable of acknowledging where
they’re gone wrong and they cannot say sorry. The inability to say sorry shows
the inability to show compassion and a leader that lacks compassion is a cruel
leader. And I’ll tell you why I say President Michel lacks compassion. He’s
been in power for 11 years and he is the only person who has the power of
pardon and, in 11 years, he has not pardoned a single prisoner. To me, that is
a terrible record for a person who wants to be seen as the father of the
nation. A father doesn’t do this.
Patrick Pillay said that the opposition parties need to get
together to strategize. Is this something that you would be willing to do?
We are in discussion
with a few people as well as people who are not active in politics. For us, it
is not only important to remove this government, it is also important that we
give the people of Seychelles a viable alternative. The Constitution does not
allow for coalitions but we are definitely talking ad strategizing and whatever
comes out, will definitely be something that will benefit the people of
Seychelles.
Would you be willing to step aside for somebody who you
believe can do the job?
(Hesitates…) If it was decided by my party and as a
consequence of our discussions with the others, that it will be in the
country’s best interests that I step aside for a better candidate, then it will
be the democratic thing to do.
But I sense that you believe you are the best candidate for
the job?
(Smiles…) Yes,
absolutely!
SOURCE:Today
