The Price of Bad Governance

Gaddafi paid his own life for committing the sins of bad governance. The television picture of the man being dragged out of the gutters, beaten and shot by the rebel soldiers provided the majority of the Libyans with an immense source of rejoicing. For my part, I felt sad for the man whom I saw at a number of African Union summits and who had great dreams for Africa despite his megalomania. If only he had listened to the voice of reason and learned the ropes of good governance!
I have come to the conclusion that corrupt political leaders rarely listen to good advice. They think they are permanent rulers. Some even think that they have been appointed by God. They are always defiant and will accept defeat only when they meet with it. Recently, in Parliament we heard the Prime Minister using a defiant tone vis-a-vis the Opposition, telling them that they would never form a Government and would always stay in the Opposition as if he would enjoy power forever. Such defiance reminds me of the stance of Gaddafi's son, Saif Al Islam who told the international press just a few days before the dramatic killing of his father that the concerted efforts of the rebels and Nato forces would never be able to defeat his army. We know what is his fate today. Surely, we will hear no more of his incendiary statements.
The price of bad governance in Libya is extremely heavy. Thousands of Libyans have lost either their life or family members or property. The whole country will have to be rebuilt. The cost of reconstruction runs into billions of US dollars. A new constitution will have to be drawn up. New institutions will have to be set up and democratic elections organised. It will take years for any country to pay the price for bad governance, as we have witnessed in Egypt, Tunesia, Yemen and Syria.
In Mauritius, we have several cases of poor governance which need to be checked before they reach conflagration stage. I shall mention only one. We have learned from the Prime Minister in Parliament that the report of the Fact Finding Committee in the case of Rehana Ameer, a dismissed MBC employee, would not be made public. He commented that 'les torts sont partagés' and that he would look into the question of reintegration of the lady. The meeting at the Prime Minister Office on the issue was inconclusive as the request of Rehana Ameer for reintegration at the MBC was rejected.
We have now learned that two senior and respected trade union leaders, Jack Bizlall and Jane Ragoo have decided to join Rehana Ameer on a hunger strike, starting from the 9th December. This development is very serious and the Prime Minister would be well advised not to treat it in a casual manner as it has the potential to start something he would not be able to stop easily. I recall that on Sunday 21st February 1999, I heard a laconic sentence in the first news bulletin on the MBC radio that the health of Kaya, a renowned seggae singer had deteriorated in Prison and that further news would be communicated later. I immediately sensed that there would be grave social problems if Kaya died in prison. In a subsequent bulletin, his death was confirmed. We know the sequel. Mauritius experienced the worst riots since Independence in 1968. A spark had caused a blaze with devastating effects for the citizens and the economy. The inability of the Prime Minister to deal decisively with that situation at the very start will, I am sure, be studied by historians.
What will the Prime Minister do now in the light of the hunger strike announcement?  Will he adopt a wait and see attitude, a do-nothing posture and then with the help of his usual drummers, claim that his strategy was the best? I honestly hope that he comes up as early as possibly with some innovative solutions to defuse the impending crisis, bearing in mind that he likes to invite the audience in his speeches to think out of the box. Unfortunately, the solutions recently proposed by his own Office, through the Secretary to the Cabinet, smack of the traditional type. There was absolutely no originality.
It has been shown that the decision taken by the MBC Management and the MBC Board in the Rehana Ameer case was unfair. Dan Callikan, the MBC Director-General has his own management style which may or may not be appreciated by many, but should the Board follow him without discernment? When I served as a member of the MBC Board in the years 1986 to 1991 we had a strong Board constituted of respected personalities like Kenneth Noyau (Chairman), Veena Sooben, Georges Chung, Sir Edouard Lim Fat and Professor Abed Peerally. The Board meticulously examined all the recommendations of Management (represented by the same Dan Callikan) and did not hesitate to reject those which did not hold water. There was a legitimate balance of power between the Board and Management.
I know personally the present Chairman and several Board members, but cannot understand why they did not examine all the implications of the submission of Management in order to reach a mature decision in the Rehana Ameer case. It is clear the Chairman and his Board are now in a bad spot. In fact, the credibility of the whole Board is seriously under question.  
Will the Prime Minister favour his usual style of status quo or would he take the bull by the horns and appoint a new Board, composed of independent and competent persons and make important changes at top management level to restore the credibility of the MBC?  Such measures will also allow the new Board and Management team to reconsider the Rehana Ameer case with impartiality. Will the Prime Minister have the courage to do that before 9th December? However if he decides to stay in his comfort zone, I fear we may experience some form of social unrest which will eventually give rise to a mass ' movement des Indignés', as we have seen in many countries.
Let's hope for some sensible decisions from the Prime Minister within the next couple of days.