A Vibrant Democracy, Alive and Kicking: The Story of Our Resilience

Mauritius 1968-2026

In plural societies, democracy and development are mutually reinforcing. In Mauritius, this synergy — and our overall resilience– has been driven primarily by enlightened political leadership

By Sada Reddi

In 1968 we voted for freedom and liberty and in 2025 we again voted to regain our freedom, which had been undermined in the preceding decade. This is to suggest that democratic resilience has always been a continuous struggle for our people to withstand threats to their liberty.

Today we are proud that our country is defined as one of the very few democratic countries in Africa. However, there have always been periods of doubt when we began to think whether we would be able to withstand the threats thrown in our way. A V-Dem survey in 2018 found that we were among countries with totalitarian tendencies. An AfroBarometer survey in 2021 revealed only 59% of the population described the country ‘as a full democracy’ or ‘a democracy with minor problems’. These different views at different periods of time suggest that our democratic path has not been as smooth as expected.

Despite these reservations, the country can be termed democratic with regular democratic elections, smooth transfer of power after election results, the rule of law, separation of powers, independent public and legal commissions, an independent judiciary and a Bill of Fundamental Human Rights enforceable in a court of law; we can even have recourse to the Privy Council.

One must also acknowledge that, over the past decades, our democratic aspirations have at times been frustrated by a number of obstacles. The postponement of elections to 1976, the imposition of emergency laws, and the repressive actions that followed — though constitutionally defensible, whether justifiable or not in order to save a post-colonial liberal state — were a blot on our democratic system. Barring these controversial years, and the no less controversial attempts between 2014 and 2024 to entrench a more authoritarian form of rule, Mauritius has nevertheless endured as a liberal democratic regime.

The success of Mauritius must be largely attributed to leaders who effectively adapted the Westminster model to our local context. These leaders were like-minded individuals nurtured in Western political traditions and practices through a period of political apprenticeship spanning nearly a hundred years. A sophisticated political culture developed, rooted in municipal politics beginning in 1851, the constitutional framework existing since 1885 with the creation of semi-elected assemblies, the post-war liberalisation of the political system under the 1945 Constitution, and the advent of democratic politics with universal suffrage in 1958, leading up to independence in 1968.

Democratic values

Over the years, Mauritians have assimilated democratic values not only through democratically elected legislative councils but also within numerous social, civic, religious, and trade union organisations framed along democratic lines — regardless of whether they were registered with the Registrar of Associations. It is also worth recalling that the Mauritian representatives at Lancaster House in September 1965, responding to the democratic aspirations expressed by the people in various submissions from August to September of that year, carefully adapted the Westminster template. They scrutinized the constitutional framework clause by clause and reached a consensus on the framework, with the notable exception of the electoral system.

While many British colonies also adapted the Westminster model, its implementation in Mauritius has been largely successful due to our leaders’ commitment to liberal democratic values. Since independence, the judiciary has remained independent and the separation of powers has been largely observed. The parliamentary system has followed established rules, though not necessarily British conventions. Furthermore, various commissions have functioned independently because civil servants and the political, economic, and administrative elites generally adhered to the liberal values enshrined in the Constitution.

The Erosion of Democratic Integrity

It is not to say that all members of the elite have adhered strictly to the letter and spirit of the Constitution; indeed, various amendments have often undermined these core values. One such amendment granted the Executive the power to dismiss top civil servants in the “public interest.” In many cases, however, the true motive was simply to make space for political supporters. This shift has reduced many senior civil servants to pliant officers, often implementing the whims and caprices of politicians.

Consequently, some officers became political cronies, facilitating corrupt practices that became widespread between 2014 and 2024. Corrupt practices have always existed in Mauritius. It is well known that in the 1970s, ministers and MLAs were condemned for corrupt practices. However, the mechanisms meant to combat it have often been weakened. The Economic Crime Office was disbanded to provide political protection, and the ICAC, established to fight corruption, has been a lamentable failure.

In recent years, corruption has been practised on an unprecedented scale, with many court cases effectively swept under the carpet. While some ministers were forced to resign, others were not, and several cases never even reached the courtroom. Significant scandals, such as “St. Louis Gate” scandal, have seemingly faded from public discourse.

In many of these instances, members of the elite — caught in the whim of circumstance — proved unable to face temptation with moral courage or resistance. Instead, they yielded to the lure of “seductive lucre,” hoarding ill-gotten gains in foreign bank accounts or through property investments abroad.

The Power of Active Citizenship and Resilience

On the opposite side, lest we think that a democratic society hinges simply on the practices of the elite, our democracy has survived because of an active citizenship. This has expressed itself unambiguously not only at the ballot box but in the daily commitment of citizens to protect and defend their freedoms and values. Organisations of every hue — religious or secular — and numerous individuals have fought valiantly before and after independence to preserve democracy against all odds.

Group and mass protest marches, trade union strikes, party protests, the press, hunger strikes, court cases, social media, and even periods of unrest have all been employed consistently over the years. Without an active citizenship empowered by free education, our democratic system would not be as resilient as it is today — a vibrant democracy, well alive and kicking.

One can legitimately ask: would our democracy have survived without economic development, a welfare state, and a policy of multiculturalism? History shows that democracy has survived periods of low economic development in countries like Britain or France. However, in plural societies, one may argue that economic and social development help to sustain democracy, just as democracy helps to consolidate development. In the case of Mauritius, a mix of factors has shaped our resilience, perhaps the most important being enlightened political leadership.

Of course, not everything is perfect. As Churchill once said, democracy is not a perfect system of government, but it is the least flawed. The need for improving our democracy is a continuous exercise. We have learned over the last decade that democracy does not follow a path of linear progress. Our country is like a rowing boat; it requires constant effort to avoid stagnation and a slide backward in the economic, social, or political fields.

We have learned this lesson well in recent years. The pent-up resentment toward “unfreedom” finally burst forth in the 2025 general elections, allowing us to recover our democracy along with our liberty and freedom.

Mauritius Times ePaper Friday 12 March 2026