Beyond Polls and Predictions: Understanding the Mauritian Voter

Politics

The Mauritian electorate remains an enigma, but it is neither dormant nor indifferent to its vital interests

By Sada Reddi

Election results invariably trigger a range of comments and opinions. Observers and the public alike, across mainstream and social media, hasten to interpret the electorate’s decisions and abstentions in the recent municipal elections. These diverse perspectives each contain a degree of validity, and this article is no exception. However, achieving a consensus on electoral behaviour, whether at the national or regional level, remains a significant challenge. Indeed, the Mauritian electorate remains an enigma which political scientists are at pains to decipher. How the electorate reaches its decision in the secrecy of the polling booth may never be known, as it is shaped by so many different factors, although the results may indicate certain trends.

It is argued in some cases that the electorate makes up its mind long before the start of the election campaign, especially if party politics and party allegiance are strong and issues appear crucial for the electorate. In other cases, some find that decisions are reached on the eve of election day or even on the day itself, shaped by party campaigning and marketing. This is not an unfamiliar story, as in many countries even credible and impartial polls get it completely wrong, for they are incapable of gauging the changing mood of the electorate, and even when the electorate is divided along party lines, the segment not sympathetic or affiliated to any party may decide the outcome in a First-Past-The-Post electoral system.

For example, the last three general elections were exemplary gambles. One remembers well that in 2014, the alliance of two mainstream parties suffered unexpected defeat, and the numbers did not add up in defiance of the forecasts of armchair political observers. When the strategy was changed in 2019, and two mainstream parties tried their luck separately, they still did not make it. Yet in 2024, the same alliance of 2014, with some contribution from small parties, was successful in flushing out the incumbent alliance with a surprising 60-zero victory, although the prospect of such an outcome was envisaged in some quarters one year before the general election. How and why the victory of 2024 was so overwhelming remains elusive, though with hindsight it is easy to draw a few tentative and unverifiable conclusions in the absence of exit polls.

When confronted with the results of elections, party leaders and political observers in the victorious camp have been quick to view the electorate in glowing terms as the “admirable people” or invest them with a strong sense of nationhood, but defeat, politicians privately resort to negative labels for the electorate, though they avoid doing so publicly due to future electoral needs.

The electorate has often been defined as fickle when they alternate their votes between different alliances, though in the Westminster system of government this is what is expected of them; the opposition party represents an alternative government to be decided at the polls. Others consider the government as their patrimony and the electorate as their clients who owe them undivided loyalty, and in the hour of defeat, find the electorate ungrateful. However, oblivious to crafty discourses and gifting at election times, the electorate remains the decisive voice in democratic politics.

In the recent municipal elections, observers and members of the public may continue to lament at the behaviour of the electorate, blaming them for high absenteeism — about 1 in 4 decided to cast their vote — imputing their absence to the lack of political values, apathy, selfishness, and devoid of any sense of civic responsibility. What is overlooked is that the electorate knows best what its interests are and when to act.

After 10 preceding years of perversity, when an economic and political oligarchy had configured public offices as occasions for private enrichment, the electorate, having colluded in creating the mess, rose to the occasion to deal such a death blow to the previous government that it would not even appear in the municipal elections. Despite the usual warning to the contrary, it may never reappear in the political landscape with its current leadership. As the investigative bodies continue to expose the layers of corruption, revealing the rot of a regime where civic responsibility was supplanted by insatiable greed, wonders how many tainted politicians will survive in politics, burdened by the millstones around their necks. Unsurprisingly, having fulfilled its primary duty in the general elections – ousting a corrupt regime – the electorate did not feel obligated to participate in the municipal elections, considering the most crucial task complete.

Nevertheless, municipal elections have rarely mobilized the electorate, not only because the stakes have historically been low, but also because local government institutions remain centralized. With budgets dependent on central government, citizens perceive that municipal administration has little impact on their lives compared to the national level. Furthermore, four critical areas of citizen concern — education, health, employment, and environment — fall outside the municipality’s purview. Having elected the central government, many citizens fail to see the importance of municipal elections. While this attitude is misguided, they are not entirely to blame as long as local government remains unresponsive to numerous local issues.

A genuine reform of local government could invigorate the democratic process at the local level and foster greater participation in local politics. Why couldn’t the structure of the Rodrigues Regional Assembly be replicated in municipal and district councils? Establishing distinct commissions tailored to the specific needs of different municipalities and districts would be better positioned to address local problems and respond to the population’s needs than centralized bodies. Too often, when local issues arise, municipalities absolve themselves of responsibility and refer the matter to ministries that typically fail to act.

A case in point is when residents decried the construction of buildings lacking proper sewage systems near streams in Hermitage, a situation that would inevitably pollute the waters flowing into Bagatelle Dam. The municipality disclaimed responsibility, stating it fell under the purview of the Ministries of Health and Environment, seemingly oblivious to the fact that communities in lower Plaines Wilhems rely on Bagatelle Dam for drinking water. Similarly, regarding traffic congestion in Hermitage, citizens had to engage directly with the Ministry of Transport and the RDA to advocate for a new branch road because the municipality proved ineffective.

However apathetic or indifferent the electorate may appear at local elections, it would be a mistake to underestimate their potential reaction to certain issues. Politicians and political parties are well aware of this, which explains the persistent resistance to electoral reforms. A significant political issue has the power to rouse the electorate from its apparent lethargy and become a subject of intense debate.

This is what would likely occur if the best loser system were abolished without strong proven safeguards for minority communities. Even if it is subsumed under different guises and does not meet the expectations of important segments of the electorate in its essence, such a change would have very little chance of succeeding. A majority in the Assembly would be a flimsy base to make changes which the electorate perceives as its vital interests. When these fundamental interests are at stake, the electorate can be remarkably effective, as demonstrated in the 2024 elections. Therefore, it is always prudent to engage the electorate when discussing critical issues.

The Mauritian electorate remains an enigma, but it is neither dormant nor indifferent to its vital interests.

Mauritius Times ePaper Friday 9 May 2025