Dear Sir/ Madam,
The much-needed reforms in multiple walks of our nation’s life were clearly expressed by the landslide election results a few months ago, and it would thus be safe to say that most Mauritians agree deeply and inherently that one cannot move forward if we fail to identify, acknowledge and modify our said-major societal issues. The onus is thus on all of us, headed by those we chose to lead us, to manage such abscesses with tools that differ from those which caused such a catastrophic state in the first place.
Education with a big E, wellness (rather than sheer medical health), equity on par with equality, ecological awareness and respect for our earth, law and order alongside a justice that not only needs to be done, but be seen to be done, Realignment and prioritisation of the ethos of our work, our duties and entitlement… They all hold significant weightage in the ‘Grand Oeuvre’, but on this auspicious day, harbinger of a new beginning for our Chinese compatriots, allow me to address a serious snake-bite that has and still is wrecking the wooden parts of our Tree of Life: THE INCONGRUENCIES and PRACTICES of our POLICE OFFICERS and ‘apparent exemptions’ pertaining to their professional and personal status in a blatantly disrespectful manner.
In as much as there is no doubt that this noble and demanding profession, in its purest of essences, is meant to ‘protect and serve’ us, the people of the land, by use (and not abuse) of politically generated laws voted by MP’s whom we elected in power, and by jurisdiction of learned professionals of the law who ensure said laws are respected, it is sad to say that day-to-day observation of the practices of our MPF procures the total opposite effect. Instead of leading by example and ensuring that the layperson understands the whys and hows of imposed laws, instead of ensuring that they themselves do not condone in said practices for which they police us, it would seem that our police officers feel they are beyond law and confidently claim that they are exempt from abiding by said laws, without always being right about their perceived ‘privileged exemptions’.
* They feel justified in their ‘fast and furious’ driving on the pretext of emergencies (as if other professionals’ emergencies are less justified). I have lost count of the very common sight of our police cars, motorbikes and vans, overtaking on a white line, parking on double yellow lines, to then realise that their ‘rush’ was anything but a genuine professional cause.
* They don’t feel that the rule and rationale for NOT holding a mobile phone while THEY are driving, pertains to them, but are convinced about the logic and legality that everyone else should be arrested /fined if they do the same.
*They don’t seem to appreciate the difference between an exemption from wearing a seatbelt in very specific cases when their life can be endangered, for example, if a prisoner is in the car with them and can use the belt to attack them (like taxi drivers apparently also are?) and the insolent act of simply not wearing a seatbelt AT ALL when they drive official or personal vehicles.
Why? Because they say they are exempt. It is true that what is legal may not be synonymous with what is ethical, moral, religious, cultural or even logical.
But let’s stop for a short minute and try to understand ‘logically’ why wearing a seatbelt while driving or travelling in a car is highly recommended for ALL. It is the single most important protection of one’s own life in case of high impact road accidents. Common sense dictates that we should all do this anyway for our own good and thus declining this wisdom, the price to pay would be self-harm. If legal penalties and fines for not doing something whose consequences would harm us anyway, are imposed, then, one could beg the question as to why one has to doubly-penalise the said offender when he is already penalising himself by putting his life at risk by not wearing a seatbelt?
If the intent of the law was to protect us from harm, why then are there no penalties and fines for those who smoke knowingly in the fact that it harms our health, as clearly indicated on all cigarette boxes? Is it perchance related to monetary advantages?
And if the loose rationale given by some MPF members, even in the National Coast Guard or other rather quiet policing forces are to be heeded, they don’t wear belts because they may be called at any moment for an emergency and they need to get out of their cars fast. If so, are we suggesting that emergencies and quick exits are exclusive to policemen? How about all other frontliners, medical /nursing professionals, firemen etc…?
So …if we are supposed to logically wear a seat belt for our own good and protection, both as a driver and as a passenger and it is stipulated by law that we would be fined/arrested for not doing so, what’s so different about police officers who are legally exempt both when driving and as passengers? Why don’t they even wear a seat belt when ALONE in their police cars, with no near threats of danger within the vehicle?
Why do so many police officers drive their own private vehicles (with or without their uniforms) without a seatbelt? Surely, what’s good for the gander, should be good for the goose.
*They park when and where they wish; yellow lines included, enter ‘no-entry’ roads even in off-emergency scenarios, to literally cut corners and bypass slightly longer public roads. In Souillac, there is such a road leading to the Police Station, next to the central bus stop, that is deemed dangerous to accede to in one direction and thus not open to the public, but police cars or police officers driving their private cars to go to the station are exempt. Why? Because they are allowed to… Says who? Pa kone!
* They have no qualms about using the power associated with the act of wearing their uniforms to instil their personal interests ahead of their public duties, such as conducting parallel trades, within their working hours. Some run businesses related to their jobs, others run trades and businesses under ‘prête-noms’ of their partners but are physically present to run such businesses and offer their paid non-police services openly during hours of work when they should, ethically and administratively be serving our people, with respect for the badge they wear. The last example in kind was the Lube PC who was doing her shopping in Vacoas, in full DIP ashirwaad. If Missie Moustass clips are to be heeded.
* A few stories of police drink-driving and partner physical abuse are brought out and just as quickly stifled so as not to dishonour the profession, as are the well-known stories of end of month’s surge of excuses to fine the populace in hope of a lill ‘on the side’ income.
And to add insult to injury, just before last elections there was even a last-minute proposition by the then government, to significantly increase the pension and dues of widows and widowers of police officers to the detriment of all other front-liners. Les mauvaises langues auraient même pu conclure que c’était un pot de vin deguisé, because it is no secret that any Government is best served by an abiding and grateful police force that will collaborate. Great strategy until and unless both are aligned on the same noble mission of serving those who employ them, i.e. the people!
If it is true that we are all human beings and by definition will err, irrespective or creed status or profession, there is a difference between other professionals who indulge in the proverbial ‘faites ce que je vous dis, pas ce que je fais’ syndrome, and the police force. The latter’s ‘exemptions’ if truly valid legally, have direct consequences for the social fabric of our country which is already stretched in terms of finding valued and valid morals and ethics to move forward. A lawyer /doctor/manager/ economist who abuses his privileges and power can face retributions by instances set to maintain standards. But who polices our police?
Who ensures that they abide by the same rules and respect for the law that they are employed to help enforce on others? A Google search states there are regulatory bodies but any attempts at seeking information via the main MPF website have fallen by the wayside.
I was tempted on numerous occasions to write articles in line with above points on various platforms to elucidate clarity on the ownership of such ‘exemptions in law’ and on the wide preponderance of such suboptimal and almost ‘accepted’ behaviour, but was put off by the ‘Ayo pa vo lapenn. To pou zis fer bann-la rann to lavi amer’.
I then toyed with the idea of collecting evidence of such frequent abuse of power in my daily routine, since examples of such idiosyncrasies seem to find me and many in my circle of friends. Unfortunately, most episodes happen when I am driving and thus quasi-impossible to stop in a safe place, get my phone out to video what has lasted a split second. Moreover, I was led to understand that we were not ‘legally’ allowed to film police-officers, without their consent, even if they are condoning in a perceivably unconventional manner.
A doubt that dissipated in November 2024, on the eve of counting votes, when a clip showing ‘the Joes of Mauritius, vigilantes’ checking a police car, aided and abetted by a policeman on duty, who was holding a torch to allow laymen to check a police van!
I then double checked with a friend from the legal field who reassured me that filming police officers in a public place, and in a context of a public issue is NOT illegal.
This morning, I went for my bi-weekly stroll around Souillac, and met up with two separate events which highlighted my above concerns about inequities in our police system. Since I was walking, it became possible for me to catch such evidence on video, and both clips are still in my possession, unshared so far.
-
As I walked past the SBM cashpoint, around 07h40, I noticed a uniformed policeman in his private car, getting back in his vehicle after having used the machine and driving off without putting on his seatbelt. Since it was a one-way path, I knew he would be driving a bit later past me. I thus positioned myself in a way as to film him coming out onto and across the main road in Souillac, NOT wearing his seatbelt. Video saved with no immediate issues.
-
Went across to SNACK LEPEP, my rakhee bhaiya’s food and vegetable stall around 08h00 to clean up my brède chouchou bought earlier during my walk and from within the shop (which is also on Royal Road Souillac), I noted a police van coming in and parking itself in such a way that it was 3/4 on the parking slot and the rest of its tail out on the main road and crossing the double yellow line, clearly impeding access for pedestrians next to a zebra crossing. Since it was the hundredth time that I had witnessed such inequitable behaviour among police officers who, at best, slap us on the wrist for doing same and often even issue fines and tickets, and since I was in a position where I was still (not in my car) and able to collect such evidence, I went out and filmed what I felt was lawfully classified as improper parking. At that point I noted a female officer in the front passenger seat, using her phone. This video is still on my phone and also non-shared so far.
I walked back inside and a few minutes later, my Bhaya’s wife came up to me stating that two police officers outside had asked her to tell her employee (they assumed I was so) to come out and erase the video I had taken. I went out and the female officer very aggressively insisted I erased the clip I had taken, stating I was not allowed to film her since she was in the police vehicle. I asked her to state what law stated that I couldn’t film something public. She started shouting at me and told me she would take me to the police station if I didn’t comply. I calmly replied that I wish to know on what grounds and that I was calling my lawyer. The male officer also started threatening me and I asked them to quote to me what exact law was being infringed. The female officer said I didn’t need to know which and that was that. I again expressed knowing my rights and was told I was an ignorant so-and so. Verbatim ‘Ou pena ledikasion.’ I replied: ‘O fet mo enn dokter, spesialis ek nou pei inn mem dekor mwa pou travay patriotik ki mo’nn kontribie’. I think that kind of threw them off, since indeed I was dressed in basic house-wear and walking shoes. They started walking out of the snack and the male police officer got his phone out to video me. The ‘lady officer’ shouted out to the owners of the business (my bhaya and his wife) and threatened to boycott his snack because they had been challenged for what they didn’t acknowledge to be their fault. They both got into the car, and I put my video cam, back on and videoed the rest of the event as their car reversed onto the main road. I asked them if they thought it was OK for them to park so poorly and he replied: ‘Abe dir bann la fer enn parking pli gran. Pa mo fot, sa, si oblize park deor lor lari.’ To which I asked; ‘Abe si nou ki ti fer sa, ou pa ti pou fini donn nou warning la?’ He replied: ‘abe al fer zournalis alor, al met sa partou. To which I replied: ‘Kitfwa mo ava fer sa’.
I then asked ‘Kifer ou ena drwa ek nou, nou pa kapav?‘, to which he replied: ‘Abe vinn lapolis ou osi, koumsa ou osi ou ava ena drwa’. They drove off and he made a manual sign with his finger indicating that he thought I was mad, also caught on clip.
End of this second video clip perhaps, but unsure if this is the end of this story.
I am far from being naive enough to assume there will not be repercussions, especially since Souillac is a small close-knit community. I wouldn’t be surprised if I will now be targeted by colleagues who will watch out for my most minor mistakes like a hawk and ensure that I ‘payback’ for having dared challenge their collective authority and for daring to express my thoughts and to know my rights.
But this incident, this last drop that has caused an overflow of my vase of agroes, and my frustrations with the opacity and perceived discrepancies in behaviour and privileges of our police officers has prompted me to write this letter, even now unsure of whom to address it to. I tried getting the details of the Divisional Commander Southern section on 6274682 but I guess at 08h30 on a public holiday, he might not be in. Tried the chief clerk number (6277344) provided by the MPF website ( 2081212) and even the Deputy Divisional Commander, to no avail.
I am thus composing this note and will publish it on social media and in parallel, try to see if it can be posted in one of our public newspapers, hopefully awaiting guidance from the concerned authorities, with regards to how to gain public clarity on a subject that warrants a good introspection. I daresay police-work should perhaps include in its curriculum INSPECTION as much as INTROSPECTION.
By no means does this mean that other areas are devoid of issues. If anything, the adage ‘let him who has never sinned cast the first stone’ holds very true.
All professions and their workforce (being human) will have their weaknesses and far from it to accuse the whole system or this specific group. Nonetheless it is fair to say that the impact of an unfair use of power by a few, against the many is less palatable when the said structure is supposed to implement security stability and respect all the while abiding by Law and Order.
There’s hoping that the Latin saying ORDO AB CHAOS holds weightage. That out of Chaos, Order will emerge finally. There’s hoping that someone out there could answer the above questions and doubts by a repartee, other than ‘pas mwa/nou, li sa’, passing the buck in this blur. Here’s hoping that the average Mauritian law-abiding citizen finds some degree of logic and clear explanation as to why our police officers do exactly the opposite of what they impose on us and why there are exemptions and who decides on the details of such exemptions?? Our MPs? our Legal structures? the Police force itself?
Here’s hoping that in the context of the abolition of slavery, there will be a ray of hope that those who have pledged to serve and protect us, won’t hold us enslaved in their games of power and control.
Any reasoned and reasonable explanations will be most welcome, to help me smooth out my difficulties accepting those clear disparities in our system.
Yours sincerely.
Dr Zeennat Aumeerally
CSK, MRCOG
Consultant Obstetrician and Gynaecologist
Trustee and Founder of the Morisien San Frontier Charitable Trust Fund