First Reading On motion made and seconded, the following bills were read a first time – (i) The Police (Amendment) Bill (No. XXVII of 2025) (ii) The Courts (Amendment) Bill (No. XXVIII of 2025). Second reading THE POLICE (AMENDMENT) BILL (No. XXVII of 2025) Order for Second Reading read. (4.58 p.m.)

Madam Speaker, I beg to move that the Police (Amendment) Bill (No. XXVII of 2025) be read a second time. Madam Speaker, the Police (Amendment) Bill (No. XXVII of 2025), this Police (Amendment) Bill (No. XXVII of 2025) is both urgent and historic in its purpose. It is designed not merely to amend the law but to redefine the capacity of our Police Force, restore public confidence, and correct the systemic failings that have hindered police inquiries and ultimately plagued delivering justice in our country for far too long. The Police Act of 1974 has been the foundation of policing in Mauritius for over fifty years. While this legislation at the time served our nation well, the nature of crime has changed dramatically since its enactment. Today, the Police Force faces unprecedented challenges posed by transnational and technology-driven offences. These crimes are complex, sophisticated, and often borderless, exploiting globalisation and technology in ways that outstrip the reach of conventional investigative methods and local resources alone. Under Section 9 of the Police Act, one of the primary duties of the Police is to prevent and detect offences. This provision was drafted at a time when criminal activity was largely localised, and investigations could be conducted within familiar parameters. However, offences such as drug trafficking, human trafficking, money laundering, cybercrime, and other complex criminal enterprises have become increasingly prevalent. These are not only sophisticated in execution but also frequently involve networks operating across multiple jurisdictions, leveraging advanced technology and financial instruments to evade detection. Criminal organisations have grown, we all know, in sophistication, and without modern tools, Mauritius is falling behind in the fight against these threats. The investigations of serious and long-standing unresolved cases, such as the Kistnen case, the Nadine Dantier case, and other cold cases, are often beyond the capacity of local expertise alone. These are intricate matters that require specialised skills and a knowledge of how to deploy them, for example in digital forensics, communications technology and financial analysis, skills that, without external support, are not practically available locally. The existing Police Act does not provide the Commissioner with the authority to engage foreign investigative expertise, and as a result, local officers, despite their dedication and professionalism, have at times been constrained in their ability to resolve these cases efficiently. This limitation has not only delayed justice but, in some instances, allowed criminals and their networks to operate with impunity, undermining both public confidence and national security. Madam Speaker, the House will recall the Kistnen case, an MSM Political agent, a matter that has long symbolised the failures, or should I say deliberate failures, of the previous regime. Under the former government, this inquiry was mismanaged and deliberately misled the public, with critical leads ignored, investigative protocols circumvented, and opportunities to bring clarity to the matter squandered. What was clearly a case of homicide was made to appear to be a case of suicide. Had the people not booted them out, it would have remained a case of suicide. Nobody would have known. No further investigation would have been made and that would have been that. The very able magistrate who presided the Judicial Inquiry was as reported in the press unforgiving about how the police who investigated the case were unprofessional and I recall what was said on the case: it marks a new level of incompetence. So, incompetent they were. Families of the victim were left in anguish – no answers, there was no closure and public confidence in the integrity of law enforcement was severely eroded. This Government, in contrast, is determined to rectify those past mistakes, ensuring that every aspect of the investigation is conducted transparently, professionally, and in full accordance with the law. We already know and I mentioned it the other day that forensic experts abroad have already concluded that it was not suicide but murder. By empowering the Police to retain specialised investigative officers from overseas in serious and complex cases, we will contribute to restoring institutional rigour into important police inquiries and we will finally pursue justice in cases that the previous administration tried to cover up. Bringing in experts from abroad with specialised skills, independence and international experience to assist our police in the reopening of this case and in other major inquiries, will make possible the pursuit of all leads available and the thorough investigation of matters, which by reason of passage of time, may become very difficult to unravel. I will give you an example – and I have witnessed this – for example, somebody tried to destroy his mobile phone. He burnt the phone and threw it in the sea. This was found by the police – I am talking about the police in UK – the phone was destroyed by fire; they managed to get the information out of that phone. We intend to do this here as well, with their expertise. Just as those whose loved ones are affected by disease, the victims of those who were injured or affected by crime, could not care less about the identity or the nationality of the police officers who bring them assistance in their hour of need and find out who is guilty. They cry out for justice. This is what matters to them. Who is finding out does not matter for them. This is what we are trying to do. Just like my hon. friends who are doctors here. When somebody is very ill, you not go and see from which community he belongs or which colour he is. You want the best doctor. This is exactly what we are doing here with the police force. This measure and the radical and far- reaching reforms we will bring forward in the coming months, will provide us with the best chance of answering their cries. The proposed amendment to Section 22 of the Police Act directly addresses these challenges. A new subsection (1A) is being introduced, which provides that – (a) The Commissioner of Police may retain the services of foreign specialised investigative officers to carry out complex or serious criminal inquiries. This does not prevent a local policeman to be there but he may retain the services of a foreign specialised investigating officer. (b) Such officers shall act under the direction and control of the Commissioner of Police or any other police officer designated by him. (c) The specialised investigative officers will have no powers of arrest, and (d) Eligibility to serve as a specialised investigative officer will be restricted to persons who have served in a foreign law enforcement authority and who have demonstrated specialist expertise in the type of inquiry for which their services are retained. Madam Speaker, I stress that these foreign specialised investigative officers will be under the direct control of the Commissioner of Police or any other police officer designated by him. They will not be able to initiate or decide upon any police inquiry but will instead carry out specific, complex or serious criminal inquiries as directed by the Commissioner of Police or any police officer designated by the Commissioner. As I mentioned, these foreign specialised investigative officers will have no powers of arrest and as I have said, this reform is part of a broader legislative and institutional programme that we shall bring forward shortly, that will transform our law enforcement, strengthen the rule of law and restore institutional integrity. It complements the recent interim amendments to the Financial Crimes Commission Act of 2023, which were immediately necessary to address the deliberate and structural weaknesses inserted and inherited from the previous administration. Under the previous Government, investigations into complex financial crimes were frequently delayed, completely mismanaged or allowed to stagnate, owing to overlapping mandates, unclear line of accountability and frequent confusion over prosecutorial authority. Cases went unresolved for years, creating a perception that financial and other malfeasance could occur with impunity. The FCC amendments have corrected these failings decisively. By restoring the primacy of the Director of Public Prosecutions, those amendments ensured that prosecutions are coherent, consistent and subject to rigorous oversight. Cooperation between the police and the FCC has now been strengthened, closing loopholes that previously allowed suspects to evade justice. Above all our reforms, we will signal to the public that no person, however influential, is beyond scrutiny and that our institutions are capable of acting decisively and independently. These measures are more than technical adjustments; they are systemic corrections of past errors, restoring integrity and public trust in the administration of justice. Madam Speaker, let me be clear: this Government is not merely tinkering with the law. We are correcting the failures of the past, restoring professionalism and accountability and sending a clear message. Mauritius will no longer tolerate delays, inefficiency or institutional inadequacy. Families of victims will be concerned about the integrity of our institutions and our international partners must have confidence that justice will be delivered, the rule of law will be upheld and justice will be delivered on time, not in ten years’ time as we have seen these days. This Bill aligns fully with the Government Programme of 2025-2029 which commits to modernising our institutions, enhancing law enforcement capacity and reinforcing public trust. By enabling the engagement of international experts, strengthening investigative capacities, and linking reforms to broader legislative measures such as the FCC amendments and the coming law enforcement transformation, we will ensure that our law enforcement agencies are prepared for the challenges of the modern criminal landscape. In conclusion, Madam Speaker, this Police (Amendment) Bill is necessary now so that critical inquiries can benefit from the expertise it will enable the police to bring to bear. It empowers the Commissioner of Police to take effective action in cases of complex crimes, addresses unresolved cold cases and strengthens institutional integrity while helping to restore the public faith in justice. It complements recent legal changes that have corrected systemic failings and prepares the ground for our further transformative reforms which will firmly situate Mauritius as a nation where the rule of law is paramount and where justice is timely, independent and impartial. This is our contract with the country, Madam Speaker, and the Bill shows that we shall not flinch from fulfilling that promise. For these reasons, Madam Speaker, I commend the Bill to the House. The Deputy Prime Minister rose and seconded.

Thank you. Hon. Seeburn, yes! (5.10 p.m.) Mr M. Seeburn (Second Member for Vieux Grand Port & Rose Belle): Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I rise today in full support of the proposed Police (Amendment) Bill introduced by the hon. Prime Minister. This Bill has a profound importance to the functioning of the law enforcement in our Republic. This Bill comes at a time when we must strengthen the capacity of the Mauritius Police Force to deal with increasingly complex forms of crime while ensuring that the rights of individuals remain protected, upholding our democratic institutions and the rule of law. The existing Police Act does not allow the Commissioner of Police to engage or retain services of foreign investigators as the hon. Prime Minister said earlier. Madam Speaker, henceforth this Bill will empower the Commissioner of Police to retain services of foreign specialised investigative officers under its direction and control, so as to enhance the investigative capacity of the police in dealing with enquiries in serious and complex criminal cases and put a clear and transparent process within the bounds of our constitutional right, so as to modernise and restructure the police work. I strongly believe, Madam Speaker, that this can mark a positive step in the renewal of our justice system that fosters public confidence. This is more than a legal reform as it says to every Mauritian, rich or poor, powerful or ordinary that in our Republic, the law stands above all to serve the vulnerable and uphold the rule of law. Madam Speaker, justice has no borders. In today’s world, crime does not stop at our shores. We face frequent criminal cyber intrusions, international money laundering and drug trafficking leading to violent criminal offenses. We heard earlier in the House the Statement of the hon. Prime Minister, highlighting the legacy of drug problems left by the previous Government, which is alarming and needs to be tackled urgently. This Bill sends a strong signal to the public that this Government intends to keep pace with those developments. This is about acquiring expertise and not interference. By bringing in foreign investigators under the supervision of the Commissioner of Police, our officers will be acquiring specialised knowledge and best international practice to deal with complex cases that require advanced technical and foreign expertise which will, ultimately, serve the public interest and the fight for justice in Mauritius. Madam Speaker, public trust is essential. When citizens believe that police investigations are competent, fair and transparent, they are more likely to cooperate. The Bill provides the opportunity for the Mauritius Police Force to demonstrate that competence and fairness. The Bill recognises the need to reform our investigative capacity in complex criminal cases, and this is consistent with a broader shift towards aligning our system with international standards that will enhance public confidence so that every investigation is impartial, thorough and beyond suspicion. Madam Speaker, this Bill serves as a stepping stone towards a more comprehensive reform with a prudent approach, ensuring that there is institutional clarity and competence to meet the end of justice. Specialised foreign investigators will work hand in hand with our national police. They will transfer knowledge. They will share techniques and this will enhance our local capacity so that in time, our own officers can handle even the most sophisticated crimes. Madam Speaker, this Bill provides for the foreign specialised investigative officers to act under the direction and control of the Commissioner of the Mauritius Police Force to carry out police enquiries in complex criminal cases. The Bill does not create any parallel avenue beyond normal oversight simply because experts are foreign. The Bill ensures that those assisting have limited scope. As noted, they will have no powers of arrest and they will properly integrate under the Police Commissioner’s direction. Madam Speaker, this approach shows that Mauritius is confident, and not insecure. We are a mature democracy, promoting transparency and accountability. We are ready to face the truth, whatever it may be. This is the mark of a strong and responsible nation. Madam Speaker, the objective of our Government is simple: no crime, no matter how complex, powerful or hidden, can go undetected or unpunished. By welcoming foreign expertise and cooperation, we are sending a clear message that in Mauritius, justice will always prevail. Madam Speaker, in an era where criminality is complex and serious, we must ensure that justice remains one step ahead. Retaining foreign investigators is not a sign of weakness, but rather a sign of wisdom. It gives our citizens confidence that every investigation will be fair, transparent and professional. This is how we strengthen our institutions – by learning, by collaborating and by never compromising on the truth. This Bill should not be viewed in isolation. It sits within the broader reform agenda of the Government in modernising the criminal justice process in complex cases. Madam Speaker, allow me further to address a matter of great importance: the proposal to retain services of foreign investigators within our national system of law enforcement is not a question of capacity, but rather it is a question of credibility and collaboration. The world of crime today has changed. Criminal networks are sophisticated, transnational and often backed by vast financial resources, making it more difficult for our local investigators to gather evidence. To fight them effectively, Mauritius must be ready to tap into global expertise as a demonstration of strength and transparency. Madam Speaker, let me say that we are proud of our dedicated local investigators, but when we invite foreign experts to collaborate in complex, serious criminal cases, we are not undermining our police force. We are, in fact, empowering it. Foreign investigators will bring specialised knowledge and advanced technology with international best practices that can enhance our local investigations and help to build the capacity of our own officers through skills transfer and joint operations. In a democracy, justice must not only be done. It must be seen to be done. Madam Speaker, by involving independent experts in criminal cases, we are sending a clear signal to our citizens and to the international community, that Mauritius has nothing to hide, that we are committed to uncovering the truth, and that no crime will go undetected or unpunished regardless of who is involved. This amendment will, therefore, strengthen public confidence in our institutions and reinforce the reputation of Mauritius as a country governed by the rule of law. This Bill makes it clear that such collaboration will remain under the full authority and supervision of the Commissioner of Police. The sovereignty of Mauritius will never be compromised. The foreign officers will strictly operate within the legal framework and for the specific purposes authorised under this Bill. Madam Speaker, we are not alone with this amendment to the legislation. Even the greatest nations in the world, like the United Kingdom, the United foreign investigators in the interest of truth and justice. They did so not because their institutions were weak, but because they were strong enough to be transparent. Mauritius can do same with confidence and without hesitation. Madam Speaker, before I conclude, I wish to place on record my sincere thanks to the hon. Prime Minister for his leadership, vision and determination in bringing this important amendment to the Police Act before the House. It is about protecting our citizens, our families and our democracy. It shows that this Government has the courage to act when it matters most in defence of justice. It reflects a clear and courageous vision – a vision of a Mauritius where law enforcement is modern, professional and accountable, where justice is above politics and where no crime can go undetected. This is the kind of reform that strengthens our democracy and reassures our people, where they can have full confidence in the institutions that protect them. Madam Speaker, I truly believe that one day, history will remember this reform as a turning point where Mauritius chose to strengthen the rule of law to open itself to global expertise, and to reaffirm that justice in our country is firm and fearless. We are moving forward in building a nation where our citizens feel protected, where institutions are trusted and where the guilty can no longer hide in the shadows. I, therefore, urge all the Members of this House to come together in support of this Bill so as to make our country safer, stronger and prouder. Madam Speaker, with these words, I thank you.

Thank you. Hon. Junior Minister! (5.20 p.m.) The Junior Minister of Foreign Affairs, Regional Integration and International Trade (Mr H. Narsinghen): Madam Speaker, thank you for giving me the floor. Let me explain the context prompting the presentation of the Bill of today. Madam Speaker, let me remind Members of the House that 11 November, in a way, is the liberation day. You know fully why it is the liberation day. We must thank the enlightened electorate, as mentioned by the Prime Minister, which has uprooted the unprecedented dictatorship and rogue state put in place by the previous regime. The black period of our history was marred also by alleged extrajudicial killings like the case of late Mr Kistnen, as alluded by the Prime Minister. Not only Mr Kistnen, but also, late Mr Kanakiah and Mrs Mooniaruth, and so many others. We have witnessed, unfortunately, unprecedented alleged judicial killings which have not been elucidated. Here, I reiterate my sympathies and condolences to the bereaved families. I use the term ‘alleged extrajudicial killings’ but let us see the findings of the bold magistrate regarding the judicial inquiry which took place and which speaks volume and speaks for itself. In a nutshell, Madam Speaker, the bold magistrate found that the death was not a suicide. She described the case as a clear case of criminal homicide and our Prime Minister mentioned about murder, possibly there was murder. The inquiry report also criticised, don’t forget, the conduct of the police investigation. We all know that there were attempts of cover-up. We all know that Mr Kistnen was a prime political agent in No.8. The Magistrate qualified the handling of the case by the police in a very strong term as “abhorrent”, that is, repugnant. It marked unprecedented incompetence and attempts to cover up. Who attempted to cover up? You all know who attempted to cover. Who wanted to be Prime Minister and judge at the same time? The report found serious deficiencies, missing footage, poor management of evidence, defalcation of papers in the hands of the victim. In light of the report, the DPP, as you know, intimated the police to carry out in-depth inquiry. Unfortunately, this was not carried out. Our actual Prime Minister promised to rope in foreign investigators and this is being done today. We have to walk the talk. The number of speakers during previous debates mentioned about that. This was being done in the past on an unofficial and ad hoc basis without the proper legal framework and safeguard measures. For example, in the past, if we were having recourse to foreign investigators, unfortunately, evidence of such investigators could not be admissible. Now, the objective of the Bill, you will see that the Police (Amendment) Bill represents an important opportunity to modernise our investigative system and very important is to restore public confidence in our law enforcement. While some police officers, we have to acknowledge, display courage and dedication in their daily duties, unfortunately, some do not do the same. The reality, Madam Speaker, is that our investigative framework remains outdated in many respects. We continue to rely excessively on confessions and provisional charges, often at the expense of robust evidence-based investigations and I lay emphasis on this concept of evidence-based investigations which is very important. When confessions are later retracted or declared inadmissible, unfortunately cases collapse. The over-reliance on confessions, you will see, Madam Speaker, reflects systemic shortcomings. Insufficient training in investigative technics and also a lack of advanced forensic capacity and limited access to modern equipment. Our training system although improving over time still does not provide officers with specialised competency-based development in investigation and in many advanced jurisdictions, detectives must follow clear professional pathways that include modules in crime scene management, digital forensics, financial investigations and evidence handling. It is true that we have many capable and qualified officers, including more than 500 with degrees in Police Studies and Law. At one time, as the head of the Law Department, with the Mauritius Police Force, the University of Portsmouth and the blessings of Mr Dan Bhima and the CP, Mr Gopalsingh and also Dr. Navinchandra Ramgoolam who was then Prime Minister and, of course, still Prime Minister, we trained more than 350 policers, crowned with a BSc in Police Studies. Unfortunately, what we have seen over the years, they are too often underutilised and seldom promoted to positions of command, based on merit and competence. This must change and we are here to build a credible, modern police force and also a more modern investigative force. People with qualification, Madam Speaker, and experience, should get fast-track promotion like it was done with cadet inspectors. And, I would recommend here a two tiers system of recruitment and promotion. It is important, I believe, that on one hand we focus more on physical criteria and possibly lower qualifications and I would make that special recommendation to the Prime Minister but on the other hand, it is also important to focus for some people, especially those in the investigative department to focus more on qualifications, IQ and experience and possibly then lesser physical qualities. Another very important point, Madam Speaker, we find out that in Mauritius for many years, there have been major limitations in our forensic infrastructure. Mauritius depends heavily on the Forensic Science Laboratory which certainly plays a crucial role but lacks the full range of specialisation found in modern forensic institutes. Forensic medicine, DNA analysis, digital forensics and ballistics are areas that demand continuous investment in both people and technology. A well-equipped forensic laboratory, independent, very important, accredited and technologically advanced is vital for building cases that can stand up in court. Without it, even the best intention investigations are hamstrung by the lack of scientific support. Now, what we also see that we have to address in the future, we must also acknowledge a shortage of modern investigative tools, for example, 3D scenes scanners, digital evidence laboratories to proper crime scene mapping and also imaging equipment. These technologies, Madam Speaker, are standard in leading agencies, not only to enhance accuracy but also to ensure transparency and accountability. I am sure in the future, besides trying to rope in foreign investigators, we have also to embrace international best practices and see the role models internationally but also at the regional level. There is much we can learn from international best practices and certainly the Prime Minister referred before to the United Kingdom and also, I will also refer to Netherlands, not only the United Kingdom, Singapore, Germany, stand out as global leaders in investigative science and technics. The United Kingdom, as you know, through Scotland Yard and the College of Policing pioneered the PEACE Model of investigative interviewing, an evidence-based approach, that avoids coercion and focuses more on reliable, admissible statements. The Netherland, as you know, holds one of the world’s most sophisticated forensic institute, the NFI which integrates over 40 forensic disciplines with a rigorous, very important, quality control framework. Singapore also has invested massively in digital and forensic innovation through its home team science and technology agency. While Germany’s federal criminal office, once one of the world’s most comprehensive forensic systems serving as a model of scientific integrity and efficiency. Now, we should not only look at the European countries, I think also within Africa, South Africa offers a useful regional reference. Despite its challenges, South Africa possesses, as you know, Madam Speaker, the continent’s most advanced forensic and digital investigative capacity, particularly through the Hawks Directorate of Priority Crime Investigation and I believe that targeted cooperation with South Africa, especially in areas like DNA and organised crime investigations could bring practical regional benefits. Now, at the same time, that we are trying to rope in foreign investigators, it is important to have the proper regulation and also domestic oversight. That’s said, any collaboration with foreign investigators must be strictly regulated and this is what has been done by the Prime Minister and his team who prepared the law. Their role should be, I lay emphasis on that, to support, not to supplement, not to supplant our national institutions. They must operate under the clear authority and the supervision of the Commissioner of Police and Senior Mauritian Officers. Foreign investigators should have no powers of arrest – this was mentioned rightly so and hammered by the hon. Prime Minister – no powers of search and seizure. The mandate must remain very technical and advisory. All evidences collected or processed must comply fully with the Mauritian law, a Chain of Custody protocols must be safeguarded by our own officers. Recourse to foreign investigators does not mean to flout the golden principle of rule of law and also, I will hammer that we have to be fully compliant with human rights. We have to reconcile the tracking of crimes and also respect for human rights is of utmost importance. We have to comply with section 10 of the Constitution. In short, foreign assistance must serve our sovereignty but not certainly to weaken it. So, advance investigative techniques can and must coexist with constitutional safeguards. Modern policing in democratic societies depends not on coercion but on precision, on science, documentation and respect for the due process of law. Every foreign expert deployed in Mauritius must therefore comply with our own legal standards and the universal principles of justice and dignity. Now, obviously, there is the clear intention of Government to seek foreign investigators. In spite of the intention, there was no legal framework to rope in foreign investigators; now this is being done. The Government has already expressed its readiness to seek foreign expertise from renowned agencies such as Scotland Yard, but also from other countries, not only Scotland Yard. We have good experts from India, from South Africa, especially in serious and sensitive cases, for example, the unresolved matters involving late Mr Kistnen, Mr Kanakiah and so many others. These cases, Madam Speaker, unfortunately, have deeply affected public confidence. This was mentioned by my colleagues. It is right that the hon. Prime Minister intends to demonstrate that such alleged crimes will not go uninvestigated. The involvement of respected foreign experts in these specified cases would show that Mauritius, the government, means business and is serious about transparency and accountability. Now, we have to be careful. It does not mean that if we are amending the law, this is a panacea or a miracle solution. Obviously, it is not a miracle solution. However, we must be clear, recourse to foreign investigators will solve to a great extent our problems. Lasting progress will come only and I lay emphasis on that, through structural reforms and also massive investment at home. This will take time inevitably. That means building our own forensic capacity, modernising our equipment, professionalising our investigative ranks. It also means rewarding merit over political affiliation, over community or creed. The future of policing Mauritius must be based competency and integrity.

Hon. Junior Minister, time is almost up, please.

Yes. So, thank you for your attention, Madam Speaker. I will rest my submission here and I commend the Bill.

Thank you. Hon. Minister, Mr Pentiah. We all keep an eye on the time. (5.36 p.m.)

Madam Speaker, I start by quoting – “The object of this Bill is to amend the Police Act so as to empower the Commissioner of Police.” This, Madam Speaker, speaks of itself, the very object of today’s Bill before the House. I stand, Madam Speaker, to contribute in today’s debate on the Police (Amendment) Bill (No. XXVII of 2025) before the House which is far more than a technical amendment. It stands as an essential component of this Government’s broader reform agenda aimed at modernising, professionalising and restoring public confidence in our law enforcement institutions. This Bill may appear simple in its form, yet it carries with it profound moral and institutional significance. It reflects this Government’s resolve to restore justice, accountability and the rule of law particularly in the wake of heinous, unsolved crimes that have for too long haunted our conscience as a nation. How can we not feel for the families of the public officers who lost their lives in suspicious circumstances, to say the least. The following names come to mind, Madam Speaker. Jhurry Vijay Anand, 18 June 2020, falling at Medine Mews building in Port-Louis, from the 11th floor. He was a Procurement Officer at the NDU at the time. The report described the incident as ‘décès après une chute’ rather than a clear suicide or deliberate act, reported Le Mauricien of the date. Late Sarah Boitieux, again 2020. She was at the time working as a typist and administrative employee at the then Prime Minister’s Office. She was found with a scarf around her neck, hanging by the handle of a cabinet in the kitchen. That also in the wake of all the discrepancies and unequivocally questionable incidents concerning procurement incidents. Her death occurred within days of several other suspicious deaths of civil servants in the late 20s. We have mentioned the case of Pravin Kanakiah. Some commentators on this case linked Boitieux’s death to a wider set of suspicious deaths among others. Madam Speaker, speaking of Pravin Kanakiah, besides of what was said about him, let me please bring this before the House. His body was found on 11 December 2020 at La Roche-qui- Pleure with a different set of clothes that he was found in Reduit at his workplace. The official autopsy carried by Dr. Sudesh Kumar Gungadin, attributed the cause of death to a traumatic subarachnoid haemorrhage, i.e. bleeding in the brain due to trauma. This was reported in the media. An investigation by the MCIT and subsequent judicial inquiry were opened to clarify the circumstances. During the hearings, the medical experts gave evidence that the injuries were consistent with blunt forced trauma rather than natural cause of suicide alone. I quote – “The victim had 16 injuries on the body. The victim was already dead when the body fell into the water. This is not a case of drowning.” Dr. Gungadin reported in 5-Plus. Yet, the police still maintain the official line that the death is a suicide. The ….. said, and I quote – “The Police studied for different possibilities and avenues before concluding to suicide.” despite the medical evidences casting doubt. Madam Speaker, we mentioned the case of Mrs Mooniaruth. Mrs Mooniaruth, once more, was concerned with cases of procurement. She climbed on a chair at the roof of the Registrar Building and then jumped off that. What is deplorable about the circumstances of this sad incident is that the then Minister of Public Service came to this House and revealed alleged confidential medical report of the late person. It was allegedly said that this person was suffering from depression. The family stood strong to deny such claims. This person’s case is still unresolved. Madam Speaker, we have the case of – finally, I must say, I shall add to it –Mr Kanakiah and of Mr Soopramanien Kistnen.

Mr Kistnen.

This case was in 2020. The backdrop of all the cases brings this case into another aspect and forces us to look at it from this perspective. Mr Kistnen was no one else, but the agent of the MSM in Constituency No.8, Moka and Quartier Militaire. He was no one else, but who worked closely day in, day out with the then Prime Minister, Pravind Jugnauth. It at his place that they sat for tea and for breaks. It is his family who catered for them as well as Mr Sawmynaden and Mrs Luchoomun. Yet,this person’s body was found in a field calcinated. Rather hastily, the police, at the time, classified the case as a suicide case. Had it not been for a competent member of the bench, had it not been for a magistrate who feared nothing, had it not been for a magistrate who was in search of the truth, the judicial inquiry would have perhaps stayed at a stage of suicide! She uncovered and revealed to us the failings of a system of investigation. The hon. Prime Minister mentioned the word ‘deliberate’ earlier on. I believe he was not deliberate in mentioning the word ‘deliberate.’ This is, in fact, palpable, open and shut, deliberately closing a case when it should not be closed. Madam Speaker, such cases, such instances, such heinous crimes call upon us to be cautious to answer to the legitimate expectations of the people of our country. The Government stands resolute in its commitment to bring perpetuators to justice and to uphold a zero-tolerance policy against crime, corruption and impunity. A pledge made to the people, who with faith and conviction, renewed their trust with us. How symbolic it is, Madam Speaker, that this Bill is being presented on 11 November – a day that coincides exactly one year after the landslide victory at the elections of November 2024 of the people of our country. A victory of renewal. A victory of integrity. A victory of hope. Madam Speaker, the Police (Amendment) Bill No. XXVII of 2025 seeks to amend Section 22 of the Police Act, as I said, to empower the Commissioner of Police to retain the services of foreign specialised investigative officers to assist in complex or serious criminal inquiries. As said by hon. Seeburn, these experts will operate under the direction and control of the Commissioner of Police of our country or a designated officer. They will have no powers of arrest. Their function will be to assist and strengthen investigative capacity, to bring technical expertise and to inject scientific credibility into the conduct of serious and complex investigations. The intention is to reinforce our police force to enable it to work alongside specialists who possess the forensic and analytical sophistication required by modern day criminal investigations. Madam Speaker, our police force has always been a pivotal institution in maintaining law and order. Its members served courageously across the island. Yet, we must confront reality with honesty and courage. Over the past decade, we have witnessed an erosion in investigative competence often ‘deliberate.’ I repeat myself with this word, and this not a mere political statement. Madam Speaker, it is an observation echoed by the population. I have considered the book ‘Forensics in Paradise: A Mauritius Odyssey’ by Dr. Satish Boolell. In his book, Dr. S. Boolell is bare – the systemic failures of our investigative political system, crime scenes left unsealed, evidence mishandled, external pressures, external political pressures and a lack of scientific rigor. He recounts how, amongst others, in the Bassin Blanc case, essential forensic details such as post-mortem timing and larval evidence was ignored. Madam Speaker, in the end, our past and recent history of unresolved criminal cases is not just the path left by the past decade. It is the burden on our collective conscience today. This Bill, though seemingly straight forward, carries profound way. It is our collective acknowledgement. The time of complacency and silence must come to an end. If we do nothing, we become accomplice in the injustice that has claimed too many innocent lives. That, Madam Speaker, would be an affront to a belief in the sanctity of human values, in the sanctity of human lives and in the face of the rule of law. Let this Bill be concrete evidence for the 27th time before the House that human lives are above pure, basic unsupported political decisions. Let it be a sign that this Government stands for ethics, stands for courage, and stands for its commitment to truth. Let us operate within the bounds of law guided by justice, and not by convenience. Let this Bill be a pathway for shared experience. Let this Bill be an opportunity for our police force to learn and train amidst foreign specialised experience investigators to be more efficient. The time has come to restore faith, rebuild integrity and reclaim trust in our institutions. With these words, Madam Speaker, I commend the Bill. I thank you.

Hon. Minister of Agriculture! (5.51 p.m.) The Minister of Agro-Industry, Food Security, Blue Economy and Fisheries (Dr. A. Boolell): Madam Speaker, I feel rather sorry that the Leader of the Opposition and the Whip of the Opposition have chosen to stay away when we are debating a very important Bill – the amendment to the Police Act. It is not because only one provision is being amended that this Bill is not significant. It is a Bill which is full of significance and means a lot. The Prime Minister has committed and given a firm commitment that justice will not be delayed. Justice will be done! He has stated without fear or prejudice that we would not tolerate a culture of impunity and it is a message being sent loud and clear to those who have gotten away with heinous crimes but they will not get away now. With heinous crimes or illicit trafficking and they have started to quake in their boots. Undetected crime will not remain a mystery irrespective of complexity. The rule of law has to prevail and we are instilling confidence in the minds of people for far too long, people in this country have been living in fear and no one, Madam Speaker, no citizen likes a case closure. Government is determined to walk the talk to unravel complex criminal cases and the investigations become less arduous because the mutual legal assistance and extradition treaty we have signed with many countries especially with Commonwealth countries. France is a willing part of the mutual legal assistance but not over extradition. And, the Bill was a promise made to the nation to bring to justice suspects in the Kistnen case and other criminal cases. Let me quote, Madam Speaker – “the hon. Prime Minister, Dr. Navinchandra Ramgoolam has reiterated his dissatisfaction with the initial management of this enquiry and has that the truth will be pursued relentlessly, ensuring that justice is served not only for the family of Soopramanien Kistnen but for the entire nation.” Madam Speaker, they are unresolved cases because of gross interference from a corrupt regime. There was an era of forestall over law and order during the MSM regime. Collusion and flagrant violation of separation of power was inevitable because of State capture. The decadent filthy regime set up the political arm of the Executive to threaten, to frame and made arbitrary arrests with duplicity of special teams within the Police Force. Special Striking Team will no longer strike at political opponents. The former Commissioner of Police was a lackey of the MSM-led regime and the MSM in government had been a curse and the curse of the nation and was involved in shady deeds and never dared to address front forcefully and frontally transnational crime. It had a culture and still has a culture of perverting the course of justice. The CP, we have trust in him, in the light of arrests made over drugs which was discovered on board of a ship. The CP we follow the trail to detect, with the services of experts, those who have perpetrated the crimes. And, let me refer to 2 cases which were deliberately closed, the ICAC U-turn on MedPoint, Madam Speaker, was shocking. And I quote – “The MedPoint case is a shadow looming over the Prime Minister Pravind Jugnauth and his ruling MSM party. In an election year, the London-based Privy Council is supposed to decide whether or not Jugnauth broke anti-corruption laws by taking part in the buying of a decrepit clinic partly owned by his own sister. The first time that a sitting Prime Minister is facing such a trial in the history of Mauritius.” And I quote – “Now, on the eve of the case being heard in London, the ICAC has switched sides, from prosecuting to defending Jugnauth. This is not the first time that the MSM has attempted to squash a case in this way and when it comes to MedPoint, it is only the latest in a long line of attempts made by the current government to bury the case”. Those were the days and these days are over, Madam Speaker. We had to deal with a political party in power which had links with the Mafia and let me remind the House of the Angus Road saga and this is what Mrs Prayag wrote in L’Express on 19 November 2020 and she said it without fear and she had the guts to say it in the face of adversity and she said it, and I quote – “This saga started as a sale of property where the source of funds and the mode of payment raised a number of legal questions. It then took on a political dimension when it transpired that Pravind Jugnauth, who currently holds the office of prime minister in an election being challenged at the Supreme Court, had been or is being investigated by the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) in connection with the purchase of property and possibly also for unlawful cash payments under the Financial Intelligence Anti Money Laundering Act. Ironically, this piece of legislation was enacted when he was minister! When confronted in parliament, [we have put several questions to him. I did when I was Leader of the Opposition but he chose to run away and he chose not to reply], he sought to hide behind an alleged ICAC enquiry to refuse to answer to parliamentary questions. Subsequently, it emerged that only a few weeks after taking office in December 2014, the MSM government cancelled a request for information on this matter sought from the UK’s Serious Fraud Office under the Mutual Legal Assistance Scheme. The saga continued with disclosures about investigations being supposedly concluded not once but twice already in the past for lack of evidence.” Nothing says the case cannot be reopened. It has to be reopened in the name of justice and we have to do it as a responsible government. We cannot allow those who have links with the Mafia to get away with murder, with corrupt practices, Madam Speaker. As information trickles down far from clarifying the issues, it also deepens the legal and political … There are now far more questions that the hon. Prime Minister, former Attorney General, Ravi Yerrigadoo and the ICAC have to answer in the public interest. The Pack & Blister scandal, the sale of planes of Air Mauritius are financial crimes with huge payments made in all opacity. The MSM regime in power never had the will and determination to wage war on illicit activities. It was party to it. Should I highlight the connection with Franklin, Madam Speaker. Illicit drugs, especially, synthetic drugs, are cheap but did they have the courage to wage war on drugs? No! They were lenient and should I say, Madam Speaker, they had connection with the Mafia. The digital age has revolutionised drug-trafficking, has revolutionised human trafficking, money laundering, illicit trading in firearms, trafficking of wildlife and natural resources against the CITES – the Convention of International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. It is the fourth largest transnational crime activity of drugs, counterfeit and human trafficking and the CP with his team is expected and, rightly so, to break the vicious circle. The war on drugs and the barons is a national and transnational war. As to transnational crimes, they have too often escaped us but we are saying time to put an end to this because we are going to come with a team which can deliver and we are going to enlist the services of experts to wage war on transnational crime. Because it is an organised crime, it is a multibillion industry that operates across borders, exploiting vulnerable persons and undermining global security. In Africa alone, it accounts to 4% of the continent’s GDP, over more than 90 billion US dollars. Madam Speaker, unfortunately, we cannot comment on ongoing cases before the Supreme Court but it is good to find out how many Ministers of the previous regime had acquired properties built by Mamy R. We need to find out and they have acquired properties built by the person who is under question by the Financial Crimes Commission. We have to find out who bent the rules and bent backwards for a few dollars more to allow the likes of Sobrinho to wash, rinse, dry and spin dry the money. He was given a certificate of good character and a banking licence by Financial Services Commission, bypassing the Bank of Mauritius. All these cases have transnational implications. As a low tax jurisdiction, the hon. Prime Minister is sending strong signals that the police force would neither retreat nor surrender on complex criminal cases. The file will not be closed. Notwithstanding the diligence of the Financial Crimes Commission, new legislation will be introduced to set up the National Crime Agency with a highly specialised officer to head the agency, and I have been told that he will probably be recruited from Scotland Yard. Our anti-money laundering programme, in line with our legal and regulatory obligation, I must say is robust. An Unexplained Wealth Order and Interim Freezing Order are well entrenched in our legislation. The amendment to section 22 of the principal Act gives unfettered power to the Commissioner of Police to enlist – as has been highlighted and reinforced by all those who have intervened – the services of experts in criminal investigations, as has been stated, let us say it again, with no power to prosecute. There are specialised police who will use data and latest technology as the hon. Prime Minister has stated, to unravel mysterious crimes. They will collect sufficient evidence for the suspect to be indicted before the Court. May I remind the House that on 21 February 1998, the hon. Prime Minister appointed a senior police officer from UK to study reform of our police force, the famous Constable Shattock and when we did so, some of us were sneering. Some people outside were sneering. The hon. Prime Minister was right to enlist the services of an expert to revamp our police force, to inculcate new values, to reinforce the relevance and importance of being sincere to the police force and to deliver and to be able in relation to work which is being entrusted to the police force. A Memorandum of Understanding was signed on Friday 30 2011 in the Council and Senate room of the University in the presence of Deputy Commissioner of Police because our objective as was highlighted by hon. Professor Narsinghen is that we need to look at capacity building. We have to make sure that our police force is a police force which is constantly being updated with constant breakthrough in technology, and funding was released by Government, by the Office of the Prime Minister, Minister of Defence, Home Affairs and External Communication. Yes, it was thanks to us, under the leadership of hon. Prime Minister, Navinchandra Ramgoolam, that University of Mauritius ran courses for police officers, including BSc Honours Police Studies and various continuous education and tailormade programmes such as Diploma in Police Studies. Madam Speaker, as I have stated, this legislation is an act of faith, of commitment from a government which believes in separation of power. The amendment to the Police Act empowers the Commissioner of Police to retain the services, as and when required, of foreign specialised investigative officers to carry out serious, complex criminal inquiries under his control. We have given a commitment to this House and I firmly believe, and I know the public has placed trust in us. A year since we have this absolute trust from the public and we are here to live up to the expectations of the public. We are here to live up to their expectations! We have a moral responsibility to act and to act without fear or prejudice. This is the trust that the public has confided in us and we have to live up to the trust confided in us by the public and we are here for the public because you have to live up to their expectations. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Hon. Prime Minister! (6.08 p.m.)

Yes, Madam Speaker. I wish first of all to thank all the hon. Members who took part in the debates. Again, such an important piece of legislation, the Opposition is absent. As we reach the conclusion of the debates, I wish to say, Madam Speaker, that this has been a golden opportunity for them to participate because this is a piece of legislation that will transform the whole because this is part of a bigger picture. We have said that the challenges we face today are not the same challenges that we faced at the time of independence or in 1974, which the Police Act was dealing with at the time. We have challenges which are beyond our borders. We have to have a police force which is equipped, which is trained and which will also not allow corruption to come in, that they have to do their job that they are paid to do. This is what we are doing. We have to move with time. We are in this fast- evolving world and improved technology. It is important that we seek expertise of those who have acquired that expertise over a long time. I gave the example earlier on of this mobile phone. This cannot be done in Mauritius at this time. It cannot be done but it will be done once we put in place everything of this armada that we are talking about. I wish to reassure the House that the reforms are being pursued thoroughly but within the police force but not only instruction operations, also at the level of recruitment, you will see changes. We want to have the best people. Now, we do not want people who are motivated to become policemen and policewomen. This recruitment policy itself is being reviewed and this enlistment of foreign experts is not a reflection on the capacity of our officers. They have not had the training; they have no knowledge. They have to have this capacity building. That is why we said that we want to have foreign experts, including Commonwealth experts and we will train our own people. We have some very able police officers in our police force but they have not had the training that they should have had. We have very often seen in the past big flaflafla on the papers, somebody is arrested and then nothing. This is what we want to change, Madam Speaker. We have to move with time. As I said, it is part of a bigger picture. We are bringing the National Crime Agency Bill. This is will be a total change in Mauritius. Total change – it will transform the police force and with the support of these foreign experts, we will be able to do what we have not been able to do so far. We have many examples. I have given the example because it is the latest case of Kistnen, where here, the police experts and everything had a look and they decided it was a suicide case. But how is it now that we know it was murder? It was actually murder. I know the judicial inquiry was done by this very able Magistrate. The report has not been published but we had bits and pieces in the Press and what she says in it, is exactly what I am saying. The incompetency level, probably deliberate – because you know, with the MSM, it is always covering up. We have seen when the Minister went to depone, you had snipers on the roofs. But all this will change. As I said, this is part of the bigger change that is coming. What I am saying is that I am confident. With the changes that we will bring, the people of this country will get results – and results on time, not delayed – concrete results, and justice will prevail. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Thank you. You have to commend the Bill once more to the House.

I commend the Bill to the House. Question put and agreed to. Bill read a second time and committed. COMMITTEE STAGE (Madam Speaker in the Chair) The Police (Amendment) Bill (No. XXVII of 2025) was considered and agreed to. On the Assembly resuming with Madam Speaker in the Chair, Madam Speaker reported accordingly. Third Reading On motion made and seconded, the Police (Amendment) Bill (No. XXVII of 2025) was read the third time and passed.