Once the democratic darling and among a handful of liberal democracies in Sub Saharan Africa – the island of Mauritius has suffered dramatic democratic decline. In just ten years, it has lost its status of ‘liberal democracy’ to be classified as an ‘electoral autocracy’. Today, all democratic indicators, be it the Ibrahim Index of African Governance (2024), Afrobarometer African Insights 2024 or Varieties in Democracy (2024) have described Mauritius as a country where democracy is facing “increasing deterioration”, “ minus 40 % drop in satisfaction towards democracy” and a “stand alone autocratizer’, respectively.
So, what are the causes of this drastic fall in grace? Like a number of countries across the world Mauritius has seen its democratic credentials chip away. The advent of divisive ethnopolitics, an outdated electoral system, dynastic politics and money/crony politics have contributed to what can be referred as the wear and tear of democracy. However, in the last ten years and more specifically the five years, matters have considerably worsen where state capture is now rampant, core institutions have been disemboweled and the police has been systematically weaponised.
One of the direct outcome of the island’s accelerated democratic deterioration is a prevailing culture of censorship and surveillance that has instilled self-censorship within large segments of the Mauritian population. There is a tangible fear to openly speak out, be too articulate or be on record on matters/issues that cast a critical opinion of the government.
Big Brother Watching: Surveillance, Clamp Down and Data Capture
There seems to be a correlation between the island’s digitalisation trajectory and its democratic backsliding. Three examples support this – the launch of the Mauritius Safe City, the proposal to control the flow of social media and the mandatory re-registration of SIM cards. All three projects/initiatives happened between 2016 and 2024 – a time when the online space become heavily controlled and monitored.
A number of journalists and ordinary citizens were harassed and even arrested following their online posts under the “offences” subsection of the Information and Communication Technologies Act (2001). In fact, those journalists and citizens were essentially targeted due to their posts that were deemed critical of the current regime.
Concurrently, the media landscape was under duress with a series of amendments brought to the Independent Broadcasting Authority (IBA) Act (2000), namely requiring radio journalists to reveal their sources and in case of non-compliance, would face the risk of imprisonment of up to five years and a fine of 500,000 Mauritian rupees, the renewal of private radio licences (from 3 years to 1 year) and finally the doubling of licence fees.
Such amendments have had the effect of crowding out journalists critical of the government and replacing them with those that are highly consensual or that are directly related to the government. Therefore it is not surprising that both digital and media freedom have recorded sharp drops in the last ten years: -21.7 % and -10.7 % respectively.
Data generated from digitalisation be it through the Mauritius Safe City (including facial recognition) or the numerous undersea cables serving and connecting the island with the rest of the world (at least six – LION, LION 2, METISS, SAFE, MARS, IOX) – the issue of data ownership, protection and sovereignty has been at the forefront of citizens’ concern. Till date, there is no clarity concerning the thousands of hours of data footage coming from the 4,000 Mauritius Safe City cameras pumping out images on a 24/7 basis.
Where does the data go? Who has custody? Is the State spying on its citizens? What are the implications of State surveillance on freedom of speech and movement? In fact, an incident that occurred in 2022 concerning alleged ‘sniffing’ by a foreign third party on one of the strategic undersea cables – SAFE has cast severe doubt as to the integrity and safety of data to, from and within Mauritius. This was further exacerbated in a recent series of leaks that telephone tapping and eavesdropping is happening on a massive scale in Mauritius.
Academic Freedom Under Attack
Academic freedom a much cherished feature of an open society has unfortunately not been spared. This is mostly felt within public universities whose main source of funding comes from the state and falls under the responsibility of a government ministry. This burdens these public universities to follow the often bureaucratic and administrative requirements of a public sector entity. However, it is not the main bone of contention!
In fact, one of the most blatant restrictions towards academics based at public universities is the restriction in engaging into active politics. Any academic who decides to take the plunge must resign with the impossibility of getting back their position. Over the years the red flags have become brighter, louder and more stifling and have even caught the attention of international bodies.
Memos and circulars from the parent ministry (Ministry of Education, Tertiary Education, Science and Technology) have become frequent, providing directives on what themes (or not) to do research, which local or international conferences to support (or boycott), which partnerships/collaborations to encourage (or avoid) and the list goes on.
Any research that is deemed too problematic, sensitive or might cast a negative light on the current government’s actions/policy is discouraged, buried under administrative requirements or flatly refused. There are two recent examples that demonstrate this succinctly. In 2022, the University of Mauritius together with the University of Witwatersrand and Kings College, London organised a conference on “Archipelagic Memory: Intersecting Geographies, Histories and Disciplines”.
A couple of days before the conference, the organisers were instructed to inform the participants to avoid any reference to the “Chagos, Diego Garcia, or British sovereignty in the Indian Ocean” during the three-day event”. Apparently, the instructions came directly from the Government of Mauritius. In 2023, Africa Check reached out to the University of Mauritius to hold its annual “Africa Facts Summit”.
I was personally involved as the main contact person due to my long term engagement with Africa Check. The University of Mauritius was initially on board but pulled out of the collaboration just 10 days prior to the conference. Was it the nature of the conference – fact checking, understanding political disinformation that spooked the top management of the University of Mauritius? Was it instructions from higher authorities?
Today on the campuses of the different public universities there is a generalised culture of deference that has sapped the sense of autonomy, independence and capacity to speak truth to power – essentially features for a public intellectual worth his / her salt!
As I sign off on this piece, the country has been hit by a ban on social media sites which will only be lifted on the 11 November – the next day after the country goes to poll. The ban galavanised Mauritians and international advocacy groups to push back against what was deemed an unwarranted and arbitrary ban. Within 24 hours the ban was lifted. As Mauritians prepare themselves to vote in a couple of days – this might be an election that might be decisive in charting a new democratic course for the country.
Roukaya Kasenally is a democracy scholar in Mauritius.
