rallye illégal : le dpp veut un durcissement des lois

Office of the Director of

Public Prosecutions

‘To No One Will We Sell, To No One Deny or Delay Right or Justice’ Chapter 40, Magna Carta 1215

E-Newsletter Issue 52

October 2015

IN THIS ISSUE: October 2015- Issue 52

EDITORIAL TEAM

Miss Anusha Rawoah, State Counsel Ms Zaynah Essop, State Counsel

Miss Shaaheen Inshiraah Dawreeawoo, Temporary State Counsel Ms Pooja Autar-Callichurn , Temporary State Counsel

Mr Ashley Victor, Public Relations Officer Mr Yashvind Kumar Rawoah, STM Intern (Legal Research)

Mr Ajmal Toofany, STM Intern (Legal) Miss Toshika Bobeechurn, STM Intern (Legal) Miss Jouana Genave, STM Intern (Sociology)

We look forward to receiving your comments/suggestions on:

[email protected]

PAGE

Editorial 1

Fast and Furious 2

Tricentenaire de la présence française à l’Ile Maurice et son impact sur le droit mauricien 4

Prevention of Commercial and Sexual Exploitation of Children 6

Lectures to police officers 7

5-day training programme for Prosecutors and Enquiry officers 8

Compte rendu des Nations Unies sur la transposition de la « Convention relative aux droits des personnes handicapés » en droit positif mauricien

9

Obituary: Mr Shamus Mangan 11

Court Cases Summary 12

List of new callees to the Mauritian Bar 15

The views expressed in the articles are those of the particular authors and should under no account be considered as binding on the Office.

EDITORIAL

Page 1

October 2015- Issue 52

On the other hand, in light of the tri-centenary of French’s presence in Mauritius, this issue also covers the extent of French’s

influence on the Mauritian legal system, which has consequently bestowed us with a unique hybrid legal system, comprising of

both the British and the French laws. The French Penal Code, the Civil Code, as well as the Code of Civil Procedure remain the

basis of the substantive law in Mauritius today.

Moreover, in relation to trainings attended by our law officers, you will read the synopsis of a workshop organised by the

Ministry of Gender Equality, Child Development and Family Welfare on the ‘Prevention of commercial and sexual exploitation

of children’. On the other hand, some of our law officers carried out trainings on a panoply of legal issues. For instance, in view

of the forthcoming police examinations, the Commissioner of Police organised a workshop whereby some of our law officers

provided lectures to numerous police officers. In the same vein, the Ministry of Civil Service organised a five-day training

programme at the Rajsoomer Lallah Lecture Hall whereby our law officers conducted training courses with prosecutors and

enquiry officers.

Furthermore, you will also have the benefit of reading an article on the gist of the ‘United Nations Convention on the Rights of

Persons with Disabilities’ as well as the extent to which its provisions have been incorporated into our law. We also present our

heartfelt condolences to the relatives of Mr Shamus Mangan, the UNODC Co-ordinator of the Maritime Crime Programme for

the Indian Ocean, who passed away on 7th September 2015.

Finally, we bring to you, a precis of the recent court decisions of the Supreme Court of Mauritius. We also extend our

congratulations to the newly sworn-in barristers of the Mauritian bar.

We wish you a pleasant and fruitful reading!

Anusha Rawoah,

State Counsel

Dear readers,

‘Know safety, no injury. No safety, know injury.’ It is with this adage that we bring to

you the October edition of our monthly newsletter. Indeed, with the unstinting number

of fatal road accidents which Mauritius has witnessed lately, the overwhelming concern

of road safety has, more than ever, become significantly prominent. Road safety no

doubt, calls for a dire need of consciousness by drivers on our streets, most importantly,

by those overzealous drivers who are thrilled by speed. In that respect, this issue

provides you with a thought provoking article by the Director of Public Prosecutions on

‘street racing’.

Fast and Furious

Page 2


But street racing can also be unorganised and sporadic in nature, involving impromptu drivers who want to show off

their driving speed and skills.

It is undoubtedly a dangerous activity inherent with enormous risks not only to the racers but also to other road users

and pedestrians. Unfortunately, it is becoming a popular past time in Mauritius and often takes place at well-known

locations in the early hours of the morning.

Section 125 of our ‘Road Traffic Act’ prohibits street racing and makes it an offence for anyone who takes part in or

promotes any race or trial of speed between motor vehicles on a road. It provides for a derisory fine of one thousand

rupees upon conviction. One can hardly imagine section 125 as a deterrent to a racer in need of a double serum of

adrenalin. Nor will section 125 be an incentive to any person to seek the authorisation of the Commissioner of Police

whose responsibility will be to impose appropriate safety conditions before authorising a race on our roads.

There is urgency as we revisit the ‘Road Traffic Act’, to provide for a new section 125. First, by widening its scope to a

race between two or more vehicles whether the race is over a predetermined or indeterminate course and also to cover a

situation where the competition between two or more vehicles involves the production of sustained wheel spin.

Similarly, provisions should be made for those who mistakenly believe that slaloms on our road is a form of driving.

There is also a need to include in the meaning of “promoting” a street race, those persons who offer an inducement to

another person to take part in a street race.

Street racing is certainly not for the timorous soul but rather for the intrepid

who seeks the exhilaration of speed.

It is unlawful in Mauritius, unless authorised by the Commissioner of Police.

Street racing involves racers and spectators meeting at a convenient roadway

location and design. A wide and straight road where cars or motorcycles can

line up to race against one another is usually a favoured spot for the organisers.


Finally, the fine of one thousand rupees, which does not have its raison d’être today, should be replaced by a

graduated sentence providing for a basic and aggravated offence. An aggravated offence of street racing would exist

where the offender knew he was driving the motor vehicle in circumstances of heightened risks (his visibility was

impaired), or the use of the vehicle constituted a serious risk to the safety of other persons.

In an aggravated situation, the ‘Road Traffic Act’ should provide for imprisonment and disqualification of the

offender from holding or obtaining a driver’s license. In respect of any subsequent similar offence, the forfeiture of the

vehicle should follow. Obviously, the mere muscling of our laws may be insufficient as a deterrent, street racing has its

attractions as a great social occasion to make friends and to show one’s driving skills. There should be emphasis on the

prevention side by educating the youth on the dangers of such a dangerous activity. In many countries where street

racing has gone viral the latest racing craze is a “kamikaze” in which drivers put money in a hat, the money is then

taken to an undisclosed location from which a call is made informing drivers where the cash awaits. The first driver to

get there wins all the money.

In Mauritius, we have only one choice, legislate even faster.

Satyajit Boolell, SC

Director of Public Prosecutions

Tricentenaire de la présence française à l’Ile Maurice et son impact sur le droit mauricien

Page 4


différends en matière criminelle et civile. Deux ans plus tard, un édit du roi Louis XV donne à l'Ile son conseil provincial qui

délivrait la justice en son nom. En six ans de colonisation, les Français en avaient fait plus que les Hollandais en matière de droit

durant leurs 72 années d'occupation.

Le code pénal mauricien, promulgué en 1838, est le digne héritier du code pénal français de 1810 qui a vu le jour sous le règne de

Napoléon Bonaparte. En amont du code de 1810, la colonie de l’Ile de France fut gouvernée par le Code des Iles de France et de

Bourbon qui soumettait ces colonies aux ordonnances faites pour le Royaume de France en général. Le « Code noir » fut une

parmi les nombreuses lois non-enregistrées qui servaient de règles aux juges de la colonie. Le code pénal de 1791, produit de la

révolution de 1789, inspiré par les philosophies humanistes, mit fin à l’arbitraire de la monarchie et des juges en matière de lois

criminelles. Ce Code ne fut non point étendue à l’Ile de France mais bien adopté en 1793 par l’assemblée coloniale, qui

subséquemment approuva la Déclaration des Droits de l’Homme et du Citoyen dans son sillage législatif.

À la prise de l’Ile en 1810 par les Anglais, ceux-ci s’engagèrent aux termes du Traité de Capitulation de 1810, de respecter les lois

et coutumes existantes. À cet effet une proclamation fut publiée, selon laquelle les lois et règlements existants seraient conservés,

laissant ainsi survivre le code pénal de 1791. Parallèlement en février 1810, l’assemblée nationale française révoqua le Code de

1791 et le remplaça par le nouveau code pénal de 1810. La codification impériale de 1810 se distingue de son prédécesseur, le code

pénal de 1791, par sa volonté de permettre aux citoyens d’avoir une compréhension claire et précise des prohibitions existantes.

Ce changement concrétise la maxime du juriste ‘Jean Etienne Portalis’ selon laquelle, d’une part il ne peut y avoir de crime ou de

délit sans qu’ils soient clairement définis dans un texte et d’autre part, sans que les sanctions applicables y soient également

inscrites. L’adage « nullum crimen sine lege, nulla poena sine lege » (pas de crime sans loi, pas de peine sans loi précédente),

pose ainsi le fondement du principe de légalité criminelle, figure incontournable du droit pénal mauricien. Le code pénal de

1810 vient donc marquer son époque en répondant à un souci de sécurité juridique par une approche unificatrice et

simplificatrice du droit.

Le 15 février 1832, le code pénal de 1791 fut remplacé sur l’Ile de France par un code de 1810 revisité. Dès le 14 aout 1838,

l’administration de l’Ile promulgua un nouveau code pénal, cette fois-ci rédigé en anglais et en français, remaniant les

Si l’histoire n’a rien retenu de l’influence des Hollandais sur la question du

droit à Maurice, la contribution des colons français ne peut être contestée. C'est

ainsi que Sir Charles Lucas, commandant dans l'armée britannique, expliqua

que « l'Ile Maurice était bien plus qu'un avant-poste pour les Français »

(Historical Geography of the British Colonies). L'histoire du droit mauricien

débute en 1715, à la prise de Mauritius, qui devait être rebaptisée Ile de France.

C'est en 1721 que l'Ile de France instaura un conseil provisoire pour trancher les


dispositions de la loi de 1832. Ainsi le code de 1838 s’érige sur les fondements du code de 1810, à quelques nuances près. En

1866,les Anglais décidèrent que les modifications des textes soient désormais faites en anglais. Ce n’est qu’en 1962 qu’un nouvel

ordre du conseil autorisa le législateur mauricien à légiférer de nouveau en français pour toute modification aux codes.

Au niveau du judiciaire, la transition coloniale opéra un changement sur l’usage du langage autorisé au sein des juridictions. En

1839, les juges avancèrent qu’aucun avocat ou avoué ne serait admis à plaider sauf à disposer d’une « connaissance suffisante »

de la langue anglaise. La Reine Victoria en conseil, décida en 1841 que « toutes les ordonnances […] et toutes les proclamations

[…] ainsi que tous les actes ou avis publics du gouvernement […] seront à l’avenir faits et promulgués en langue anglaise

seulement […] » (Célicourt Antelme et le français en Cour Suprême, Raymond d'Unienville QC). Dès 1847, les plaidoiries et les

actes de procédures devaient se faire en anglais. Certains avocats et avoués furent cependant exemptés, étant admis avocats ou

avoués au moment de la prise de l'Ile par les Anglais « ou dans les quinze ans qui auront suivi la reddition de ladite île à sa feue

Majesté le roi George III » (Avoué since 1853, Edmond Victor Duvivier) . C’est le 15 juillet 1847 que l’honorable Célicourt Antelme

parla en langue française pour une dernière fois devant nos tribunaux.

En 1808, le Général Decaen, par un décret, étendit le code civil français jusqu’aux frontières de l’Ile de France sous l’intitulé

Code Napoléon. Mahé de Labourdonnais, gouverneur-général de l'Ile, favorisait toutefois l'arbitrage pour régler les différends

des habitants de l'Ile de France. Pierre Poivre, intendant des Iles de France et de Bourbon, disait que « pendant les onze années

de son gouvernement (Labourdonnais), il n'y eut qu'un seul procès à l'Ile de France » (Ile de France, Documents pour son histoire

civile et militaire).

« Ma vraie gloire n’est pas d’avoir gagné quarante batailles […] ce que rien n’effacera, ce qui vivra éternellement, c’est mon code

civil. » Napoléon Bonaparte ne croyait pas si bien dire alors que nous fêtons les 300 ans de la présence française à Maurice et

que son code est toujours utilisé en droit mauricien.

Ajmal Toofany, STM Intern (Legal) &

Ashley Victor, Public Relations Officer

Prevention of Commercial and Sexual Exploitation of Children

Page 6

Commercial and Sexual Exploitation of Children (CSEC) is a commercial as well as a criminal process where children are used

for sexual activities in exchange of financial gains. There are mainly 3 forms of CSEC, namely prostitution, pornography and

trafficking for sexual purposes.

A training was organized by the Ministry of Gender Equality, Child Development and Family Welfare. It was a 3 phase training

course which ended on the 11th September 2015. Several stakeholders attended the training, namely the Office of the

Ombudsperson for Children, the Child Development Unit (CDU), the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP), the

Probation Office, the Ministry of Education, the National Children’s Council, Brigade des Mineurs, representatives of various

shelters, amongst others.

The resource person was Mrs. Rita VENKATASAWMY, OSK, Consultant and Director of the 'Centre d'Éducation et de

Dévéloppement pour les Enfants Mauriciens' (CEDEM). Various issues were canvassed, a few of them being how to better

understand and assess the sexually abused children, what are the special needs of those children, how to provide adequate

support to victims of sexual exploitation, rehabilitation of those children, effective sensitization campaigns. There were also

debates and case studies which were conducted during the training. It was an interactive training course all along and it was a

privilege for me to be part of this enriching training.

The training ended with a speech of the Honourable Minister of Gender Equality, Child Development and Family Welfare, Mrs

Perraud and all participants were awarded a certificate.

Pamela Veerabadran-Mudaliar, Temporary State Counsel


Lectures to police officers

Page 7


During the last month the Commissioner of Police had organised several

workshops, for which the assistance of law officers of the Office of the Director

of Public Prosecutions was sought to provide lectures on various legal topics to

around 700 police officers.

The lectures were delivered by some of our law officers at the Indira Gandhi

Cultural Centre, Phoenix and they dealt with a panoply of legal topics such as

‘Hearsay’, ‘Corroboration’ and ‘Defences and Excuses’.

The aim of the workshops was to address legal issues which crop up during the course of duties of the law enforcement

officers. The lectures were also aimed at providing support to the officers in preparation of their forthcoming

promotional examinations.

5-day training programme for Prosecutors and Enquiry officers

Page 8


The Ministry of Civil Service organised a 5-day training programme on “ Prosecutions matters” for Prosecutors and Enquiring

officers from the 21st to 25th September 2015 at the Rajsoomer Lallah Lecture Hall, Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.

The training sessions were attended by around 50 prosecutors and enquiry officers and included participants from the different

ministries and departments. This course was conducted by the law officers of the Office of the DPP on the Mauritian Legal

System, Information, Evidence, Burden and Standard of Proof, Cross Examination, Case preparation, hearsay among others.

The training focused on key factors that should be considered in the process of carrying out investigations, which could

ultimately lead to a prosecution.

The course was carried out with the objectives of providing to participants to deal effectively with cases from the date the offence

is reported up to its determination in Court, including how to produce evidence in court and proceeding with the enquiry stage,

follow up and drafting of information, recording statements from witnesses and fulfilling the role of a prosecutor efficiently.

Further, the closing of the training programme involved a particular interactive session which enabled the participants to

discuss the difficulties they usually encountered in the fulfilment of their duties. Finally, the training came to an end with a

certificate award ceremony.

Toshika Bobeechurn, STM Intern (Legal)

Compte rendu des Nations Unies sur la transposition de la « Convention relative aux droits des personnes

handicapés » en droit positif mauricien

Page 9


législatif, administratif, ou autre, pour mettre en œuvre les droits reconnus dans la présente Convention.

Afin de garantir la pleine efficacité de la Convention, il est prévu à l’article 35 que les Etats partis s’engagent à remettre

régulièrement au « Comité des droits des personnes handicapées » un rapport concernant les mesures qu’ils ont adoptées pour

donner effet aux dispositions ladite Convention, sur les progrès réalisés, et sur les difficultés rencontrées. Selon les dispositions

conventionnelles le premier rapport doit être présenté dans un délai de deux ans par l’Etat parti, et ensuite au minimum tous les

quatre ans. La Convention prévoit à l’article 34 qu’un Comité d’experts (le « Comité ») soit institué pour examiner les rapports

des Etats partis. Le Comité a passé en revue, le 24 et 25 août 2015, le premier rapport présenté par le gouvernement mauricien. Le

Comité a adopté son compte rendu le premier septembre 2015.

Le comité d’experts note que la définition du terme « handicap » (impairment) sous la section 2 ‘Equal Opportunities Act 2008’ et

la définition de « personne handicapée » (disabled person) énumérée sous la section 2 du ‘Training and Employment of Disabled

Persons Act 1996’ (TEDPB Act) ne sont pas conforme à la définition à l’article 1 alinéa 2 de la Convention qui dispose : « Par

personnes handicapées on entend des personnes qui présentent des incapacités physiques, mentales, intellectuelles ou

sensorielles durables dont l’interaction avec diverses barrières peut faire obstacle à leur pleine et effective participation à la

société sur la base de l’égalité avec les autres ».

La définition du terme « handicap » sous le ‘Equal Opportunities Act 2008’ est très certainement inspirée du contexte médicale

car elle considère uniquement le critère de l’incapacité physique, mentales, intellectuelles ou sensorielles dont l’étendue est

généralement évaluée par un professionnel de la médecine. L’insuffisance de la définition du handicap dans ce texte de loi n’est

pas sans conséquence. Ainsi, le critère de diverses barrières qui font obstacle à la pleine participation des personnes handicapées

dans la société a été écarté par cette législation qui détermine qui est handicapé ou pas. L’approche médicale encourage les

personnes handicapées à être perçues comme des êtres-humains en besoin de soins médicaux et d’assistance permanente pour

leurs besoins quotidien, alors que dans le contexte des droits humains il est compris que toute personne handicapée possède la

capacité d’exercer leurs activités quotidiennes de façon autonome et de s’intégrer dans une société inclusive.

L’inclusion sociale des personnes handicapées dépend largement du respect des lois en

vigueur, qui assurent l’interdiction relative de toute discrimination à leur égard. L’Etat

mauricien a signé et ratifié, en 2008 et 2010 respectivement, la « Convention relative aux

Droits des Personnes Handicapées » qui place le gouvernement, en vertu de l’article 4

alinéa 1, sous l’obligation de promouvoir et garantir le plein exercice de tous les droits de

l’homme et de toutes les libertés fondamentales de toutes les personnes handicapées sans

discrimination d’aucune sorte à travers des toutes mesures appropriées d’ordre


Cependant, on constate que la définition du terme « personne handicapée » sous le TEDPB Act 1996 comporte l’élément de

barrière auquel les personnes handicapées doivent faire face en fonction de leur handicap qui signifie que ladite loi adopte une

définition bien inspirée de celle de la Convention comme prévu à l’article 1. La recommandation du Comité en ce qu’il s’agit

d’amender la définition du terme « handicap » dans nos textes de loi nationaux doit donc être apporté à l’ ‘Equal Opportunities

Act 2008’. Selon le Comité, le gouvernement mauricien doit veiller à enlever le langage exhaustif dans tout texte de loi et

discours.

Le Comité est d’avis qu’il y a un manque de mesure effective prises par le gouvernement pour rendre l’infrastructure publique et

autres services destinés au public accessible aux personnes handicapées. Il est possible de rendre l’infrastructure publique (c.à.d.

les passages cloutés, le transport public, les bâtiments publics et tout environnement physique) accessible aux personnes

handicapées en y apportant des aménagements raisonnables. Mais le concept d’aménagement raisonnable n’apparait dans

aucune loi et n’est donc pas définit dans la législation mauricienne. Il est recommandé à l’Etat mauricien d’enlever la réserve sur

l’article 9(2) de la Convention, qui dispose que « toute mesure doit être prise pour rendre tout bâtiment et endroit public ainsi

que tout service destiné au public accessible aux personnes handicapées », et de procéder à l’amendement annoncé des textes de

lois concernés ; notamment le ‘Building Act’, le ‘Roads Act’, le ‘Morcellement Act’ et le ‘Town and Country Planning Act’. La mise

sur pied d’un plan d’action, limité dans le temps pour couvrir tous les aspects d’accessibilité tel que la langue des signes et un

système d’écoute dans le moyen de transport public, est également préconisée. Dans ce même contexte d’accessibilité, tout

document relatif aux procédures légales doivent être en format accessible pour que les personnes handicapées puissent exercer

leur droit d’accéder à la justice.

Autre observation du Comité se porte sur le manque de participation des personnes handicapées dans la réforme législative se

portant sur leur droit. Le Comité est concerné par le fait que jusqu’à présent il semblerait que les personnes handicapées n’ont

pas été consultées pour le ‘Disability Bill’. La Convention est promue avec le motto suivant : « NOTHING ABOUT US WITHOUT

US », avec le but d’encourager tout Etat parti à considérer la voix des personnes handicapées dans le développement des textes

de loi et des plans d’action qui impactent sur leur vie. Le Comité incite le gouvernement à consulter les personnes handicapées à

travers les organisations qui les représentent pour le ‘Disability Bill’, le ‘National Risk Reduction Disaster Management Bill’ et le «

Strategic Paper and Action Plan » 2015-2020. Enfin, le Comité recommande que le contenu de son rapport soit divulgué aux

personnes handicapées qui permettra à ces derniers de prendre connaissance du niveau de l’avancée de leur droit au sein de

notre république.

Aarthi Burthony,

STM Intern (Legal)

Obituary: Mr Shamus Mangan

Page 11


It is with great sadness that the Office has learnt of the demise of Mr Shamus Mangan, the UNODC Coordinator of the

Maritime Crime Programme for the Indian Ocean, on 7 September last. He was aged 41.

Mr Mangan has been collaborating closely with the authorities in Mauritius since 2010 when he was given charge of the Counter

Piracy Programme. From enabling negotiations with the European Union on the transfer of suspected pirates to Mauritius, to

empowering judges, prosecutors and the police through regular training sessions, Shamus Mangan became a regular

collaborator and mentor from UNODC.

He was one of the key speakers on the Piracy Panel at the Regional Conference of the International Association of Prosecutors

organised by the ODPP in August 2012.

At the time of his death Shamus Mangan was on mission to Mombasa to work on the implementation of a court administration

system for the Kenyan judiciary, a project to which he was particularly committed.

The ODPP presents its heartfelt condolences to his family and friends.

Sulakshna Beekarry, Principal State Counsel

Mr Shamus Mangan [here on the left] with Mr Filberto Ceriani Sebregond, EU Ambassador and Head of Delegation during the UNODC EU programme to promote regional maritime security [2013]

Registrar for the bill of costs in respect of the amount claimed as Attorney’s

fees to be decided.

MOULAN M.S v THE STATE [2015] SCJ 344

Hon. A. A. Caunhye, Judge and Hon A. D. Narain, Judge

Sentence , First opportunity , guilty plea

The appellant was prosecuted before the Intermediate Court for the offence

of drug dealing, for the possession of 38.65 grams of cannabis, contained in

10 rolls of printed paper parcels, for the purpose of distribution. He

pleaded guilty to the charge, was found guilty as charged and was

sentenced to undergo 12 months’ imprisonment and to pay Rs 500 as costs.

He is now appealing against the sentence on the ground that it is

manifestly harsh and excessive. Counsel for the Appellant argued that a

non-custodial sentence should have been imposed thus allowing the

appellant to “serve his sentence” among his peers rather than among

seasoned criminals in prison. H also laid emphasis on the fact that

although the appellant only pleaded guilty on the day of the trial itself, it

was the first occasion on which he could do so since the plea was not taken

before.

On the other hand, Counsel for the Respondent, conceded in Court that a

sentence of 12 months’ imprisonment may be harsh and excessive but

maintained that a custodial sentence was warranted in the circumstances,

the more so since the appellant had been given a community service order

in the past, albeit not in relation to a drug related offence.

The Appellate Court thus concluded that the Learned Magistrate was

wrong to find that it was “hardly the case” that the appellant had put in a

timely plea of guilty as he had only pleaded guilty on the day of the trial,

that is, 9 months after the case was lodged before the Intermediate Court.

In effect the record showed that no plea was taken before the day of the

trial and the appellant had therefore pleaded guilty at the first

opportunity.

In the light of the above and of all the circumstances of the case, including

the relatively small amount of drugs involved, the Appellate Court found

that the term of 12 months’ imprisonment was excessive. The appeal was

therefore allowed and the Court substituted the sentence of 12 months’

imprisonment to one of 8 months’ imprisonment.

HURLOL D v THE STATE [2015] SCJ 341

Hon. N. Devat, Judge and Hon O. B. Madhub, Judge

Appeal , Sentence, Guilty Plea

This is an appeal against the decision of the Intermediate Court, whereby

following plea of guilty, the appellant (then accused no.1) has been found

guilty under four counts of the information in breach of Sections 301(1),

Page 12

October 2015- Issue 52 SUMMARY OF SUPREME COURT JUDGMENTS: September 2015 INDEPENDENT COMMISSION AGAINST CORRUPTION (ICAC) v DABEE-

BUNJUN [2015] SCJ 345

Hon. S. Peeroo, Senior Puisne Judge and Hon. R. Teelock, Judge

ICAC , Attorney’s Fees

The appeals deal with the same issues and involve the same parties were

consolidated and a single judgment was delivered. The Appellant

challenged the ruling of the Deputy Master and Registrar not to allow the

bill of costs in respect of Attorney’s fees.

In the first case, ICAC resisted an application for Judicial Review entered

by respondent. In the second case ICAC resisted the motion of respondent

for leave to appeal to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council against

the judgment of the Supreme Court in the first case. Each case was set

aside by the Supreme Court with costs against respondent. A bill of costs

and fees incurred in the respective cases was signed by Mr S Sohawon, as

Senior Legal Adviser and Attorney for ICAC where the following claims

were made:

Attorney’s fees Rs 10,000

Counsel’s fees Rs 10,000

The respondent objected to the taxation of the bill in each case on the

ground that Mr Sohawon was not entitled to Attorney’s fees as claimed by

him in the bill of costs as he was an attorney who was in the employment

of ICAC and as such he could not make a claim for Attorney’s fees as he

had done.

The Deputy Master and Registrar retained the submissions of the

respondent who had rested her case on the authority of Gungabissoon

[1956 MR 557] to submit that ICAC was not entitled to Attorney’s fees as it

had not incurred additional fees to defend the cases since the attorney who

appeared for it was employed by it. The Deputy Master and Registrar

decided that since Mr Sohawon, as attorney, was “employed” by ICAC, and

no justification having been given for the Attorney’s fees claimed by Mr

Sohawon in the bill of costs, it would not be fair or reasonable in such

circumstances to allow them. He accordingly did not allow the bill of costs

in respect of Attorney’s fees.

The Appellate Court after having referred to Article 130 of the Code de

Procedure Civile, the cases of Poorun v Civil Partnership “Nouvelle Societe”

Ramdenee Freres & Cie & Ors [1960 MR 286] and Mrs V. Besooa v Ruth

Residence [2013 SCJ 389] held that the general principle is that costs

should go against the losing party.

The Court went on to conclude that whether the party has retained the

services of a private Attorney or Counsel or has been represented by an in

house Attorney or Counsel should not make any difference. Costs are

recoverable by a successful litigant even though the attorney is employed

on a salary basis. The case was referred back to the Master and

On 07/12/08, on their way to the shop, the accused was discussing their

problems with the deceased who would then refused to answer especially

when the accused asked the deceased about her lover. The Accused thus got

so angry that he used violence on the deceased to such an extent that the

deceased fell on the ground inert. He left the spot and called his sister

whom he informed that he was about to commit suicide as he had killed

the deceased. As he made his way through a nearby tea plantation, he

slashed both his forearms with the cutter. He spent the night in a wood and

in the morning he bought caustic soda which he ingested before going to

the house he was occupying to change his clothes. He then returned to hide

in the wood until dark when he returned to his house. Whilst he was inside

his house the police came. Before they entered the house he stabbed himself

at the abdomen with a knife. Insp Seebaruth, the main enquiring officer,

confirmed that the police raided the house of the accused and found him

with a knife planted in his abdomen. He was immediately taken to hospital

for treatment where he was admitted for some time. The officer confirmed

that the accused fully cooperated in the enquiry and right from the start he

made a clean breast and expressed remorse for what he had done.

After having taken into consideration the mitigating factors, the Court

sentenced the accused to undergo 23 years penal servitude from which was

deducted the 89 days which he spent on remand.

ELLAPEN v THE STATE [2015] SCJ 335

Hon. A. Hamuth, Judge and Hon. O. B. Madhub, Judge

Definition of Soliciting , Section 72 of the Tourism Act

This is an appeal against the judgment of the Learned Magistrate of the

District Court of Pamplemousses, who found the appellant, then accused,

guilty under the charge of “working as a canvasser without being the

holder of a canvasser’s permit”, in breach of section 72 of the Tourism

Authority Act, and for which he was sentenced to pay a fine of Rs 8,000

plus Rs 100 as costs.

Grounds of appeal 1, 2 and 4 were argued together and relate to the

appreciation of the evidence adduced by the Prosecution by the Magistrate,

in particular that of Police Officer Bhunjun. Ground 3 was in relation to the

consideration or lack of consideration by the Learned Magistrate of the

version given by the Appellant as his defence.

The facts of the case are such that on or about 29 July 2010, while PC

Bhunjun was on patrol on the beach he saw accused soliciting tourists in

relation to water sports activities. In fact, accused had in his possession an

album of photographs which contained details of various offers in relation

to pleasure crafts activities and was speaking to the alleged tourists in

French. Accused does not deny those facts but stated that he was just

talking to customers who had been on his boat earlier.

Page 13

October 2015- Issue 52 305(1)(b), 301 (1)(c) and 305 (1)(a) of the Criminal Code. He was sentenced

to undergo 3 years penal servitude under Count 1, 3 years penal servitude

under Count 3, one year imprisonment under Count 4 and six months

imprisonment under count 8.

There were 8 grounds of appeal challenging the sentence imposed by the

Learned Magistrate. At the hearing of the present appeal grounds 7 and 8

were dropped and grounds 1,2,4,5 and 6 which basically question the

“harshness” of the sentence were argued together. Ground 3 which was

argued separately, questions the propriety of the Intermediate Court not

making a community service order in lieu of a custodial sentence, from a

“proportionality perspective”.

The Appellate Court considered the judgment of the Learned Magistrate

and found it to be concise given the fact that the Appellant pleaded guilty.

The statements of the appellant were full confessions. It was hence

apparent from these statements, that the Appellant was the ring leader of

his group of friends involved in the offences. He was the one who instituted

the preliminary actions that eventually led to the commission of the crimes

and had full control of the vehicle in which the “band” was travelling.

Further, it is clear that was it not for the arrest of his accomplices, the

appellant would not have surrendered himself to the police, and part of

the stolen goods which were kept by the appellant, for re-sale purposes in

the car, would not have been recovered.

The Appellate Court thus concluded that the Learned Magistrate took into

account the sentencing principles applicable to the present case before

imposing the sentence. The Appellate Court thus held that the appellant

fully deserved the sentence. The Appeal was dismissed.

THE STATE v ALEXANDRE ZICO KOOMANIKOOA [2015] SCJ 340

Hon. J. Benjamin G. Marie Joseph, Judge

Murder, Guilty plea , Sentence

The accused stood charged on an amended information with having on

the 7th December, 2008 committed the offence of manslaughter on the

person of his wife Marie Christine Theodore, in breach of sections 215 and

223(3) of the Criminal Code. He pleaded guilty to the charge.

In the light of the guilty plea of the accused, he was found guilty as

charged.

With regards to the facts of the case, the Accused confessed in his

statements that him and the deceased got married in 2001 and at the

material time they had four children. Their relationship turned sour in

2008 and the accused’s family moved out from the accused mother’s place

to that of the deceased’s grandmother. It was after several over family

disputes and separation that the Accused came to know that the deceased

was having an affair with a man from Rodrigues and the deceased was

planning to move in with the latter in Roche Bois. As he loved the deceased

and was desperate as well as jealous, he managed to convince the deceased

to come back with him at his sister’s place.

Pamplemousses District Court of the offence of simple assault upon the

person of his wife in breach of section 230(1) of the Criminal Code and was

sentenced to two weeks’ imprisonment.

He appealed against his sentence as being manifestly harsh and excessive.

Learned Counsel for the respondent is not resisting the appeal and has

conceded that the sentence of two weeks’ imprisonment is manifestly

harsh and excessive inasmuch as in passing sentence the learned

Magistrate took into consideration matters which are not borne out by the

evidence on record. She also submitted that the learned Magistrate

appeared to have considered the not guilty plea of the appellant as an

aggravating factor.

The circumstances of the offence as related by the appellant’s wife to the

trial Court reveal that on 22 December 2012 a dispute arose between the

appellant and his wife following which the appellant slapped her several

times resulting in a swollen cheek and injuries to her eye.

The appellant’s version to his wife’s allegations was a mere denial. The

Magistrate accepted the wife’s version and convicted the appellant. After a

document showing that on 22 March 2013 the appellant was fined for a

breach of a protection order was admitted in evidence, the learned

Magistrate proceeded to sentence the appellant in the following terms:-

“Taking into account all the circumstances of this charge including the

nature of the injuries sustained by the victim, the fact that accused has a

previous for “breach of protection order” which indicate a progressivity for

violence, his apologies in Court, and the fact that he chose to plead ‘not

guilty’. When the evidence has shown otherwise (he cannot benefit of the

early guilty plea discount). I sentence accused to undergo two weeks

imprisonment to pay Rs 100 costs.”

The Appellate Court thus held that the appellant’s failure to comply with a

protection order was indicative of a “progressivity for violence” but was not

borne out by the evidence. The Court thus held that a trial Court when

passing sentence must take only relevant factors into consideration and

should refrain from drawing unnecessary inferences in the absence of

supporting evidence. Furthermore, a sentence must also reflect an

appropriate punishment for the offence for which the offender is being

sentenced. The Appeal was allowed and the case was remitted to the

relevant district court for a community service to be contemplated.

Page 14

October 2015- Issue 52 The contention of the appellant is that the Learned Magistrate failed to

give enough weight to the fact that PC Bhunjun did not, either in his

statement to the police or in evidence in court, state the exact words which

the accused now appellant, allegedly told the tourists; he was not aware at

that material time that the appellant was in fact a skipper and was the

owner of a boat; and lastly no statements were recorded from the said

“tourists”.

Counsel for the appellant submitted that had the Learned Magistrate

considered those elements, he ought to have found that there was not

enough evidence to conclude that appellant was “soliciting”. Counsel for

the prosecution on his part submitted that the act of “soliciting” can be

inferred from the conduct of the accused, and there was enough evidence

on record, for the Learned Magistrate to have inferred that the accused

was soliciting.

As regards ground 3, appellant submitted that the Learned Magistrate

failed to take into account the version of the accused namely that he was

merely speaking to tourists who had been on his craft earlier. Counsel for

the respondent on the other hand pointed out that the Learned

Magistrate did make specific mention of the accused’s version and did

give adequate reasons why same was rejected.

The Appellate Court thus held that an indication of the exact words

spoken would have assisted but they held that there was enough material

before the Magistrate to justify his conclusion. The Court went on to

analyse the word to “solicit” and held that what amount to solicit would

depend upon:

(a) The circumstances under consideration and

(b) Whether an activity proved against the “defendant” amounts

to a request to another, will depend on the nature of the

activity proved and the circumstances in which the activity

took place.

Based on the above, the Court held that it is clear that not always active

participation or positive act will be required.

In the present case, clearly on the undisputed facts, coupled with the fact

that there is undisputed evidence that the accused had, at the material

time, in his possession an album which contained details of various offers

in relation to pleasure craft activities, the Learned Magistrate was

perfectly entitled to have come to the conclusion that appellant had been

“soliciting”.

The grounds failed and the appeal was dismissed with costs.

PURMANUND D v THE STATE [2015] SCJ 333

Hon. N. Devat, Judge and D. Chan Kan Cheong, Judge

Assault , Sentence, Harsh and Excessive

The appellant was found guilty by the District Magistrate of

List of new ly sworn-in barristers of the Mauritian Bar

Page 15


September 2015

The Mauritius Bar Association has, since 25th September 2015, 13 new members. They are Mr Sanjaye Bhuwanee, Mr Ajit

Joyekurrun, Mr Iqbal Mohammad Hematally, Ms Marie Valentine Mayer, Mr Arshaad Inder, Mr Yohann Rajahbalee, Mr

Trishul Yovan Naga, Ms Roudhita Devi Ramyead, Ms Marie Véronique Cui Ling Low Kwan Sang, Mr Vishwanath Ashvin

Ramdhian, Mr Nabiil Shamtally, Mr Shiv Koomarsingh Servansingh et Ms Kayal Vizhi Munisami.

The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions congratulates the new barristers especially Ms Mayer, Mr Rajahbalee, Mr

Shamtally, Mr Ramdhian and Ms Munisami who were pupils at the Office.

“ Every man is guilty of all the good he

did not do.”

Voltaire

rallye illégal : le dpp veut un durcissement des lois

Documents

law officers

enquiry officers

numerous police officers

substantive law

mauritian legal system

stm intern sociology

civil code

panoply of legal issues