UK privy council considers election petition concerning Mauritian national assembly election & offence of ‘bribery’, and freedom of expression
16/10/2023
On 10 July, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council heard the appeal in Dayal v Jugnauth & ors.
The appeal arises from an election petition concerning the conduct of the 2019 Mauritian National Assembly election and raises important issues concerning the scope of the election offence of ‘bribery’, and freedom of expression in electoral campaigns.
The case concerns the 2019 Mauritius National Assembly election in Constituency No. 8.
The Appellant and the First to Third Respondents were candidates in that constituency election.
The Appellant was unsuccessful in the election. The First to Third Respondents were each returned as members of the National Assembly for Constituency No. 8 and the First Respondent (Mr Pravind Jugnauth) continued to serve as Prime Minister of Mauritius.
By a petition presented to the Supreme Court of Mauritius, the Appellant alleged that the First to Third Respondents was to be avoided by reason of bribery and/or treating and/or undue influence.
In particular the Appellant alleged that promises made by the First Respondent during the election campaign to increase the basic retirement pension, to accelerate forms of public sector pay and terms, and to pay a one-off performance bonus to police officers, firemen and prison officers constituted bribery.
The Appellant further alleged that the provision of food, drink and entertainment at an event organised by the Ministry of Social Security at which the First Respondent spoke constituted treating.
In 2021 the Supreme Court of Mauritius dismissed the election petition on all grounds. The Appellant has appealed to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council with leave of the Supreme Court of Mauritius.
Guy Vassall-Adams KC and Tim James-Matthews appeared for the First to Third Respondents (together with Ravindra Chetty SC), instructed by Nick Wrightson and Nick de Mulder of Kingsley Napley and Shamila Romila Sonah-Ori.
Helen Mountfield KC appeared for the Fourth and Sixth Respondents, the Electoral Commissioner of Mauritius, and the returning officer for the relevant constituency (together with Annabelle Ombrasine), instructed by RWK Goodman Derrick.
Case Summary https://www.jcpc.uk/cases/jcpc-2023-0006.html
The Team
Meet the team of industry experts behind Comsure
Find out moreLatest News
Keep up to date with the very latest news from Comsure
Find out moreGallery
View our latest imagery from our news and work
Find out moreContact
Think we can help you and your business? Chat to us today
Get In TouchNews Disclaimer
As well as owning and publishing Comsure's copyrighted works, Comsure wishes to use the copyright-protected works of others. To do so, Comsure is applying for exemptions in the UK copyright law. There are certain very specific situations where Comsure is permitted to do so without seeking permission from the owner. These exemptions are in the copyright sections of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (as amended)[www.gov.UK/government/publications/copyright-acts-and-related-laws]. Many situations allow for Comsure to apply for exemptions. These include 1] Non-commercial research and private study, 2] Criticism, review and reporting of current events, 3] the copying of works in any medium as long as the use is to illustrate a point. 4] no posting is for commercial purposes [payment]. (for a full list of exemptions, please read here www.gov.uk/guidance/exceptions-to-copyright]. Concerning the exceptions, Comsure will acknowledge the work of the source author by providing a link to the source material. Comsure claims no ownership of non-Comsure content. The non-Comsure articles posted on the Comsure website are deemed important, relevant, and newsworthy to a Comsure audience (e.g. regulated financial services and professional firms [DNFSBs]). Comsure does not wish to take any credit for the publication, and the publication can be read in full in its original form if you click the articles link that always accompanies the news item. Also, Comsure does not seek any payment for highlighting these important articles. If you want any article removed, Comsure will automatically do so on a reasonable request if you email info@comsuregroup.com.
As well as owning and publishing Comsure's copyrighted works, Comsure wishes to use the copyright-protected works of others. To do so, Comsure is applying for exemptions in the UK copyright law. There are certain very specific situations where Comsure is permitted to do so without seeking permission from the owner. These exemptions are in the copyright sections of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (as amended)[www.gov.UK/government/publications/copyright-acts-and-related-laws]. Many situations allow for Comsure to apply for exemptions. These include 1] Non-commercial research and private study, 2] Criticism, review and reporting of current events, 3] the copying of works in any medium as long as the use is to illustrate a point. 4] no posting is for commercial purposes [payment]. (for a full list of exemptions, please read here www.gov.uk/guidance/exceptions-to-copyright]. Concerning the exceptions, Comsure will acknowledge the work of the source author by providing a link to the source material. Comsure claims no ownership of non-Comsure content. The non-Comsure articles posted on the Comsure website are deemed important, relevant, and newsworthy to a Comsure audience (e.g. regulated financial services and professional firms [DNFSBs]). Comsure does not wish to take any credit for the publication, and the publication can be read in full in its original form if you click the articles link that always accompanies the news item. Also, Comsure does not seek any payment for highlighting these important articles. If you want any article removed, Comsure will automatically do so on a reasonable request if you email info@comsuregroup.com.