The prime minister?s office and the State House are two of the highest institutions in the country. They are supposed to function in harmony on the premises that the men behind these two institutions share a common vision in matters relating to the overall good of the State.

The authors of the Constitution must have felt that by resigning from his political party before assuming the office of president, the president would become politically neutral. In reality no politicians can completely dissociate himself from his political party or political colleagues even on assumption of the office of the president. This is the case not only in the Republic of Mauritius but around the world wherever a Constitution like ours is in force. To substantiate this point, it is in the domain of the public that the current president enjoys better relationship with the leader of the opposition than with the prime minister (PM). Without imputing any motive let me hasten to add that there is absolutely nothing wrong in such a state of affairs. On the other hand this does not prevent the PM to cultivate suspicion on the president?s integrity in so far as confidentiality of the state is concerned.

As any father the president has got a legitimate paternal ambition to see his son as the PM of the Republic. Everybody is aware of how the son has been made the Leader of the MSM unanimously and trustee of the Sun Trust. As far as the father is concerned the ideal situation would have been himself as president and his son as PM. Then the Republic would have functioned perfectly well without any tension. In pursuance of his ambition for his son, who can guarantee that the president will not share the secrets of the State with his son?

Even those who are opposed to the PM must be acknowledging that the PM is faced with a real dilemma. But being opponents it suits their interests that the PM should be a hostage to the caprices of the president and vice versa. The president is made of tougher mettles and he will go to any extent to make his son the PM. This is the only reason that explains his reluctance to depart from the State House.

Does it augur well for the Republic that the PM should face opposition in the National Assembly and the State House and with a free press that is closer to the opposition and hostile to the government for ethnic reasons? Certainly not, the opposition is issued from the will of the people, the press is independent of the state while the president is protected by the Constitution. Governing in such an environment will not be a pleasant thing for the PM.

The appropriate articles of the Constitution should be amended to allow the Prime Minister to revoke the president with a single majority. On the other hand should the president be removed by the procedure of destitution he should forfeit his pension and other benefits to which he may be entitled after vacating the office.

It is an established fact that like most political nominations that of the president?s also has its political dosage. Without the political benedictions of those in power nobody can ever dream of acceding to the highest office of the land. Any politician would like to have someone from his own flock as the president. If not allegiance the president owes at least some gratitude to him who has placed him in the office.

If not legally at least morally the president should take the exit door. But who does not remember of the slogan that was pronounced by a certain Anerood Jugnauth : moralite pa rempli vant.

Aamir SULEIMAN