Uncertainty looms over problem-plagued Independent Commission against Corruption (ICAC), as it enters a week of reckoning. Both ICAC itself and the Parliamentary Committee on ICAC, supposedly responsible for ?monitoring and reviewing the manner in which the Commission fulfils its functions?, are in a stalemate situation.

Xavier-Luc Duval, a member of the Opposition and of the Parliamentary Committee, holds that there is no evidence that could allow the Appointments? Committee to fire the three commissioners, Navin Beekarry, Gérard Bisasur and Moossa Taujoo. According to him, all this confusion at the ICAC at the moment would be the result of only one man?s ?inefficiency?: Racheed Daureeawoo, the Chairman of the Parliamentary Committee.

This is why the Opposition MP lodged a Motion of no confidence against the Chairman. After having accepted to include this item on the agenda of the last meeting, Racheed Daureeawoo, for no valid reason, backs down and avoids the debate. He soon gets into a mess and adjourns the meeting.

According to Madun Dulloo, a member of the Parliamentary Committee, ?that cannot be so?. Xavier-Luc Duval and Madun Dulloo argue that Racheed Daureeawoo should not even have been present during this meeting, as he cannot be judge and party. Xavier Luc Duval believes that Racheed Daureeawoo, by unilaterally leaving the meeting, can no longer be considered Chairman of the Committee. He maintains that: ?The five members of the Opposition can convene a new meeting and appoint a new chairman. Racheed Daureeawoo can also do so. If the situation remains unchanged, we should go to Court.? He explains that, their aim is nevertheless not to bring the issue to court, as they want to give another chance to the institution. Racheed Daureeawoo mildly defends himself by asserting that, in case of ?grave disorder?, the chairman is allowed to adjourn the Committee?s works even in the absence of a motion from any member.

The issue has brought the President and the Prime Minister into a conflicting situation. While the former is indirectly supporting ICAC, the latter has been very outspoken about his ill feelings

The fact that Racheed Daureeawoo refused to hear Roshi Bhadain during a meeting, though he was on the agenda, on the grounds that the Parliamentary Committee is going beyond its powers, gives one more reason to the Opposition to blame him. Roshi Bhadain, the former Director of Investigations at the ICAC, was to be heard regarding the letter he had sent to the Appointments? Committee - composed of the President of the Republic, Sir Anerood Jugnauth, the Prime Minister, Paul Bérenger, and the leader of the Opposition, Navin Ramgoolam.

In this letter, he accuses the three commissioners of ?irregularities? in the way they were managing the affairs of the ICAC as far as law and ethics are concerned. This letter is said to be at the origin of his dismissal. Racheed Daureeawoo has finally decided to hear Roshi Bhadain at the next Committee meeting.

However, this is being contested by the members of the Opposition of the Parliamentary Committee, and particularly by Arvin Boolell. If Racheed Daureeawoo is no longer the chairman of the Committee ? as the Opposition states ? he is no longer allowed to convene a meeting of the committee.

After these accusations, the Appointments? Committee is expected to meet and decide of the fate of the commissioners. However, the President says he is satisfied with the ICAC and its commissioners and therefore has not found it necessary to convene the Appointments? Committee.

The issue has brought the President and the Prime Minister into a conflicting situation. While the former is indirectly supporting ICAC, the latter has been very outspoken about his ill feelings towards the commissioners: ?The ICAC has disappointed the country and a solution must be found?. Even if Navin Ramgoolam, as member of the Appointments? Committee, decides to support one of the two other members, - we could suppose it would be the Prime Minister - the situation would still be at a standstill, as the Appointments? Committee may suspend a commissioner from office only by a unanimous decision of its members.

However, the leader of the Opposition might be taking advantage of this situation of deadlock. He knows the Prime Minister will tone down his criticism against the commissioners in order to avoid a fight with the President. This definitely suits the Leader of the Opposition as the resulting deadlock would show the incapacity of the government to solve this inner struggle.

At the moment, the ICAC looks more like a playground, where commissioners and members of Parliament prefer to squabble, than a serious Commission that must solve affairs of corruption. Even the country?s leaders do not seem to be in a hurry to take appropriate steps towards the commissioners. The problem is: the more time they take to find a way out of the crisis, the less the ICAC will be able to carry out its main goal: the fight against corruption.

<B>Lesage denies pocketing NPF money</B>

?I have not benefited from the money of the NPF?, maintains the former Chief Manager of the Mauritius Commercial Bank (MCB). This statement comes after the MCB has submitted ?documentary evidence? against Robert Lesage to the police. Robert Lesage is said to have embezzled Rs 500,000 from NPF accounts. Robert Lesage was, until now, accused of being the main actor of the financial scandal, but it is the first time he is accused of personally benefiting. The CCID will probably have to collaborate with ICAC to avoid duplication.

Pauline ETIENNE