Very many people seek and accede to (or find it thrust upon them!) positions of responsibility - in politics, corporations and institutions, trade unions, media, the professions, socio-cultural organizations, the clergy, etc. Positions, which require individuals to do some or all of these aspects of governance:

Monitor a sector, identify human and technical needs; Build-up admin& action teams; Consult with all concerned; Seek advice on the best available solutions; Plan for both short and long term; Take decisions, always in the interest of people?s welfare; Evaluate results for positive improvements, and Re-adjust, innovate and continue.

■ Equality

The theory that communism meant equality for all, collective decision-making and collective work is as much a fallacy as apartheid was supposedly standing for ?separate but equal living?! Hierarchy quickly establishes itself and (as I witnessed first hand in USSR, East Germany, Poland and Czechoslovakia of the 80s) all governance and privileges fell into the hands of party members, none to the vast majority of citizens (one saving grace: the party members rose from the ranks, not as a result of birth or aristocratic connections). More unequal societies could not be found, except in the days of apartheid in South Africa.

It may be a hard thing to say, but in 21st century Mauritius we are, in some ways, at a similar stage. The perception is that, by and large, only those identified as PTr members and supporters get into everything, get everything, the others are plain left out! (Lest you think that I single out the PTr. for criticism, the MMM of 1982 was perceived as doing the same thing!) Except that we are now in the 21st century and that those now governing Mauritius were chosen by the electorate on the basis and promise of ?equality for all?.

In a system of voting through secret ballot, how can anyone know who voted for whom, unless given individuals stand up and claim things like ?remember that I supported you and voted for you, now that you are in power, what can you do for me!? Such a ?démarche? is of course totally unethical and unjust. What is even more unjust (but here we are up against that common trait of human nature to yield to flattery) is the response of those who govern and who succumb to the ?need? to reward perceived ?followers?, often regardless of their abilities and what is more to the point, regardless of the competencies of other citizens.

■ Learning to govern

Is it fair and realistic to expect a newcomer of no particular distinction to successfully and responsibly plan let?s say housing, energy sources, national health services, sports, cultural enrichment, sustainable development or the economy of an entire State? Definitely governance has to be learnt. Therefore no one still at ?governance level? of only ?CPE or SC equivalent? should be given, so to speak, ?the command of the aircraft?, lest it crashes and kills everyone on board.

Isn?t there sound wisdom in the American system, whereby the chief executive (the president) chooses whoever he identifies as the most competent to ?govern? a given sector? (albeit a choice subject to scrutiny and clearance by elected senators and representatives). Danger arises when the wisdom of the man at the top is itself flawed!

We can finally and usefully examine some of the concepts or principles by which elected representatives can achieve good governance:

Member of a party or group, once elected by free and secret ballot, the person takes office as representative of the whole constituency, appointed a minister governs the given sector for the benefit of all citizens, and indeed for a PM, becomes the PM of the entire country, definitely NOT the benefactor of only his/her so-called followers. This is equally true for all appointed heads and cadres of national institutions or corporations.

Elected on a programme or platform in a given month and year, representatives may have to pursue different policies relating to rapidly changed circumstances in the country/region/world, with in all cases, the benefit of teh country and the well-being of its citizens first (to take the aircraft comparison once again, flights are quietly de-routed when the destination airport is unusable, insisting to land there as scheduled could mean disaster!).

Utilise the best competencies and expertise available, first those locally available, then from abroad, if need be, to achieve above aim.

Governance equals service, hence the last to be served are self, friends, family and clan. Use of elected office to serve oneself with resources meant for the common good is akin to a ?crime against humanity?. Taking land use as a crucial example, in such a small (2000km2) overcrowded island as Mauritius, good governance requires setting up of systems to collect for the nation a substantial proportion of the profits, which promoters will make when granted a morcellement, land conversion or IRS permit.

An unbelievable but true example of awful governance from elsewhere was the attempt by the government of Kenya to de-gazette Amboseli National Park, one of the jewels of this world! Governance equals ?stewardship? of resources entrusted to one, not their misuse and mismanagement. In my experience, relatively few are those in power, in any country of the world, who have reached this required degree of selflessness, so that the fight for probity is going to be a hard and long one.

Dr. Michael ATCHIA [email protected]