[Blog] Rant: In the shadow of humiliation

In the den of political power, where every movement is scrutinized, the sudden ousting of Vikram Hurdoyal from his ministerial post caused a real earthquake. This decision, executed in the darkness of a Sunday night, reveals the complexities and intrigues that underlie the workings of power. Analysis of the timing of this revocation raises questions.


Why did Prime Minister Pravind Jugnauth choose to dismiss his Minister of Agro-industry while he was on a private trip to Europe? Why didn't he wait for her return to explain to her face the reasons for his dismissal? Why was this decision announced around 8 p.m., almost when Vikram Hurdoyal was boarding the plane to return to the country? According to the latter, it was only when he got off the plane on Monday morning that he learned that he was no longer a member of the Cabinet.

The irony is that Vikram Hurdoyal had left Sir Seewoosagur Ramgoolam Airport as a VIP and returned there as an ordinary citizen. Playing a bit in the show, Vikram Hurdoyal preferred to return home in a taxi.

Certainly, the way in which he was dismissed is a form of humiliation which takes on another dimension when he says he does not know the reasons. The Eastern planter cannot hide the bitterness that gnaws at his insides. “Mo enn ti pe afekte. Mo leker extremman fermel,” he confided to the press.

We wonder what this fault could be that made him deserve this humiliating treatment. The lack of official communication from the government regarding the reasons for this revocation has left the population in suspense, thus fueling various speculations.

Some put forward the hypothesis of a relationship between Vikram Hurdoyal and Navin Ramgoolam, leader of the Labor Party. This so far unproven “proximity” would have been favored by the frustration of Vikram Hurdoyal since the dismissal of his “protege” as president of the Flacq District Council.

However, whether it is Vikram Hurdoyal or Navin Ramgoolam, they completely reject any secret contact. Despite these denials, gray areas remain, reinforced by the enigmatic remarks of Minister Soodesh Callichurn. The latter adds an additional dimension to the mystery surrounding this revocation: “Bannn news ki pe sirkile kom kwa li finn zwen Navin Ramgoolam, the leader of the Labor Party. If his hare then for me to get into trouble, we do not dakor with his party.”

Should we deduce that the Prime Minister wanted to immunize himself from the worst humiliation for a head of government represented by the resignation of a minister by inflicting a nocturnal dismissal without warning on Vikram Hurdoyal?

Beyond the conjectures, an implacable reality emerges: this nocturnal decision will have profound repercussions on the political landscape. It takes place in a context already marked by a series of controversies and scandals, highlighting the fragilities of a government at the end of its mandate. The previous week had been marked by a complaint of assault against Minister Ramdhany, thus adding an additional layer of controversy to the political picture. Although the alleged victim has recanted, there is no doubt that the opposition will not give up.

These events come on top of the earlier resignation of PPS Dhaliah amid allegations of influence peddling and bribery in the Eco Deer Park affair and continued insinuations surrounding Attorney General Maneesh Gobin. If the Prime Minister's decision to dismiss his Minister of Agribusiness turns out to be a blunder, he may actually have shot himself in the foot, triggering a series of events with unsuspected consequences. This could shake the foundations of his power while seriously compromising his chances of electoral victory, thus giving new impetus to the opposition alliance which so far is navigating timidly in rural waters.

Already, the opposition is busy urging Vikram Hurdoyal to resign as a deputy to provoke a by-election or, ideally for it, the legislative elections. These unforeseen developments, occurring close to the end of Pravind Jugnauth's mandate and the approach of the legislative elections, suggest a precarious political climate, conducive to instability and speculation. As noted political scientist John King pointed out in a recent analysis: “Transitions of power are often moments of fragility for existing governments. Political actors are subject to multiple pressures and must navigate carefully to avoid pitfalls.” This maxim seems particularly relevant in the current context, where challenges are piling up for the government at the end of its mandate.

The fundamental question that emerges from these political developments is whether they constitute symptoms of an attrition of power. Faced with these difficult circumstances, Pravind Jugnauth is forced to deploy mitigation strategies in order to neutralize the harmful repercussions. As former political advisor and influential columnist Mark Spencer reminds us: “Moments of crisis also offer opportunities for redemption for governments in trouble. How they respond to adversity can redefine their image and legitimacy in the public eye.”

Thus, Pravind Jugnauth and his team must galvanize their troops and above all convince the silent masses that they have the situation well in hand. And that the Hurdoyal episode is only a parenthesis.

However, to restore public trust, the government must refrain from making further mistakes and above all must communicate. Ultimately, the Hurdoyal case reveals the underbelly of political power, where decisions are made in the shadows and without qualms. He also reminds us that in the political arena, the line between calculated strategy and fatal error is thin, and that the consequences can be devastating for those who cross it because the leader will prove ruthless.