Before the Judge in Chambers Application made under Section 45 of The Representation of The People Act, 1958 {As Amended) In the matter oft DR. NAVINCHANDRA RAMGOOLAM GCSK FRCP, of 37, Riverwalls, Vacoas PETITIONER vs 41, HURDOYAL Teeruthraj, also known as Vikram, a Director of, Royal Road, Trou @’Eau Douce 2. NAZURALLY Mohammud Zahid, a Barrister At Law of , Royal Road, Mont-Ida 3. BHOLAH Soomilduth, also known as Sunil, a Finance Director of , Mgr Leen Ave, Quatre Bornes 4, THE ELECTORAL COMMISSIONER, ELECTORAL COMMISSIONER'S OFFICE, of 4¢% Floor, Max City Building, Cnr Louis Pasteur & Remy Ollier Streets, Port-Louis 5. THE ELECTORAL SUPERVISORY COMMISSION represented by its President of same address as above 6. THE RETURNING OFFICER for Constituency No 10, of Montagne Blanche and Grand River South East, Mr Naghee Reddy Kritananda, service to be effected at the Attorney General's Office, Port Louis Page 1 of 30,In the presence of: 1. SAUMTALLY MOHAMED REZA, of no.1, Avenue Rouget/Old Moka Road, Soreze, Pailles 2, SEETARAM JANGBAHADOORSING also known as Jim SEETARAM of Glen Park, Vacoas 3, MELANIE MARIE LUCIA, of 5 Ylang Ylang, Morc Rey, Pointes aux sables 4. KOONJUL SEEWOONARAIN, of Jouvence, D’Epinay 5. SADUL AKHTAR PARVEZ, of Koonjul Rd, Dagotiare 6. RAMGOOLAM ANIKETH, of Beedassy Lane, Montagne Blanche 7. RAMGOOLAM PRAVESH, of Kewal Nagar Road, Bramsthan CO-RESPONDENTS ELECTION PETITION The Petition of Dr Navinchandra Ramgoolam, an unreturned candidate of Constituency No. 10, residing at 37, River Walk, Vacoas, whose name is subscribed and who elects his legal domicile in the office of the undersigned Senior Attorney at law situate at Suite No. 5, First Floor, River Court, St Denis Street, Port Louis. RESPECTFULLY SHEWETH THAT 1. The Petitioner, Respondents Nos. 1 to 3 and Co-Respondents Nos. 1 to 7 were candidates at the National Assembly Elections 2019 (hereinafter referred to as the Page 2 of 306. 8. General Elections) for the Constituency of Montagne Blanche and Grand River South East (hereinafter referred to as the Constituency No. 10) held on the 7* of November 2019. Respondent No. 4 is, inter alia, responsible for the registration of electors and the organisation and holding of the General Elections as aforesaid. Respondent No. 5 has, inter alia, the general responsibility to supervise the registration of electors for the General Elections and to monitor the proper conduct of those elections more especially to ensure that the elections are free and fair. Respondent No. 6 was the appointed Returning Officer for Constituency of No. 10 for the last General Elections. . Co Respondents Nos.1 and 2 were unreturned candidates of Alliance Nationale at the General Elections for the Constituency No. 10. Co Respondents Nos. 3, 4 and 5 were unreturned candidates of the Mouvement Militant Mauricien (MMM) at the General Elections for the Constituency No. 10. Co-Respondents Nos. 6 and 7 were unreturned independent candidates at the General Elections for the Constituency No. 10. ‘The Petitioner avers that the 7 day of November 2019 was the appointed date for the holding of the General Elections for the 20 Constituencies of the Republic of Mauritius and that of Rodrigues following the dissolution of Parliament on the 6 October 2019 by the Prime Minister and Leader of the Alliance Morisien, the main opponent of the Alliance Nationale of which the Petitioner was the Leader. Page 3 of 30,9. The Petitioner states that, as appears from Government Notice 1841 of 2019, the following candidates were nominated for the General Elections at the abovementioned Constituency to wit; overt Noes No. 1841 of 019 “THE WATIONAL ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS REGULATIONS 014 TRaguatlons and 112), [NATIONAL ASSEMBLY ELECTIONS 2019 NOTICE OF POLLING DAY ELECTION OF THREE MEMBERS OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY FOR THE CONSTITUENCY OF MONTAGNE BLANCHE {AND GRAND RIVER SOUTH EAST Net she ven ote epee eco t save mone outer etn ow pening for i ey il ‘ep or th seven Cs) ny of Neves 2019 tween thro .0 a a 0 ling paling ns eae Best aR a a aaa leclietes [oma eanacaaen aoe eT 7 —_ 7 Se SS s ie ane cose tesa —— fee eee Te s Ss aT e A ee eee a a fe 7 ator i Tee ee i a St es ret ae fa TS eat Se a ate eee Seas fos eo ee ee Page 4 of 30, outs Bim MaMa EEG ALTS] Gia River Suh Et Goverment Saka Royal Ra, rsd River Sou Eat a a 16 Bassoodicb Ros Goverment Scho! Roya Ri, Branstn 17 | Gopecehand Chit Govesnen Seal School Lae, Boia an 1a [Sir ire Daa Gover Sebel [Royal Ra Tes D's Doe a ‘Anh cond ol i mpstie fleet aint sone costa le ‘Candies | Sex] Adtrer —[Occpation | Ferp/Perp | — Blecion | — Adivass — [Osupaon iwe™ | Agente 7 [Ain Lone [Nab [Okarboman a, SaPanpl! [NH ser [oats | Seems cqses Dose [Gemeaca : el 2 Arsion, ise [Repl Ra et A |SelRewpayed [NL Fegsmaih fg, [Seine Domaingse re Sic oun” Meteo 3] Baoan Pine [al [Bk a wae [Diver [uate ssa Juenun sae, oer cuatan suman’, ie. Pete Pasa, Roe- Sensei i tng sie 7 a [ave PBaiaoaes [Ri Baycnd, Ave, Vici, [Banerman [Paranda BAe Beene [be At Rivice Rive Sha stk [Aa Ram |Sept Cie Ts meorng . Tae [Royal Ra Bet Air | Siemon Siam [sgt CT + TRitncas ice She em Does | Mane Naan ten a oa omiceRa, | Cietagwae [kesitary, [ak | Ra_ Bal_[ Seem [8 Bios, [Cope Shad [Arie Sse Rom a At ‘Gendiotes | Sex | Airs | Ovenaon | Parga | tain | Adress sapation fence” | “Agent 7 |Bhesian, Shei [hale | tpi action, [Reid [Retna Pry |Ovzeumaty, [ave Do Pow [Raed bien ier Bese Verve” | Resnster Feet |iéne comp Mobemmad ia JeeMasaee Abcod Ra fonota, fise | Merten Ave, [Fimo |UAtine [Nestle [faa Ra, Company Duo Soom, ae fQseue Bones” | Drew; [stnsen’ | Vay Mowing inom aS Bina 9 | Bteiun, Sonali | Rena Ward 4, Fort ais Seleomloyed aatenary[Caccomen [Moro Ls [Saif Emplaped ‘Towmbgh |itichtere, Bet Aira: Sit To) Boolka, Henes |Nse [Neha Rd, | Sapp fsownen [Hine |Salad, [eiFonplged omar Brana ‘pemesie rama Ti] Booesab Nate, lise |r: Sobawon, [Job Gtr Neat, [Nore Schawon, |SetRBnpioyed a Caine, Bela nnn |Cwtinn BAe [Rive che irae tate 12 reedieto, fie [More San Sous, |Safenpope [Dito esnee Re, [Sa Enpined Peer ev | Mettage Banh sacks" |Neigus T3]Emmese sre fale [camp Toon, [Cation Maker[tnmdw |Himei? Camp Toons, [Cobne Nake ly [rev daw Bouse etme trowtna Dose Compson, My | Pron COS, Résidence I, [Sac Waker [unikccl —[idgdsetiee, ore a tie, [Commer ne Mersen KN Mere bfegie | Bel Air Rive [Sosy Mesatne |Site 15] erin le Seeenlyed tiation, |Bayjoo Lane 8 [eusewite Berk Rive Ween’ fiche, Bot Ai Site Te Donsa Me_|Fonld Poe Lard, Ba |Siak Wags] Heel” [Poste Be | Siac Manag DesiesMagers_|'""']aienise Sebo Arkiv Sate Page 5 of 30, Gi0e RO TE as wes BAR Pad HLT“10E 2900 TF as aa agg | a as | is hae — pow ame meme PR fa aa Lessad {Camp 46 Masque |Kheshave Pave ee i TE or Reena foe ome cer — egg ee ES feet ise mare eae as ae ila feoaet—faiee Jefe cae fae = oat a eset Geet | (ae eer Sigg rao ar asa fats nd foe ef E craig [ime [toad ony Net eats, feces Tiare Wa fey faze — Param [eesi Pa re saa Pe [Ebene ee on AW em R_|mas ff — ess Se eases eee ana fame — fat Yio a pe alarms frente — mais fama Yes — fe fas ema 77 Si eae ang nef Ya fate ea seer erin, Saag, — a mma ar fina hfs sas em, fo [eeaaae ea Bas ao Ta oma a |S sa | a a, oa = i = ii stata [pic — me SS er — Yo comp ies a 7 ESN oo os Shag i foe ee Fa fe a fee Eee, i Sie ea [ica moo foes RRL, ES Phar, Pm [amor emir faa Se reer st Ti a — fares pe ser Eo eo fac Samarra fae cers, foasamp——_fieaa —om om rae alte iat [Bianehe 33) Kalawon, | [Male | Royal Rd, [Taxi Driver [at Himself Royal Ra Text Driver af fg otamor sl T[ = a ae la St fas fee — maar ae ioc Oe Seewoonarcin, DeEpinay Director Nea Lane, Beroign aio known as : re isa te ean rae acs, [paar ee Ee en jraoomp fe ane peer a ae ag com fama Re Page 6 of 30 as aes Tie nS I HECandidates | Sar | Tires [seapaon | Party Pary | Elcom | —Adivest [Occupation ‘ance’? | Agents 5elMaamondaly, [ve [Royal R4, Pont | Shoemaker [FouSobiie [Himsoit | Ral RA, Poot [Shormaker iNedol ally Ese et A aera Laie, Bel Alt Rivers Sehie les aie Suche 5|Maaiarioous, [Wie Bowigue Cocos, |Edacatia [Ni Hingsif Bouigue Coos, Bduation And Mora Ally Riche re, Pseq [Ard Migration eke ae, [Migration Zula [Consus og ICorstan. 7a] Meine, Marie [Fewules, Wang lang, [Entrepreneur |woweneat — [Beequs Sen | ow, Roy, Bel_[Babeator ti Morey, atte fats Bernd [A Rie Ssh ax Saber fora Faataand, |e [Darwin RE, | SelPemplayed sn Hinscit! [Davin Rd, [Seifemployed Nase Corie cosine 2] dotangso, | i [Boulsnasie RB, [Comicon [Gooiemas, — [BusnoeRG, | Busnesman oust Bel iene Faréeca | oine, Ba A state ive Scho 43] Mosta, Dasa) ab [Burua Ra, Bet [Minemnce [WP [Bcodgo, shew [Real Rd, Dewp [Famer JARs che | Manogee ee stakr |e, Bel Aw aire Sake 44) tooaceewmy, |e [Resim Rd, Bet_[Coatscior [NE Lgerot, [Real Rd, St [Self Eapayed Seen Ai Rv Séake Brfiannad’ |e, Bl Air Rite Stabe as] on, Devanand [ha Reval Ra, Bel Ai | Saitemployea [Na Finkowses, [Buanne Lane, [Barter Rive Scho Satin Ram [Bul Air Riviere site aa], Makes |otae [Royal Ra, |Legal [NP fMiseit™ (Raydo tenses Comedie a7] tathawo, [tae Rep Rd, Bet Ai | Swot (NE Ramsay, [sumic Re, St | Fines insiucior cme Ally ive siche FRookaaee Miho, Be Air skin ‘Ganditaies | See | Adress [Ocenpaion | Pary Pap | Blealn | Addvas [Occupation alionce™ | Agens “a|smisany, [Male [Chenin Seip [xt Bhar, Deon [eyed Rd, [Dever Madeven ouenger, Bet Air Makese aie Stehe 9] Mrday, Seobears [Malo [Very Ra, Maka [Blericin [alk tiara [eo Nia Balle, | Becbicine ‘Ave Palen {uve More ns Souci, [Monupre [Bluse SalRtaually, Nile [Royal Rd, Mou [Bariserht [LAlics [Prov Suley [Maroax — [Diccor [Meher ahi] | is Ese [worsen | Dave |Goyeres Ra, \Cep de Mase pave | 51[ Patines, Jonas [Nale [Ave Royal Tou [Sefemployed [Paty ain [Hino Ave. nips, [SelPamployl [csitopie [eBee Douce Pata, Te len Boose 32[Puravb, Sunder [Male |MosqucRa, [Planter | Khas, Foye PManerRa, — | ScifEaploya setter JAbead | Cerotio, el Ae Rivne Sache $3]Ragoonanes, —|Nole [Dodotane, | Salfeapiyed [rt [Rurgien, [More Suas [Security Ast Rake [Mostagse Blanche Moctoezny | Sous, Moctape| Basch 3#]Ramgeclam, [Wale [Benismy Lane, [Diver [Ni Sesh, ft [Cail Rd, | Saif Eeployt lane Montage Biche Shakar IN Blanc 5]Ramgoclam, [ale [57 River Wal, |FamerPine [UAlinee Beast Nia [Burin Lara, | Sol Employ Nevineband, Floret Miser) Suan Mors Roy, Bet [frown ae De. Aleve Sede | Navia Ramgos Page 7 of 30, ime eraiaore aa RS HE EEwie al pans a ety ee ok te sd poem bese sda hen eyed Pt a i 268 ay eb 2019. “apt ony nthe ce ofa ey esion Page 8 of 30, CL ADODOL RAHMAN ‘eae nin Tonnes | Sar aes [option | Pay 5 | Bon | ais ccapaon “ites? | “iene Sliamgstan, [Nae owngrRO, [atempoyd [Ri |Ramthn, [Cap Mae [Epo on Sanit Sane [pet i]ionti Dyan [Forte Rasnes ns |indon [Rat Emin [ioe de, Sodee [een Cg G3] faanos Satcpioed [amen [Tema Ne 1,0 Fem essa Devore Seemed tare lima area futons, —[Caopmte Ra, Dior Feats, ene he alsest alr Yate [Koosund, [Emma arenes iit, (Lala, aor Eas Desse Mame itor’ ata Narn san alsaccgam tac] ale [Rainge Ra [aciPenpoyed [Mowers imal [eNom | SFempiyed is Moms Stosee aa ear fees, Seen alinamaiy, [wae ata Sem [meee aTIow —Yispsa, Romi ks, [Camere elton Pit Beco’ [Rawnse [Rtn Pax sang bt | Rer ne ire [Nate ont ifsc Ses Jae Rogan, von [sar pea)in pas Pee [CREST [eae eer Cap fate" Vege [ates ever Bae alten, Jie [Ries [Banter [Ena moh, — Roped, [RAE Speers |" Bet ice iinae [oRd (eee she settee eee Sete Fecptan eo fnobeac fase z Ceca | x | — Alas Oar | ay | — Ben | — Aas cpa 45 Serajusay, Abdoot | Male [vaniée Best i ed [vat aa Fr eed fhosdaroece [em Peat [Beseezaate, [Seteceroret soning. ae Yost Demers aa ana feceh ar Yin [beer vitesse eke Be i Grote TE ae10. The Petitioner avers that as per the website of the Respondent No. 4 there were, in total, 42,594 valid ballot papers counted at the General Elections for Constituency No.10. 11. The Petitioner avers that the Respondent No. 6 did after the count held on the 8% and 9% of November 2019, declare in the early morning of the 9t* of November 2019 at about 03:30 hrs and proclaim that the number of lawful and valid votes secured by the abovenamed candidates at the said election were as follows: Ses 7 Cee eee [eAtlance Merten apne INRZGRACLY, MavammudZaha —|CAiTanee Woriton i fia |TaiTanee Work ao ey [BHOLAR, Scamslauth, azo Known |CAlTance Morilen i iver ith aaa Rrown |AlTance Moral Ia Sena l aces [RANGOOUAN Navnohandra, also |CAlTanos Nate [Fea xcwn 8 Or. Navn Ramgeoim 78a | 41.170% [SAUMTALLY, Wohamied Reza ——[CASnce Wats [nose Tae | wae ISEETARAM, Jangbanadoorsing—UAlsance National Jains svaraeo Maia Ragpenand, at 12609 | 20.16% lknown as Jim Seetarar eden fRECARTE, a Cc Fegagrer rarer Yoana RoR TS Ge oat JESSR, Sevrseraaln ate Wawaranaantnaursen re cael eam [SADUL, Atiar Parez Mouvement art eurcian si [rama 4877 | to.980% [TEN FERRE Garand Dakar ——]i00% Gtovons [Sener Pam) >) arom FLORE avi lean NoeT [Parr Raa aT PRT [Sanaa PoRaRTEN| — ST saan [BHOTON, Sona [Renn Pary [Sarwar Pome] 3 sono [SOMBRGHOW, Wary Dany Tear aon PR wal Popa ry Day [PRT TH PRO [Serer FopaaTEn oT a asone [BORER ns BaRSS TOT IT Isenerarrasaaten| 59, [BREERON, Shescrarza Guia [Ronn Pary [moi [Mohammad gbel Aad Khan SSH [HOSENGOCUS, Abdcol Raman [Fron Soldaris Neioaa FSM [asin me | onmn IRAGOOLAN Ana ne Rao pre JPRELINES, Jonatan CRTRpRE [Par Way [serara PORIST] 5 Taser[SEETAL Sudan i Fao mos | arr IRANGOOLAN, Pravesh IN Fina 199_[ 0.467% SERAIUDOY,, ichanimad Ni Most ERAUDDY, ea cReaE aaa Me en ile Maen ia IDULLOG, Mokamod Fess [Front Soidarle Maurcen (FSM) [isin aoe agi |FANCHETTE, Jean Aa cr: (FCO) | Sane Po "ANCHETTE, Jean Aan Forum des CRayens Libres (CU) maa | gare JADELE, Lous desques Destée Laval [ener Ponuaion) >| a ora, ]CATHERIE: Joseph Hesiey Farum des Gayene es FOL) [General Popaatn] 5 | gory [SOWGRGAR, Ramo, IN Find iit _| over OO a [Front Solara Maura asi MAHAMOODALLY, AbcooT Aly i Soidarte Maurcon FSM) ancl pase |MORDAY, Season ae [Senet Ponaaten] | a aaane |SALEEGRAM, Laloo INowverentDemorique inde lusiaver | a221% |SFUREOO, Asivia Kamar INL [and 30 anT% IBATOUR, ere Chistian [am raPopdeton| Re [General Popa etl oazone IMORAMUD, Nasseeb IN Ist 7a | 08a IMOOKLALL, Carre Nt. indo 78_| 0.165% JWRUDARECCUS. Neen y ja ost Ba tna 100, Wansa Tanisie ial Popation [eoour Paid [ceneral Popak eH aioe [BOOLAR, ernan Kumar owenant DemosTaique Fina Mawson ee IDOSONYEE: Khana) Iai [na Bi _ | O15, [DASSY, Khorray IN Find 62) 0.146% [MORANGOO, Vousast INC Mest et 0.149% [RAWNIAL, Bhcopendiorath IN indo 60 | ara [FOOLESSUR TAULLOO, Pram [NIL ind 58 | 0.136% MRT, Daayea ani Lami aT Popuaton| JRANRIIT, Dooy Pari [General Pop ear ayane CUCRHION, Gecroodutr IN Fae Taree BEEFARRY, Wonarnad ar asi assez [SHEERRARY. Oopnee Shad [NC [ana | arm JRAGOONANAN, Rakesh RC [ind 50 | G16 IBAYCHAND, Aakash Int [Rao a7_| Os10%. IBOOTEEAH NAKO, ay ING ed 46_| 0.708% REERAR, Yogesh IN ea a6 [a f08%6UROD, Mona VousauT NC sate ae MODHAWG, Moharimad Aly RSG]NIC Iasi esta tacaese [TEE Wana nT rings ai o.c8aee IpURTAUG, Satadar NIC, [Hing ax | e.096%6 ISUNOORY, Dewanand Tit Ting 38 | a.csz% MOONEESAWNY, Seaver Iwi Tats 36 [0.08% [AREKION. Drarmalngum INC Tanau 3a arr [SOKOOK. Vinesrwur Nic Finda 32007 [iriuGOOROO, sosdesh IN Tring 31.0739 IMADHAvE. Subir INI ia 28 [0.05624 IiOORLI, Bavariane i Tings Br | 0.063% IMUNISAMY, Meaever a Irina 2a ]0.0698 RURGUT. Rajesn Ie nao 25 —[oo85 ISSOON, Seared] KGET INI [anew woos IRAMCATINE, Festina [Meiranen area Pring =F |Papene [SROUDANAKO,Teoran Bar INT Trg aoa TAWON, Narainduth mc Hina is —[o.052% Page 11 of 3012. The Petitioner avers that Respondents Nos. 1, 2 and 3 were declared to be returned as members of the National Assembly for Constituency No. 10. The Petitioner came fourth and was unreturned, having purportedly obtained 638 votes less than the Respondent No. 3. 13. The Petitioner avers that at the outset, the elections of the 7% of November 2019 were far from being free and fair as will be set out below. Abusive Use of the Mauritius Broadcasting Corporation (MBC) 14. The Petitioner avers that the MBC falls under the aegis of the Prime Minister's Office. The then Prime Minister, through his appointees at the MBC, has consistently since the announcement of the general election made use of the national television station before and during the Elections with the sole purpose of unduly influencing the electors to vote for the members of the “Alliance Morisien” including the Respondents Nos. 1 to 3. 15. The Petitioner avers that the MBC has continuously been making biased reports in favour of “L’Alliance Morisien”. For instance, on the 19% and 20" of October 2019, the MBC illegally diffused/aired in its French news bulletin a recording accompanied with comments from an unidentified reporter to the effect that the leader of “L’Alliance Nationale” ~ the Petitioner - (of the Labour Party) had allegedly misappropriated funds from his party for his personal use. 16. The Petitioner avers that the situation became so intolerable and abject that after complaints by the Mauritius Labour Party the Respondent No. 5 had to call the MBC to order. In fact, by way of a Communiqué dated the 29 October 2019, the Respondent No. 5 stated that it had found that the MBC had acted contrary to the Mauritius Broadcasting Corporation Act by expressing its opinion and departing from the statutory obligations of neutrality and impartiality, amongst others. Page 12 of 3017. The Petitioner avers that the MBC paid no heed to the reproaches of the Respondent No. 5 and persisted in its one sided biased approach by allocating prime airtime during its French news bulletin on the St November 2019 (i.e two days before the Elections) to one Mr Somduth Dulthumun. The said Mr Dulthumun made a direct communal appeal to the Hindu community of Mauritius based on a doctored, manipulated and truncated video clip of the Petitioner by inviting the “grande famille hindou” to teach the Petitioner a lesson. His statement was aired during the news bulletin, in breach of the MBC Act. The said Mr Dulthumun spilled his communal venom during the prime airtime allocated to him and tried to create a division between the hindu and muslim communities, in order to deflect the votes of the hindu voters in favour of the candidates of “L’Alliance Morisien” specifically in Constituency No. 10. 18.To exacerbate matters and to add insult to injury, the MBC refused to air the intervention of Mr Ramdhean, the President of the Mauritius Sanathan Dharma ‘Temple Federation who made a public declaration at a press conference attended by the MBC, condemning the speech of the said Mr Dulthumun. The bias of the MBC was patent and clear as it failed to present the other side of the coin. 19. The Petitioner is advised that misuse of the MBC amounts to an undue influence thereby affecting the integrity of the elections to the detriment of the Petitioner, the direct opponent of the Leader of Alliance Morisien, It cannot be discounted that, aware that the MBC had been taken to task by the Respondent No. 5, the Leader of the Alliance Morisien, Pravind Kumar Jugnauth must have condoned the persistent biased approach of the MBC as this clearly favoured his Alliance at the General Elections and ensured that the Petitioner was unreturned. 20, The Petitioner further avers that the MBC acted unlawfully when it also aired, to be viewed by the whole population, the banking details of the Petitioner which had been obtained in all confidentiality following a Judge’s Order by the Police and Page 13 of 30an undertaking given by the Police before the Judge in Chambers in yet another application, in breach of section 64(1)(aa) of the Banking Act. This purposive breach was not unintentional but malevolent in that it was done to damage the reputation of the Petitioner prior to the election and had a direct impact on the polls of 7*4 November 2019. 21. The Petitioner avers that the above acts and doings of the MBC are directly attributable to an orchestrated campaign masterminded by the minions of the Alliance Morisien and its Leader at the MBC to give the said Alliance Morisien an unfair advantage. IRREGULAR COMPILATION OF THE REGISTER OF ELECTORS 22, Mauritius being a sovereign democratic State, a person who is registered as an elector in a Constituency of Mauritius including No. 10 should be entitled to vote and choose a Government of his choice so that the precept of "a government by the people” is seen to be translated. Section 44 of the Constitution further provides for a right to vote to every citizen of the land who is of age and who is registered. The registration of a citizen as an elector is thus a fundamental right that cannot be lightly taken away. 23, The Petitioner avers that and the public at large were informed by Respondent No, 5 after the elections that more than 6,800 electors nationwide were deprived of their voting rights at the General Elections of 7* of November 2019. However, there has been no public announcement by the Respondent No. 5 of the number of persons per constituency who complained that they had not been allowed to vote. Therefore, there is no indication as to how many persons discovered that they were unregistered and unable to vote in Constituency No. 10. Page 14 of 30,24. The Petitioner avers that the real number of persons who could not vote is probably much larger than the number of complaints received. The Petitioner avers that the register of electors for the Constituency No. 10 was wrongly compiled and it was the duty of the Respondent No. 4 to ensure that the right persons were selected to carry out the annual survey of electors. At least the Respondent No, 4 ought to have realised upon the completion of the survey that there was an unusual number of persons whose names had been taken off the register and who were notallowed to vote. 25. The Petitioner avers that there is at least one person in Constituency No. 10 who has come forward to complain that although she had met with the officers of the Respondent No. 4 and duly filled in the registration form, yet her name was not on the register and she was not allowed to vote. That person has queried the officer who met with her and the latter replied that he had done his job and that questions ought to be put ‘higher up’. The Petitioner avers that it is impossible to fathom the degree of error marring this process and which has had a direct impact on the votes cast at the last elections including in Constituency No. 10. 26, The Petitioner avers that the registration officer of every Constituency of the Republic of Mauritius has to be a fit and proper person appointed by the Respondent No, 4 who also has the power to appoint assistant registration officers. The criteria for the appointment of the latter officers remains the same, thatiis,a fit and proper person. 27. The registration officer has a fundamental role in the election process and has a duty to compile a register of persons entitled to be registered as electors in a particular constituency on a yearly basis. 28. The Petitioner avers that the Respondent No. 4 himself in a public interview held in January 2019 stated that if the compiling of the register of electors is not carried out properly that would affect the credibility of the results of the elections. Page 15 of 30,Furthermore, in various public statements since the last elections, the Respondent No. 4 has made it clear that there have been errors committed during the voting and counting processes so that a recount would lead to different results. 29. The polling exercise of the 7 of November 2019 at Constituency No. 10 cannot thus be heard to be fair and free in a democratic society like ours. 30. The Petitioner avers that the election of the 7 of November 2019 at Constituency No. 10 is for the reasons stated above impeached so that the results emanating from the polls cannot be deemed to be regular and lawful thus rendering such results tainted. ‘THE CHOICE OF THE DATE FOR THE ELECTIONS 31. The Petitioner avers that the choice of polling day was done by the Leader of the Alliance Morisien, the outgoing Prime Minister Pravind Kumar Jugnauth, without paying heed to the fact that this was the period for the end of year examinations in all secondary schools more especially the School Certificate and Higher School Certificate examinations, so that all the schools used for the elections would not be made available. 32. The Petitioner avers that the Respondents Nos. 4 and 5 were forced to change polling centres which resulted in a general confusion on polling day. Voters who had traditionally been voting at a particular centre could not find their names on the list of voters. Some returned home without having accomplished their constitutional right to vote for a Government of their choice. 33. The Petitioner avers that information about the change of polling station was not disseminated appropriately or adequately and this also compounded the confusion and impacted directly on the voting process and ultimately the results of the elections. Page 16 of 30LARITIES ON POLLING DATE THE BALLOT PAPERS 34. The Petitioner avers that the returning officer should and ought to have made known to the candidates the number of ballot papers which he had been provided with and the number of ballots distributed to the various polling stations. 35, The Petitioner avers that every returning officer is provided by the Respondent No. 4 with sufficient ballot papers which must be provided to each polling station in his constituency. The imparting of this information is essential so that the candidates may effect a reconciliation. The presiding officer of each voting room as per the regulations in force is duty bound in the presence of any candidate, his election or polling agent to complete amongst others the ballot paper account showing the number of ballot papers entrusted to him and the number of any unused, spoilt and tendered ballot papers. 36. The Petitioner avers that this exercise of informing the candidates of the number of ballot papers which the Respondent No. 6 was provided with was not carried out. This default by the Respondent No. 6 has left doubts in the mind of the candidates as to the faithfulness in the communication of the actual number of ballot papers that had been made use of at that election. 37. The Petitioner avers that both his electoral agent and himself noted that on polling date, the prepose of Respondent No. § allowed data and extracts to be made in breach of the regulations. 38, The Petitioner is in presence of an instance where there has been personation and a deceased person has voted, namely late Mr Viswadeo Ramkalawon. This situation would not have taken place, had the registration officer been a fit and proper person duly appointed by the relevant authorities and fulfilled his duties whilst compiling the register of electors. The Petitioner avers that the Registrar Page 17 of 30General in Port Louis and civil status officers in other districts have a duty to provide to every registration officer a statement of the names of all deceased persons. Had the registration officer done his duty and called for such statement, no deceased would have ever cast a vote at the General Elections. It clearly appears that this process was not followed. ‘TRANSPORT OF BALLOT PAPERS Tt INTING 39. The Petitioner avers that after the close of polling, the Respondent No. 6 failed to ensure that all the agents who were earmarked to escort the lorries transporting the sealed ballot boxes to the counting centre were allowed to perform their duties properly. A number of lorries left the polling stations without any escort of, the agents of the Petitioner, thus casting serious doubts as to the manner in which the whole process was carried out and thereby entertaining serious fears that the ballot boxes may have been tampered with during the transport exercise. In fact, the Respondent No. 4, on 4% November 2019, gave a firm undertaking to the Petitioner that every single lorry agent would be allowed to perform the duties entrusted to him/her during the transport of the ballot boxes from the polling centres to the counting centres. 40. The Petitioner avers that it is the first time in the electoral history of Mauritius that there has been so much confusion and chaos when voting and so many irregularities in the handling of the transfer of ballot boxes to the counting centres. IRREGULARITIES DURING COUNTING THE TIMING OF THE COUNTING 41. The Petitioner avers that on polling day, the procedures laid down in the Regulations were not followed, although the returning officer had a duty to post up at the counting centre the total number of ballot papers in all ballot boxes; Page 18 of 30unused ballot papers, spoilt ballot papers; tendered ballot papers; electors assisted and proxies. This exercise is usually called for so that the candidates can reconcile the figures that had been provided on the eve by each presiding officer at each voting room. The Petitioner avers that since this exercise was not carried out, the candidates were left in the dark and had to make their own inferences regarding the faithfulness of the poll figures. 42, The Petitioner further avers that contrary to the regulations, the ballot boxes were not opened at 8 am and the counting was not proceeded with in a continuous flow until the results were announced. 43. The Petitioner avers the breaking of the seals exercise started late in the day and counting started around 1.30 pm. 44, The Petitioner avers that after the ballot boxes were opened and the ballot papers removed and packed in bundles of 100 ballot papers, these bundles were placed back in the unsealed ballot boxes. These unsealed ballot boxes containing the ballot papers were transported to another room before counting. As from then, the ballot papers in these unsealed ballot boxes were not under the scrutiny of anyone. It is only after a few hours that the boxes were moved to the counting rooms for the count to start. There were 22 counting rooms at Ramnarain Roy Government School in Constituency No. 10. 45. The Petitioner avers that not only did the counting start very late on the 8" of November 2019, but it ended at about 3 am the next morning something unheard of in Mauritius. During the whole counting exercise only two partial results were announced at 8 pm and 11 pm respectively and final results at about 3.30 am the next day. Again, something out of the ordinary and unheard of. The confusion created by the late counting and the pace of the counting exercise led to general fatigue amongst all concerned and must have resulted in human errors having been committed. The counting process necessitates great concentration by all Page 19 of 30concerned and one can easily understand any error and/or mistake that may have occurred during the last hours of that exercise which saw an extraordinary surge of ballots expressed for the first three Respondents. 46. The Petitioner avers that this whole process has led to errors which were patent when he was still at the counting centre but he cannot again gauge the level of the mistakes when the counting continued late in to the night and the early hours of the morning owing to the chaos reigning in the counting centre and the threats that wer ner avers that he was as a result forced to leave being made. The Peti the centre with his colleague candidates. ‘THE COMPUTER ROOM 47. The Petitioner avers that during counting it came to light that the Respondents Nos. 4 and 5 had adopted a new process as part of the counting of the votes of which no one was aware, ‘There was a computer room in the counting centre towards which all the results from each counting room was directed, It appears that a governmental company namely the State Informatics Limited had set up a control centre to compute all figures. However, this room was out of bounds and the Petitioner and his agents did not have access to it. What happened in this room is unknown to everyone and is a cause of grave concern as no one has been able to check whether the figures which were collected from the counting room were effectively and correctly transmitted to the computer room. There was furthermore no transparency as to who were the persons who were working in the computer room to input the data handed over and there was no control as to whether those data were the correct ones and were correctly input in the system. When one knows that the final results came from this computation, serious doubts linger as to the veracity of the results announced. This occurred in all constituencies across the island. Page 20 of 3048. The Petitioner avers that this new procedure had never been used in any other previous elections held in Mauritius and no one had been apprised of that new procedure and no rules were propounded in order to ensure that the transparency which erstwhile prevailed, when everything was being done manually in front of everyone, was guaranteed. 49. The Petitioner avers that he did not have access to the computer room and has no jea what occurred therein, It has come to light after the results were out that the computer system used, crashed during counting day. However, no one was aware of same and there is no indication as to whether any data was lost in the process. of the The opacity of the whole process raises serious doubts as to the reliab process as any error must have directly impacted the final results. 50. The Petitioner avers that the General Elections of the 7 of November 2019 is clearly impeached and/or tainted and cannot be termed to have been conducted in a free and fair manner. This new system adopted by the Respondent No. 4 for the first time at a General Election leaves doubt as to the faithful input of the results by its prepose and the eventual accuracy and precision of the final results. 51. The Petitioner avers that this new procedure put in place for this General Elections is a very amateurish procedure, in that the prepose of the Respondent No. 4 calls in in the counting units, collects the data without same having been counterchecked by the counting agent, proceeds to the computer room and compiles the figures into the computer in the absence of any of the counting and election agents of the candidates, ‘THE UNSEALED BALLOT BOXES 52. The Petitioner further avers that on the day of the count and before the ballot boxes were opened, the Petitioner and his agents noted that in two of the ballot boxes, the seal that they had affixed on the aperture of the ballot box were not in situ and were open. Page 21 of 3053. The Petitioner reported the above facts regarding the seals on two of the ballot boxes to the representative of Respondent No. 5. 54, The Petitioner avers that there is ground to suspect that these two ballot boxes and envelopes had been tampered with. NON-CONTINOUS COUNTING AND TREATING 55. The Petitioner avers that instead of allowing a continuous counting of the votes as prescribed by the Regulations, the Respondent No. 6 allowed a break in the counting exercise in some of the counting rooms. The Petitioner noted that in those rooms where the counting process was adjourned momentarily, the Respondent No. 6 did not cause the ballot papers and other documents relating to the election to be placed under his own seal and the seals of the agents of the candidates, In fact, no proper precaution was taken by the Respondent No. 6 for the security of the papers, documents and ballot papers as provided by law. The ballot papers were left lying around, At the material time they could easily have been tampered with. 56. The Petitioner avers that, the Respondent No. 1 even bought and offered meals at dinner time to the counting officials. This act of offering meals carried in large carton boxes to the officials took place at a time when the counting was still ongoing and had been adjourned momentarily. This act of Respondent No. 1 is tantamount to an act of treating. THE CONFUSION AND DISARRAY 57. The Petitioner avers that to add to the chaos that prevailed and was prevailing as, the counting proved to be endless, a growing crowd had gradually been allowed in the precincts of the counting centre. This crowd as counting unfolded became Poge 22 of 30,more and more vociferous, intimidating and turned downright hostile to those not supporting the Alliance Morisien more particularly the Petitioner, his colleague candidates and his election and counting agents. The police could no longer handle the situation and the Special Supporting Unit had to be called in, but to no avail. The crowd went so wild that the Petitioner had to be escorted under heavy guard {in order to be able to leave the premises safely, Meanwhile all the counting agents and other agents of the Alliance Nationale had to flee, fearing for their lives. As such the whole process of supervision the rights of the candidates opposing those of Alliance Morisien was flouted and downtrodden. 58. The Petitioner further avers that there were two namesakes on the ballot paper and this has caused great confusion when the names were being called in the counting rooms. The two other candidates, namely Co-Respondents Nos. 6 and 7, fielded 422 votes together. The fact that there were three persons by the name of Ramgoolam on the ballot papers and the election officials being greatly perturbed and disturbed when the counting exercise was being held, as alluded above, led to discrepancies and/or genuine mistakes in the computation of votes obtained by the Petitioner. There must have been more votes expressed in his favour that were not computed correctly. The prejudice is immense, untold and the results are thus tainted to such an extent as to render them unreliable. The unreliability of the results can only lead to one conclusion: that it is not in fact a true reflection of the will of the people. 59. The Petitioner avers that the smooth running of the counting process having been disrupted because of the intrusion of the hostile crowd within the counting centre precints in the middle of the process, the stressful condition under which the counting was taking place, the late hour and the likelihood of mistakes and discrepancies cropping up in the compiling and computation of figures, the Respondent No, 6 ought to have alerted the Respondent No. 5 and adjourned the counting process until the next day. This the Respondent No. 6 failed to do. The result is that the final results proclaimed are not the true results. Page 23 of 30THE REFI 60. The Petitioner avers that after he left the counting centre in the early hours of the morning of 9% November, he came back some time later as he was informed that he might have been returned in third position. Later, this information proved to be wrong but the Petitioner nonetheless went back in order to ask for a recount, as was his right. Arriving at the counting centre, he was advised by the police not to go inside, but he nonetheless insisted to do so. He was copiously insulted by a hostile crowd of the Alliance Morisien and the police was simply unable to contain the crowd. The Petitioner then saw Mr. Sooroojdev Phokeer, the recently elected Speaker of the House and a very active member of the Alliance Morisien team in the constituency, in the office of the Respondent No. 6 with the latter. The Petitioner was at first refused access to the Respondent No. 6 but upon his insistence he was finally taken to him when he made the request for the recount. 61. Following the announcement of the results around 3.30 am, he drew the attention of the Returning Officer as to the short comings and irregularities noted by him namely that (i) the figures published from counting rooms No. 12 and No. 15 were not the same as the actual votes cast in those counting rooms as appeared from the ballot papers (ii) some of the ballot papers did not have the official mark and (iii) in counting room No. 18, he was leading whilst the figures published showed the contrary and requested for a recount. After having heard the arguments of the Petitioner, the Respondent No. 6 concluded that the request for a recount was unreasonable, The Petitioner avers that the Respondent No. 6 erred in his appreciation of the issues raised by the Petitioner taking all the circumstances prevailing at the material time. 62. The Petitioner avers that the decision to refuse the recount because there had been no complaint before that time is patently wrong and any request for a recount must be viewed at the relevant time taking all the circumstances Page 24 of 30prevailing into account, In fact there is no timeline provided in the law for the request to be requested. 63. The Petitioner avers that Respondent No, 6 indeed accepts in his written decision that he had made a mistake in relation to a ballot paper that had been rejected at first but was later accepted, 64. The Petitioner avers that the fact that there was allegedly no complaint during counting is not a valid reason to refuse a recount. The many complaints and facts set out above clearly show in what circumstances the counting took place. Furthermore the decision to refuse the recount based on the fact that all the candidates were present during the recapitulation of votes is an erroneous statement of fact as the Petitioner was not present having been driven out together with his agents outside the precincts of the counting centre well before the end of the counting and the alleged recapitulation of votes. 65. The Petitioner avers that the Respondent No. 6 might well have been swayed due to the late hour of the request and the fatigue that had gained all concerned with the counting process. 66. The Petitioner avers that the counting exercise has been distorted and the votes at the proclamation of the results at Constituency No. 10 do not reflect correctly and truly the will of the electorate at that Constituency, their expression of choice having been frustrated by reason of the irregularities as stated above. 67.The credibility and reliability of the counting system have been seriously undermined at Constituency No. 10 as well as the democratic process enshrined in the Constitution of Mauritius. BALLOT PAPERS DISCOVERED AFTER ELECTIONS Page 25 of 30,68. The Petitioner avers that, as to day, three ballot papers for constituencies Nos. 3, 4, and 20 which ought to have been in the custody of the authorities have been found by third parties and there are police inquiries ongoing to determine why these ballot papers were not safely stored as is required by law. It would appear from press reports today that other official documents are also out in the public domain, a very disconcerting information if there is one. 69. The Petitioner avers that all this is a first and raises serious doubts as to the whole election process and it cannot be gainsaid that the very core of the democratic system has been tainted so much so that the results of the polls cannot be a true reflection of the will of the people. As such the election results cannot be allowed to stand in Constituency No. 10. PRINTING OF BALLOT PAPERS 70. The Petitioner avers that he has now first-hand information to the effect that ballot papers were printed outside the Government Printing Office premises at the premises of Quad Printing at Coromandel. This fact casts a cloud of corruption and deviousness on the election process as there is a real likelihood that stuffing would have occurred nationwide including Constituency No. 10. 71. The Petitioner avers that in view of the above facts and circumstances and in the interests of justice, the election in Constituency No. 10 should be avoided and a fresh election ordered in that Constituency. 72.Wherefore Your Petitioner prays: A, That it be declared by the Court that the Respondents Nos. 1 to 3 were not duly elected and/or returned to serve as members of the National Assembly for Constituency No.10 Montagne Blanche and Grand River South East and that their election is invalid, null and void and should be so decreed. Page 26 of 30B. That it be declared by the Court that in view of the averments contained in this Petition that, the Election in Constituency No. 10 was void because of the aforesaid irregularities, treating , undue influence and/or any valid reason C. Any such order /s as the above Honourable Court may deem fit and proper and/or as the justice of the case may require in the present circumstances. 73. In the alternative, should the Court hold that the elections at Constituency No. 10 ‘was not void, Your Petitioner prays that to ensure that the will of the electorate has not been frustrated as a result of the irregularities, short comings, mistake or miscount as particularised in the present electoral petition, that a partial recount of the ballot papers be ordered in respect of the Petitioner and the Respondents Nos. 1 to 3 at the General Elections for Constituency No. 10 held on the 07% of November 2019 and for that purpose:~ a) the Court orders the production and inspection of any rejected ballot paper; b) the Court orders the inspection of any counted ballot paper; ©) the Court orders the opening of any sealed packet of counterfoils of used ballot paper; 4) the Court directs: 1. the Respondent No. 4 or any other person who have the lawful custody of all sealed parcels containing the ballot papers in respect of the elections at Constituency No. 10 to produce same forthwith to the Master & Registrar ; Page 27 of 30Il, the Master & Registrar to take custody of the sealed packets, containing the counted ballot papers, the rejected ballot papers and other election documents pertaining to the above election at Constituency No. 10, for the purpose of carrying out of recount of each and every ballot paper; IIL, the Master & Registrar to carry out or cause to be carried out a recount of the said counted ballot papers at the earliest in the presence of the Petitioner, the Respondents, the Co-Respondents, their respective counsel and attorneys and any such other persons as the Court may deem fit and proper in the circumstances. IV. the Respondent No. 6, after the recount, to declare, at the counting centre of Constituency No. 10 that is, Ramnarain Roy Government School, to be returned in the appropriate order the candidate who has received the highest number of votes as a result of the recount and make all necessary and relevant official endorsement accordingly; and V. _ the Master & Registrar, following the recount, to seal all ballot papers and all other documents used in connection with the recount in boxes to be remitted to Respondent No 4. @) Any such order /s as the above Honourable Court may deem fit and proper and/or as the justice of the case may require in the present circumstances. £) That the costs of this action be borne by the Respondents. Page 28 of 30