[Ravatomanga Case] Junaid Fakim Caught in a Meeting with the Businessman
The former commissioner of the Financial Crimes Commission (FCC), Junaid Fakim, has been arrested in connection with the Mamy Ravatomanga case on a provisional charge of influence peddling. His arrest and subsequent transfer to Victoria Hospital in Candos for medical examinations have caused a significant shock within institutional and judicial circles. After being taken to the public hospital, he was admitted to a private clinic where he is currently receiving care. On Thursday afternoon, he appeared in the Rose-Hill court, where the FCC formally objected to his release on bail.
In court, the FCC presented two grounds for objection: the risk of witness tampering and the possibility of evidence tampering. These points were raised to justify keeping the former commissioner in custody. His lawyer, Me Urmila Boolell, responded by filing a motion for his conditional release, which will be debated next Monday. After leaving the court, she stated that the defense is "ready" to present its arguments before the magistrate.
The medical aspect of this case was also a significant focus during the hearing. Junaid Fakim's personal cardiologist, Dr. Timol, submitted a medical report detailing his patient's health condition. According to the doctor, the former commissioner could not remain in a police cell due to his medical conditions. In light of this report, the magistrate ordered that Junaid Fakim be immediately transferred to Victoria Hospital for comprehensive examinations. This decision was promptly executed, and the defendant was later admitted to a private clinic.
This arrest marks an unexpected turning point in the Mamy Ravatomanga case, which has been at the center of attention for several weeks. The Malagasy businessman, whose bank accounts were frozen in Mauritius at the FCC's request, is being investigated for money laundering. The arrest of the former commissioner, suspected of having exerted or attempted to exert undue influence, has breathed new life into the investigation while raising many questions about the behind-the-scenes dynamics between the parties involved.
In court, Me Urmila Boolell revisited the circumstances surrounding the meeting on October 14 at Junaid Fakim's brother's home in Quatre-Bornes. According to the presented version, this meeting was initiated by Nasser Bheeky, a family acquaintance, who requested Junaid Fakim for a meeting with the Malagasy businessman. The defendant, unaware of the purpose of the meeting, accepted the request out of courtesy, without imagining the implications it would later have.
On the evening of October 14, around 8 PM, Junaid Fakim arrived at his brother's home, where Nasser Bheeky was already present. Shortly after, Bheeky's phone rang. He left briefly and returned with three people: Mamy Ravatomanga, his son-in-law, and Christian Thomas. The ensuing discussion revolved around the difficulties faced by the businessman since his arrival in Mauritius. He reportedly mentioned an emergency landing and issues with local authorities, which Junaid Fakim initially attributed to the Passport and Immigration Office.
As the conversation progressed, Mamy Ravatomanga mentioned the freezing of his bank accounts, triggering an immediate reaction from Junaid Fakim. According to his statement, he then contacted the interim director general of the FCC, Sanjay Dawoodharry, to verify whether the Malagasy was indeed under investigation. Dawoodharry confirmed the existence of an ongoing procedure. Informed of this situation, Junaid Fakim immediately ended the meeting and left his brother's house.
Shortly after this episode, he submitted his resignation from the FCC, stating that he did not want his name associated with a case that could compromise the ongoing investigations. This gesture, which he describes as professional responsibility, is now interpreted by investigators as an element to examine in the context of the provisional charge against him.
The case has taken on a broader dimension within the FCC, with some observers citing attempts at interference or internal destabilization. Sources close to the institution mention "hidden forces" seeking to discredit the Commission and its interim director general, Sanjay Dawoodharry. These internal tensions, already perceptible for several weeks, have intensified with the arrest of the former commissioner, who was one of the first to lead the FCC in its early days.
The investigation into potential links between Junaid Fakim and Mamy Ravatomanga continues, with particular attention being paid to communications and exchanges that took place before and after the October 14 meeting. Investigators are particularly trying to determine whether the former commissioner used his influence to intervene in administrative or judicial processes concerning the Malagasy businessman. So far, no tangible evidence has been made public, but the FCC maintains its position, asserting that the risk of obstructing the investigation justifies continued detention.
The hearing scheduled for next Monday in the Rose-Hill court will be crucial for the future of this case. The defense plans to argue that their client's presence at the meeting had no criminal intent and that he took immediate necessary actions once he understood the nature of the problem. Meanwhile, the FCC relies on the exchanges and circumstances surrounding the meeting to support its objection to the release.
The arrest of Junaid Fakim, a well-known figure in institutional circles, has caused shock within the FCC and among the public. This development comes amid efforts by the FCC to bolster its image and consolidate its authority following several sensitive investigations. The case, now closely monitored, highlights the pressures and internal tensions faced by institutions tasked with combating corruption and money laundering in Mauritius.
The fate of the former commissioner will now hinge on the magistrate's decision next Monday. In the meantime, he remains hospitalized under medical supervision, while the FCC continues its investigations into the ramifications of this case, which, beyond the individual case of Junaid Fakim, reveals the vulnerabilities and power struggles at the very heart of the Mauritian institutional framework.
