Fatal Assault at Melrose Prison: An Investigative Commission Underway

Last Friday, in the National Assembly, Prime Minister Navin Ramgoolam announced the establishment of an inquiry commission following the death of inmate Andy Selmour. This commission, set up under the Public Inquiries Act and chaired by former judge Paul Lam Shang Leen, adds to an investigation being conducted by the criminal police.

However, this dual process has sparked division. While some view it as a necessary step to establish systemic responsibilities, others consider it unnecessarily cumbersome. Legal experts and human rights advocates are questioning both the effectiveness of the established mechanism and the structural failures of the Mauritian prison system.

Lawyer Jean Claude Bibi emphasizes that the decision is primarily political. "An inquiry commission aims to establish the facts and identify responsibilities. Depending on its mandate, it can examine broad aspects, such as prison policies," he explains. He clarifies that this process does not replace the police or judicial investigation but can "highlight shortcomings, recommend prosecutions, and propose structural reforms, particularly regarding prisons, oversight, and prevention."

Bibi is adamant that the conclusions of an inquiry commission cannot, by themselves, lead to criminal prosecutions. "The prerogative to prosecute criminally in Mauritius exclusively lies with the DPP," he reminds. However, inquiry commissions often have extensive investigative powers, sometimes broader than those of certain institutions, allowing them to hear witnesses under oath and require the production of documents. At the end of its proceedings, the report is submitted to the President of the Republic and then forwarded to the Cabinet, which decides on its publication and the subsequent actions to be taken.

Waste of Time

When asked about the risk that the commission may limit itself to administrative responsibilities, Bibi acknowledges that this possibility exists. "It will depend on the evidence collected," he states. If elements conducive to criminal prosecutions arise, the report may be forwarded to the DPP, the police, or other competent authorities.

Lawyer Ravi Rutnah, on the other hand, does not hide his skepticism. He believes that establishing an inquiry commission alongside the police investigation is a waste of time. He estimates that the commission's conclusions could take years, with no guarantee of publication. Worse, he argues that this procedure slows down a case that should have been clarified quickly. "We have moved beyond a simple settling of scores. There is likely a gang at work," he asserts.

The suspects are inmates, and authorities have access to surveillance footage: for Rutnah, the police investigation should have been concluded swiftly. "A death in prison under such circumstances is serious," he emphasizes, recalling that Andy Selmour's family has legal recourse. They can initiate action against the state, as the principal, and against the Commissioner of Prisons, as the agent.

Beyond the individual tragedy, Bibi sees in this case a symptom of a prison system that needs deep reform. The lawyer mentions the presence of drugs in prison and the corruption affecting several agencies. He calls for a revision of the training of guards and their salary structure to "reduce the risks of misconduct."