Source: United Nations – Geneva
The Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination today concluded its consideration of the combined twenty-fourth and twenty-fifth periodic reports of Mauritius, with Committee Experts commending the State on the Intercontinental Slavery Museum, while raising questions on mandatory HIV testing for migrant workers, and the treatment of the Chagossian people.
Pela Boker Wilson, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said the Committee commended the State party for the 20 October 2020 official launch of the Intercontinental Slavery Museum under the theme “breaking the silence”, to remember the suffering, resilience and struggle for freedom of the forefathers, and to honour interculturality and promote remembrance and reconciliation.
Chrispine Gwalawala Sibande, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, said Mauritius still applied HIV related restrictions on the entry, stay and residence of non-nationals, with migrant workers being required to provide evidence of their negative HIV status to qualify for work and residence permits. Would the delegation clarify reports that Mauritius required HIV testing for any residency permit longer than 90 days, and applicants were denied on the basis of HIV status? What had the Government done to make sure it did not violate the rights of people, especially migrants, on the basis of HIV status? What were the plans to reform the HIV/AIDS and immigration laws in Mauritius?
Ms. Boker Wilson also asked what steps the State party had taken to ensure the rights of the Chagossian people in negotiations with the United Kingdom’s Government? Another Committee Expert said the Chagossian people had suffered a harm that had been significant. They were due reparations and restitutions and needed to be involved in these negotiations. Those who were descendants of a system of enslavement enforced on people in Mauritius were victims of a harm which needed to be repaired. It was important to look at best practice examples from other countries. Had there been restitutions for the Chagossian people who had been disadvantaged?
Introducing the report, Gavin Patrick Cyril Glover S.C, Attorney General of Mauritius and head of the delegation, said the Government Programme 2025–2029 announced the setting up of a Constitutional Review Commission to make recommendations on constitutional and electoral reforms. The work of the Commission would also address several issues of direct relevance to the Committee’s concerns, including the future of the Best Loser System, the use of Kreol as a parliamentary language, and broader questions of equality and representation in Mauritian institutions. He concluded by stating that Mauritius reaffirmed its deep commitment to the Convention and looked forward to a constructive exchange.
Mr. Glover, responding to questions, said all migrant workers had to comply with the law and present a HIV negative test result before being granted access to the country. If a test was positive, they were not allowed to work and had to leave the country. For those who contracted the disease in the country, they received the same treatment as nationals, regardless of their origin. There were currently 60 foreign workers receiving treatment for HIV/AIDS. There was no discrimination when this test was applied; it was applied across the board, wherever you came from. It was implemented as a public health policy by the Government, due to Mauritius’ small size. Unfortunately for the time being, this would stay in place.
Mr. Glover said since 1999, the Chagossians welfare fund act was established. Dedicated educational support, including scholarships, and healthcare programmes were also provided, and the State conducted regular visits to the communities. The Government remained firmly committed to the resettlement of the Chagossians in the Chagos Archipelago and ensuring the full human rights of this group. Mauritius was in the process of finalising with Great Britain the return of the Chagos Archipelago. It was expected that the terms would result in a positive outcome.
In concluding remarks, Ms. Boker Wilson extended sincere thanks and appreciation to the delegation for the interactive dialogue. The delegation had delivered on its pledge to ensure openness and accountability, and the State party’s commitment to continuity was appreciated.
Mr. Glover, in his concluding remarks, extended thanks for the dialogue which had taken place. Mauritius viewed this exchange as an opportunity to reflect openly and recommit the State to the principles of the Convention. History left long shadows, but Mauritius believed that progress was possible. The State was committed to achieving unity, dignity and justice for all.
The delegation of Mauritius consisted of representatives of the Attorney General’s Office; the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Regional Integration and International Trade; and the Permanent Mission of Mauritius to the United Nations Office at Geneva.
The Committee will issue its concluding observations on the report of Mauritius after the conclusion of its one hundred and fifteenth session on 9 May 2025. The programme of work and other documents related to the session can be found here. Summaries of the public meetings of the Committee can be found here, while webcasts of the public meetings can be found here.
The Committee will next meet in public on Tuesday, 29 April at 3.p.m to review the combined twentieth to twenty-second periodic reports of the Republic of Korea (CERD/C/KOR/20-22).
Report
The Committee has before it the combined twenty-fourth and twenty-fifth periodic reports of Mauritius (CERD/C/MUS/24-25).
Presentation of Report
BRIAN NEIL JOSEPH GLOVER, Permanent Representative of Mauritius to the United Nations Office at Geneva, expressed appreciation to the Committee for allowing the dialogue to take place in a hybrid format. He then introduced the delegation of Mauritius.
GAVIN PATRICK CYRIL GLOVER S.C, Attorney General of Mauritius and head of the delegation, said that since the combined report was submitted in July 2021, several developments had affected the application of the Convention in Mauritius. In retrospect, Mauritius recognised that paragraphs 4 and 5 of the report should have engaged more meaningfully with the concerns of the Committee; this approach had been reassessed and today the State was committed to more openness and accountability. In November 2024, a new government was elected with a vision which included a renewed commitment to human rights. During the dialogue, the State would aim neither to disown the past nor engage in political blame, but would reaffirm Mauritius’ enduring commitment to the Convention.
Some of the issues relating to disaggregated data, ethnic identification, and racial disparities were deeply complex and sensitive in Mauritius. It was a proudly diverse society, but also one shaped by a painful history of division. Against this backdrop, classifying individuals along ethnic lines remained politically sensitive and socially divisive. However, the State accepted that the absence of such data must not become an excuse for blindness to discrimination. Mauritius welcomed the guidance of the Committee to chart a path forward that was principled and mindful of the national context. To mark the sixtieth anniversary of the Convention, it was being translated by the Government into Kreol Morisien for public dissemination.
The Government Programme 2025–2029 announced the setting up of a Constitutional Review Commission to make recommendations on constitutional and electoral reforms. The work of the Commission would also address several issues of direct relevance to the Committee’s concerns, including the future of the Best Loser System, the use of Kreol as a parliamentary language, and broader questions of equality and representation in Mauritian institutions. Since the submission of the report, Mauritius had enacted several important legislative reforms, including the private recruitment agencies act 2023; the combatting of trafficking in persons (amendment) act 2023; the immigration act 2022; the protection and promotion of the rights of persons with disabilities act 2024; and a gender equality commission bill.
The Best Loser System continued to operate within Mauritius’ electoral framework.
Following the 2024 general elections, and with the operation of the Best Loser System, the National Assembly now comprised of 36 members from the Hindu community, nine members from the Muslim community, two members from the Sino-Mauritian community, 19 members from the general population, and one non-elected member. Many civil society groups had called for the abolition of community-based classifications, while others urged updating the census, believing that the Best Loser System could still offer an important safeguard for minorities.
Navigating this dilemma would be one of the challenges that the Constitutional Review Commission would be called to address.
The Government of Mauritius remained strongly committed to implementing a resettlement plan in the Chagos Archipelago and supported the aspirations of Chagossians, as Mauritian citizens, to be able to resettle in the Chagos Archipelago if they wished. An amount of Rs 50 million had been earmarked for 2024-2025 for visits to be undertaken to the Chagos Archipelago as groundwork for a proper resettlement. In Mauritius, out of a population of 1,233,097, Kreol was the language habitually spoken by 968,952 persons. Regarding the use of Kreol in Parliament, meetings were being organised with a view to looking into the practical hurdles that needed to be cleared before introducing the Kreol Morisien language in the National Assembly.
A new public website would shortly offer free access to updated legislation and all international treaties binding Mauritius, including the Convention. The State’s legislation criminalised hate speech and incitement to racial or religious hatred. Human rights education remained a national priority, and the National Human Rights Commission conducted workshops and collaborated with civil society to promote equality. Sensitisation campaigns targeted both youth and the wider public, including the distribution of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in Kreol Morisien. Mr. Glover concluded by stating that Mauritius reaffirmed its deep commitment to the Convention and looked forward to a constructive exchange.
MICHAL BALCERZAK, Committee Chair thanked the delegation for the invaluable contribution of Committee Expert Yeung Sik Yuen Yeung Kam John, from Mauritius.
Questions by a Committee Expert
PELA BOKER WILSON, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said
regrettably, the Committee noted the State party’s persistent position that the collection of data disaggregated by ethnicity ran contrary to national unity and the fostering of a rainbow nation. The Committee recognised the State’s priorities in promoting national unity. The State party was encouraged to meet its obligation of collecting and publishing data disaggregated by grounds of discrimination, recognised in international human rights law. Notwithstanding this position, could the State party share how the rights guaranteed under the Convention were being enjoyed by the various ethnic groups, including the Creoles, Chagossians and Ilois? What steps had Mauritius taken to collect and evaluate socio-economic indicators across various ethnic minorities to develop evidence-based socio-economic policies? Could information be provided on the composition of the population in respect of non-nationals such as migrants, refugees, asylum seekers and stateless persons disaggregated by residence status, sex and age?
Had the State party taken any action, in the form of training or awareness raising, on anti-discrimination for magistrates, judges, prosecutors and police to further the application of the Convention by domestic courts? Had there been any steps by the State party to enact comprehensive anti-discrimination legislation as a means of ensuring that victims had access remedies for discrimination? Could examples be provided of cases in which the Convention had been directly applied by judges, or invoked before the courts?
The Committee had requested the State party to hold countrywide consultations to bring about a change of the existing classification of groups, including in the Constitution, giving due account to the principle of self-identification and the Committee’s general recommendation no. 8 (1990) concerning the interpretation and application of article 1 (1) and (4) of the Convention. Had such consultations been held?
Could information be provided regarding awareness-raising campaigns and educational programmes aimed at showcasing the contribution of each ethnic group to the development of the State party’s society? Did the State party have updated information on the preparation of a human rights action plan for the period 2024-2030? What measures had the State party undertaken to implement a comprehensive strategy and national action plan to combat racism, racial discrimination, intolerance, and any manifestation of racial or caste-based superiority?
The Committee encouraged the State party to give due consideration to revising the equal opportunities act, with a view to include language among the prohibited grounds of discrimination, and to introduce a legal provision on special measures aimed at accelerating the full and equal enjoyment of rights by disadvantaged groups. Could the State party provide information on the overall implementation of the act? What claims had been filed under it and what effects had it had?
Had the State party undertaken efforts at ensuring its recommendation regarding the jurisdiction of the Equal Opportunities Commission to investigate complaints against civil servants, and the handing down of sanctions commensurate with the gravity of the offences? How was the development of the land division dealing with land dispossession and ownership claims? What impact had the recent changes to the law against human trafficking had on the fight against human trafficking in Mauritius?
What efforts had been undertaken to ensure that the Criminal Code and other relevant legislation prohibited and punished racist hate speech, as well as organizations that promoted and incited racial discrimination? Were there updated statistics on complaints registered with the courts or any other national institution for acts of racial discrimination, racist hate speech and racist hate crimes, including over the Internet and through the media?
The Committee commended the State party for the 20 October 2020 official launch of the Intercontinental Slavery Museum under the theme “breaking the silence”, to remember the suffering, resilience and struggle for freedom of the forefathers, and to honour interculturality and promote remembrance and reconciliation. Could information be provided on the implementation of other recommendations of the Truth and Justice Commission relating to land dispossession and ownership claims? What had the Truth and Justice Commission done to investigate and respond to the lingering effects of colonialism and the slave trade in Mauritius? What other measures was the State party considering that could address the racial disparities and legacies of colonialism and the slave trade?
Responses by the Delegation
GAVIN PATRICK CYRIL GLOVER S.C, Attorney General of Mauritius and head of the delegation, said it was regretful that the Equal Opportunities Commission had not been a model of what it could be. The State took the suggestion of the inclusion of language as a possible segment of discrimination very seriously. Primary and secondary education was free in Mauritius and all students were taught English and French, whatever their economic and social background. No one was left behind, but it was recognised that those falling out of the system needed to be helped. It was possible that an amendment could be introduced to cater to those who slipped through the net.
Based on a population census in 2020, there were more than 1.2 million people living in the Republic of Mauritius, with the majority being of Mauritian nationality. Around 40 per cent of those had reported their religion as Hindu; 32 per cent had reported their religion as Christian, 18 per cent had reported their religion as Muslim; and the remaining identified as “other” or did not supply the religion. Some 79 per cent of the population spoke Kreol at home.
Statistics regarding the prison population were difficult to pinpoint, given the movement of people within the prison system. Information on ethnic origin was not collected, but information on religion and citizenship was provided. As of April 2025, the Mauritian prison system housed 2,858 detainees, with 60 per cent being Roman Catholic. Foreign nationals represented 9.7 per cent of the prison population. As of January 2025, there were more than 48,000 migrant workers in Mauritius with valid work permits, working across various sectors, including manufacturing, retail and trade, among others. There were no reported cases of stateless persons in Mauritius.
Questions by Committee Experts
PELA BOKER WILSON, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, asked what the delegation meant about the movement of the detained persons; could this be clarified?
The attention of the Committee was drawn to the vagrancy act of 1867, which criminalised individuals who lacked a fixed residence, means of subsistence, or regular employment. There had been reports that the history of the law was related to colonialist and racist efforts that controlled the movement of Indian labourers, referencing a historical event where thousands of Indians were reportedly imprisoned under brutal conditions. Did the State party have plans to repeal this act?
There had also been reports that the morality clauses in article 6 of the immigration act were rooted in colonial-era mentalities, and could have a disproportionate and discriminatory impact on minorities. Had Mauritius investigated this? Article 5 of the immigration act banned individuals with infectious, contagious, or communicable diseases. This could encompass HIV/AIDS, which disproportionately affected marginalised groups. Had Mauritius investigated this?
A Committee Expert asked if the racial tensions in the country had disappeared? What had caused more harmonious relations?
Another Expert asked what percentage of descendants of slavery were a part of the Mauritian population today?
A Committee Expert said the Truth and Justice Commission addressed the issue of land confiscation; what results had been achieved by the court set up to address these cases? Was the State certain that when it revoked the citizenship of a person, they would not become stateless?
An Expert said Mauritius had unfortunately experienced the effects of British colonisation, and English people were still present within the country. The people were waiting for Mauritius to be liberated from the British presence. Mauritius had the resources to help Africa to emerge from the long colonial night of slavery.
Responses by the Delegation
GAVIN PATRICK CYRIL GLOVER S.C, Attorney General of Mauritius and head of the delegation, said Mauritius was fully committed to complete the decolonisation process of Africa, for those in the Chagos Archipelago, and it was hoped that this would become a reality in the coming weeks. In 1995, a law was passed, and all Mauritians who came of age after this date were automatically granted Mauritian nationality. There was a willingness and necessity for the piece of legislation to be changed today, so everyone could be on the same level.
There was no prosecution in Mauritius for being a vagrant, but there had been prosecutions under the offence of being a “rogue or vagabond” which was a different matter. There were more than 800 of these cases prosecuted in 2024. This was a matter which would be taken up in the reform of the criminal justice system. The State was aware of the discrepancies of the immigration act regarding communicable diseases, and acknowledged there was a need to review this legislation. There had previously been an abominable piece of legislation, the Hoffman law, which enabled a citizenship provided to a non-citizen to be revoked. This would also be reviewed.
There was a latent possibility of tensions rising and the State had to be careful not to stoke any of these factors. There were instances, such as in the last election, where the whole nation came together and showed that the multicultural society could work.
Questions by Committee Expert
CHRISPINE GWALAWALA SIBANDE, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, asked what steps Mauritius had taken to ratify the International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families?
The Committee would still like an update regarding disaggregated data by ethnicity? What were the unique challenges that people of African descent faced in Mauritius? Would the delegation update the Committee on steps being taken to ratify and accept the individual communication article under the Convention? According to the State report, there were currently three distinct cases against the State in court by lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and intersex persons. Could an update on the human rights issues being raised in these three cases be provided?
Mauritius had not signed the 1951 Convention relating to the status of refugees and its 1967 Protocol Convention. Would the delegation update the Committee on the plans being developed to have a legislative and policy framework in place to ensure refugees were well protected under the law? What were the plans to ratify the 1951 Convention relating to the status of refugees and its 1967 Protocol Convention? What measures was Mauritius taking to address matters of statelessness and compile data on stateless persons? Could the delegation update the Committee on birth registration and citizenship laws available?
What were the legislative, policy and effective action points being taken to make sure that all ethnic groups were treated equally in Mauritius? How was the Government handling the allegations that certain ethnic groups were getting preferential treatment?
What legislative, policy and enforcement action points had been put in place to address discrimination on issues of wages affecting Creoles and Muslims of Indian origin communities? Would the delegation update the Committee on measures being taken to address underpayment for overtime in the textile and apparel industries, including issues on differences in legislation and calculation of overtime hours? What were the legislative and policy reform steps being taken to address matters concerning the informal sector that accounted for 10 per cent of all workers?
The garment sector of Mauritius was a significant destination for migrant workers from Bangladesh. Some reports found that Bangladesh nationals incurred significant debt to pay recruitment fees; were unable to review their contracts prior to signing or departing for Mauritius; and had a limited understanding of their salaries, among other issues. Had Mauritius reviewed the recruitment procedures of foreigners and migrant workers, especially the recruitments that involved agents? What measures had the Republic of Mauritius taken to address the concerns of persons belonging to certain nationalities, including Bangladesh citizens?
What measures had the State taken to minimise these challenges and make sure that all international labour instruments by the International Labour Organization on the treatment of migrant workers were compiled and enforced? When would Mauritius sign and ratify several International Labour Organization Conventions?
Responses by the Delegation
GAVIN PATRICK CYRIL GLOVER S.C, Attorney General of Mauritius and head of the delegation, said the three cases referred to were determined by the Supreme Court in 2023. The Supreme Court decided that criminalising consensual same-sex relations between males was unconstitutional.
It was estimated that around one third of Mauritians descended from slaves. Mauritius would update its citizenship laws regarding refugees and asylum seekers. The current laws did not address statelessness and this would be addressed.
Migrant workers should typically enjoy the same benefits and laws as any Mauritians. However, there were cases where migrant workers had been lured to come to Mauritius and became enslaved by certain employers. The Government was taking a strong stand on this issue and had recently publicised a well-published case in this regard, where they worked to bring the perpetrators who had abused the migrant workers to justice. Large companies with clientele in Europe and America were strict in their adherence to the law, and dealt with all processes relating to migrant workers correctly. Mauritius was firmly committed to enforcing its immigration laws while ensuring the rights of migrant workers were upheld. In cases where unscrupulous employers had not declared workers or where they did not renew their visas on time, these migrant workers were considered to be victims.
Questions by Committee Expert
CHRISPINE GWALAWALA SIBANDE, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, asked for more data on domestic workers? Mauritius still applied HIV related restrictions on the entry, stay and residence of non-nationals, with migrant workers being required to provide evidence of their negative HIV status to qualify for work and residence permits. Would the delegation clarify reports that Mauritius required HIV testing for any residency permit longer than 90 days, and applicants were denied on the basis of HIV status? What had the Government done to make sure it did not violate the rights of people, especially migrants, on the basis of HIV status? What were the plans to reform the HIV/AIDS and immigration laws in Mauritius?
The Government of Mauritius had demonstrated overall increasing efforts compared with the previous years on issues of combatting human trafficking and had therefore been upgraded to tier 2. However, the Government did not meet the minimum standards to combat human trafficking in some key areas, including not convicting any traffickers in court for the second consecutive year in a row. Would the delegation update the Committee on the data available on cases prosecuted? What concrete measures was Mauritius taking to combat human trafficking, including perpetrators of human trafficking prosecuted under the combatting of trafficking in persons act? What had the Government of Mauritius done to make sure that the courts dealt with the backlog of cases? What programmes were being initiated and rolled out, whether through legislation, policy or action points, to make sure citizens were encouraged to report cases of human trafficking and sex trafficking?
A Committee Expert asked why the Human Rights Commission was not present before the Committee and if it was influenced by the Prime Minister’s office?
Responses by the Delegation
GAVIN PATRICK CYRIL GLOVER S.C, Attorney General of Mauritius and head of the delegation, said from June 2021 to March 2025, there were 41 cases of trafficking reported, and six were prosecuted. The backlog of cases was a systemic problem in the criminal justice system. A police and criminal justice bill was being prepared to set up the parameters in which the judicial processes would be carried out, to ensure diligent hearings and adjudication of various cases.
All migrant workers had to comply with the law and present a HIV negative test result before being granted access to the country. If a test was positive, they were not allowed to work and had to leave the country. For those who contracted the disease in the country, they received the same treatment as nationals, regardless of their origin. There were currently 60 foreign workers receiving treatment for HIV/AIDS. Article 5 of the immigration act was a precautionary measure and was a new provision on the application for working in Mauritius. There was no discrimination when this test was applied; it was applied across the board, wherever you came from. It was implemented as a public health policy by the Government, due to Mauritius’ small size. Unfortunately for the time being, this would stay in place.
There were no restrictions on civil society to protest, provided they stayed within the parameters of the law. The State had just received the report of the Human Rights Commission for 2024, and this would be shared with the Committee.
Questions by Committee Expert
CHRISPINE GWALAWALA SIBANDE, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, asked what was being done to ensure that civil society participated in the review of Mauritius?
Another Expert said the mandatory HIV test was not compliant with the Convention. It was ineffective as a public health policy and cast a negative stigma on migrant workers.
PELA BOKER WILSON, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, asked how the different ethnic groups in Mauritius enjoyed their rights under the Convention?
Another Committee Expert said it was understood that civil society had not suffered intimidation, but was it consulted prior to the dialogue? Why did the Human Rights Commission not report directly to parliament or the public?
Responses by the Delegation
GAVIN PATRICK CYRIL GLOVER S.C, Attorney General of Mauritius and head of the delegation, said he took on board the views that the mandatory HIV law was ineffective and discriminatory and would act as an advocate in this regard. All domestic workers had to obtain a resident and work permit to work in Mauritius.
The Chairperson of the National Human Rights Commission was appointed on the recommendation of the Prime Minister, and could be seen to not be totally independent. The Commission had carried out its work well, and a new Chairperson would be appointed in the coming days. It was expected that the Constitutional Review Commission would now have a say in the processes of the appointments of these kinds of positions.
Questions by a Committee Expert
PELA BOKER WILSON, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, said during the previous dialogue, the Committee urged the State party to adopt and implement a well-resourced strategy to address the deep-rooted discrimination faced by the Creoles, including those living on Agaléga and Rodrigues Islands. What steps had been undertaken to implement this strategy? What measures were in place to ensure ethnic minorities had equal enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights? Had measures relating to adequate housing, health-care service and quality inclusive education been designed in close collaboration with the communities concerned and relevant civil society organizations? What measures had the State party undertaken to ensure effective participation and representation of ethnic minorities in public and political life? What measures were envisaged to grant national language status to Creole?
Could information be provided on the impact of climate change, tourism and development projects on marginalised communities, particularly ethnic minorities? What was the State party’s national plan on business and human rights? The Committee would appreciate updated information from the State party regarding the assessment of current measures, including the Best Loser System, and the process of electoral reform? What steps had the State party taken to ensure the rights of the Chagossian people in negotiations with the United Kingdom’s Government?
Responses by the Delegation
GAVIN PATRICK CYRIL GLOVER S.C, Attorney General of Mauritius and head of the delegation, said the Government was adamant that all races, communities and religious groups were treated on an equal footing and guaranteed full enjoyment of economic, social and cultural rights. The first of February was a holiday in Mauritius, marking the abolition of slavery in the country. Pieces of legislation had been passed to ensure the Creoles were not left behind, as well as the Chagossians. Since 1999, the Chagossian welfare fund act was established. Dedicated educational support, including scholarships, and healthcare programmes were also provided, and the State conducted regular visits to the communities. The Government remained firmly committed to the resettlement of the Chagossians in the Chagos Archipelago and ensuring the full human rights of this group.
The Best Loser System was implemented to ensure that underrepresented communities received representation. The State recognised it was not the best system and was outdated; two levels of amendments would be introduced in this regard. The Judicial and Legal Commission had been established for the appointment of judicial officers, and consisted of the Chief Justice and the President of the Public Service Commission. This Commission had the exclusivity of appointing all judicial and legal officers.
In the National Assembly, people addressed the chamber in English and French. Members were also able to address a few lines in Creole when appropriate. Recently, one member wanted to make a whole address in Creole and she was ruled out by the speaker. Following this, the speaker raised the issue of introducing Creole in the Assembly, which they expected would be supported by most members.
A student behaviour policy was introduced in schools to reinforce tolerance and diversity in schools. There had been a decline in bullying cases, and an anti-bullying policy was being drafted within the Ministry of Education.
Questions by Committee Experts
PELA BOKER WILSON, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, asked if strategies concerning Creoles were developed with their participation? Were the welfare programmes based in law or were they policies which could change depending on the Government? What kind of scholarships were provided? Who were the target beneficiaries?
A Committee Expert said welfare systems did not reconcile with the past. Had there been restitutions for the Chagossian people who had been disadvantaged?
Another Expert asked if all groups embraced the celebrations of the first of February? Could more information be provided on the Creole group of Mauritius?
Responses by the Delegation
GAVIN PATRICK CYRIL GLOVER S.C, Attorney General of Mauritius and head of the delegation, said there were national celebrations on the first of February, but ethnic lines were well demarcated when it came to attendees. Creole referred to a certain category of people with a mixed descent. A programme entitled “bridge to the future” had been produced, which was an overhaul of the election and judicial system in the country, concentrated in the hands of the Constitutional Reform Commission which would likely begin its work next month.
The previous Government had opened negotiations with Great Britain to find a solution for the Chagos Archipelago. The United Kingdom recognised Mauritius’ sovereignty over the territory and negotiations were currently underway. The Best Loser System was outdated and was based on the census of 1972 with no relevance today. The changes made would be implemented within the Constitution and removed the need to declare a candidate’s race or community when standing for parliament.
Questions by Committee Experts
A Committee Expert said the Chagossian people had suffered a harm that had been significant. They were due reparations and restitutions and they needed to be involved in these negotiations. Those who were descendants of a system of enslavement enforced on people in Mauritius were victims of a harm which needed to be repaired. It was important to look at best practice examples from other countries.
Another Expert asked how the First Decade of People of African Descent was marked and what programmes were undertaken? Had Mauritius started to think about the Second Decade? Would the State think about establishing more sites of memory for people of chattel enslavement in the Second Decade?
FAITH DIKELEDI PANSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Follow-up Rapporteur, said the Committee had made a mistake in the follow-up paragraphs for the last dialogue and appreciated that Mauritius had accommodated their mistake. It was appreciated that the national mechanism for reporting and follow-up had been established. It was noted that information had been provided on the roadmap for teaching Creole and on the use of Creole in parliament. Could an update on the use of Creole in the administration and in the judiciary be provided? Had the State considered developing a roadmap for the Chagossian people?
An Expert said Great Britain was being allowed to continue to dominate Mauritius, and still had sway over the country and its people. Mauritius had suffered too much to return to the past. It was hoped Mauritius could come together as one country.
Responses by the Delegation
GAVIN PATRICK CYRIL GLOVER S.C, Attorney General of Mauritius and head of the delegation, said Mauritius did not focus on division, but rather on unity. Recently there had been no complaints registered for acts of racial discrimination and racist hate speech. There had been a case of stirring racial hatred where the perpetrator was sentenced to two years in prison in 2022.
The political agreement reached in October for the Chagossian people did not set out the various elements of the treaty. Mauritius was trying to move away from the divisions imposed by colonial masters. All communities were aware that whichever Government was in power ensured the equality of all segments of the population. Mauritius had no definite plans yet for the Second Decade of People of African Descent.
While English was the primary language in courts, French and Creole were also accepted. Around 90 per cent of people in Mauritius understood the Creole language and it was used in the courts. Government documents were in English. There was a dedicated channel for Parliament and Mauritius was looking into setting up a second channel which carried a simultaneous translation of proceedings in Parliament into Creole.
Mauritius was in the process of finalising with Great Britain the return of the Chagos Archipelago. The United Kingdom had to have the support of the United States before coming to terms with Mauritius. It was expected that the terms would result in a positive outcome.
Questions by Committee Experts
CHRISPINE GWALAWALA SIBANDE, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, said the Committee discussed the topic of different ethnic groups in Mauritius, solely to ensure that some were not receiving preferential treatment. Could data be provided on migrant workers and how they were being taken care of? What measures had Mauritius taken in terms of training, education, culture, information and awareness about the Convention, the human rights provisions in the Constitution of Mauritius, and other laws in Mauritius? Were issues of human rights covered in the curriculum at primary, secondary and tertiary level? How was Mauritius combatting racial discrimination through school curricula, university programmes and teacher training?
Could more information be provided on judicial authorities, jurisprudence and judgments on matters of racial discrimination, including the principles of the Convention? What human rights training was offered to law enforcement agencies? What measures would be taken to ensure that non-governmental organizations and the national human rights institution fully participated in human rights education and awareness?
Reports indicated that the Government had decreased funding for protection and assistance services to victims of human trafficking, including sex trafficking. What measures had been taken to make sure there was adequate funding to combat trafficking, including providing protection and assistance services to victims? What programmes had the State rolled out for providing education to combat human trafficking? There had been difficulties reported in accessing healthcare for irregular migrants, stateless persons and asylum seekers, who might not have access to the National Health Insurance Card. What programmes had been implemented to provide human rights awareness on matters of healthcare?
Responses by the Delegation
GAVIN PATRICK CYRIL GLOVER S.C, Attorney General of Mauritius and head of the delegation, said reports relating to discrimination of migrant workers regarding healthcare were unfounded as everyone in Mauritius was afforded free public healthcare, whether they were a migrant or not. Mauritius had not hidden from the prejudices within its society. Human rights principles were embedded in formal school curricula. In 2024, the National Human Rights Commission conducted public campaigns reaching over 100,000 individuals, including parents, students and teachers, and had also produced materials, including the translation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights into Creole. Non-governmental organizations had provided input into important State documents, including the national human rights plan, as well as in preparation for the Universal Periodic Review.
Questions by Committee Experts
CHRISPINE GWALAWALA SIBANDE, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, said the law in Mauritius prevented internet users from posting anything that could cause “annoyance, humiliation, inconvenience, distress or anxiety to any person” on social media. Anyone found guilty faced up to 10 years’ imprisonment. There were reports that police arrested two people on allegations of drug trafficking because they made critical comments against the Government or police. What was the outcome of these cases? What measures was the State taking to ensure citizens were not punished merely for criticising the State through expressing freedom opinion? Had the cases of three journalists from the Defi Media group who filed complaints of harassment been addressed? How was it ensured that journalists could operate freely in Mauritius? It was reported that many buildings in Mauritius remained inaccessible to persons with disabilities; what was the Government doing to overcome this?
A Committee Expert applauded the efforts of the State party to create a harmonious society out of the calamity of colonialism.
Responses by the Delegation
GAVIN PATRICK CYRIL GLOVER S.C, Attorney General of Mauritius and head of the delegation, said the two cases of those arrested in relation to drug charges were high profile cases in Mauritius and were ongoing. The accused had been extremely critical of the previous regime. There had been no prosecutions of alleged drug offences so far. The journalists arrested were also extremely critical of the previous regime, and due to the usual process adopted by that regime, they were attacked. The inquiry had not yet been completed, and if there was enough evidence to convict the persons behind the cowardly attacks on these journalists, appropriate actions would be taken.
Questions by a Committee Expert
CHRISPINE GWALAWALA SIBANDE, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, said French and English were considered de facto languages of Mauritius. What measures was the Government taking to ensure all languages were recognised in Mauritius? Was there recognition of the various groups, including Chagossians in the country?
Responses by the Delegation
GAVIN PATRICK CYRIL GLOVER S.C, Attorney General of Mauritius and head of the delegation, said all courtrooms in Mauritius provided adequate access for persons with disabilities. Irrespective of the descent of any Mauritian, more than 90 per cent of the population understood and spoke Creole. The State had begun translating the Convention against Torture into Creole and would eventually work to translate all other Conventions into Creole.
Closing Remarks
FAITH DIKELEDI PANSY TLAKULA, Committee Expert and Follow-up Rapporteur, said the Committee would send concluding observations which contained a follow-up for recommendations which needed to be implemented within one year.
PELA BOKER WILSON, Committee Expert and Country Rapporteur, extended sincere thanks and appreciation to the delegation for the interactive dialogue. The Government of Mauritius should be commended on its reassessed approach to the review which contributed to the quality of the exchange. The delegation had delivered on its pledge to ensure openness and accountability, and the State party’s commitment to continuity was appreciated.
CHRISPINE GWALAWALA SIBANDE, Committee Expert and Country Co-Rapporteur, thanked everyone who had been involved in the dialogue.
GAVIN PATRICK CYRIL GLOVER S.C, Attorney General of Mauritius and head of the delegation, extended thanks for the dialogue which had taken place. Mauritius viewed this exchange as an opportunity to reflect openly and recommit the State to the principles of the Convention. The contribution of Committee member Yeung Sik Yuen Yeung Kam John was very much appreciated. Mauritius had celebrated the richness of its cultural heritage and honoured the memory of historical injustices. The establishment of a Constitutional Review Commission marked an important step forward. History left long shadows, but Mauritius believed that progress was possible. The State was committed to achieving unity, dignity and justice for all.
MICHAL BALCERZAK, Committee Chair, thanked all for the dialogue. During these turbulent times, it was important to celebrate 60 years of the Convention, and the Committee looked to Mauritius to join them in these celebrations. It would be a good opportunity for Mauritius to consider accepting article 14 of the Convention on individual communications.
Produced by the United Nations Information Service in Geneva for use of the media;
not an official record. English and French versions of our releases are different as they are the product of two separate coverage teams that work independently.
Follow UNIS Geneva on: Website | Facebook | Twitter | YouTube |Flickr
MIL OSI United Nations News –