Our Prime Minister has asked an interesting question querying who does not like to dance the ‘séga’ in Mauritius. Perhaps not expecting a response, the answer is nevertheless quite obvious: we all do love our séga from time to time. If the music is good and the company is desirable, then of course we call it a proper party. From previously, we know Navin Ramgoolam has self-proclaimed having ‘class’ and this was in reference to his Rolls Royce. Today he says his life is like an ‘open book’. When such a statement is made by a Prime Minister then you would expect any reasonable individual to read chapters from that ‘book’. l’express is keeping a society informed by being the mobile library.

Commentators have a lot to say about the recent pictures published in l’express and public opinion seems to gather momentum towards the validity of the publication. The fundamental question remains whether a public person can indeed have a private life? Bill Clinton was a public figure and yet his ‘affair’ with Lewinsky was widely published. Francois Hollande had an affair with Julie Gayet and he was not spared from public scrutiny and condemnation. In the United Kingdom, even Prince Charles was under the spotlight after his affair with Camilla became known.  Arguably they all had a private life while at the same time being in the public domain.  In the current episode the pictures speak volumes whilst the intimacy between the guests is undebatable.

There is no legal obligation for any politician to have moral values. However, an electorate does expect the people who lead them to have certain morals and live their lives within the sphere of these values. These are the leaders whom we expect to fight paedophilia, child prostitution and to be working towards a morally sound society. Only people with the right features will be able to achieve these.

When it comes to Navin Ramgoolam and his acquaintance, this is an affair that has, in recent past, been subject to enormous debate and most importantly necessitated legal intervention. We do have a legal standing on the issue. We are also entitled to have our own views on the matter but the general consensus seems to swing to the side of morality and values. Same as asking how many fathers would have sent their daughters to this party if there was a free invite?

In a society where poverty is taking its toll; crime is going up and cost of living becoming unbearable this is not a time for ‘séga’ dance except for the few extremely privileged.  A society has the right to be informed, decide, make a judgment and choose who to trust.