Formalized on October 1, could the inclusion of Mauritius on the European Union's blacklist and the grey list of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) be extended? This, after allegations of money laundering were recently made in the press against the Prime Minister and relayed to Parliament. In financial circles, this case is being closely monitored. However, officials do not wish to speak openly on the Pravind Jugnauth case.

"Can one rely on receipts, with amounts even exceeding Rs 350,000 or more, as stipulated in the Anti-Money Laundering Act, to conclude that there has been a financial crime? When you have a receipt, you may have paid cash or by bank transfer. We must be able to clarify all this to establish whether there has been a money laundering crime, "says the director of a company operating in the Global Business and who requested anonymity.

Shahed Hoolash, Chairman of the Association of Trusts and Management Companies (ATMC), said he does not have specific information to comment on the case. However, he argues, "I do not believe that there will be any impact on the process initiated by the authorities since last year to remove Mauritius from the FATF list of countries at risk."

One of the receipts allegedly issued by BASE after a payment of Rs 500,000 cash from the Prime Minister.

For the moment, the Prime Minister has not yet enlightened public opinion on this nebulous Angus Road affair, revealed by the leader of the Reform Party, Roshi Bhadain, three months ago at a meeting in Chemin-Grenier. Pravind Jugnauth has been content to repeat in his socio-cultural outings in recent days that he is currently preparing a file by compiling "evidence" and that the public will judge on piece what he claims. By attacking the express, which was the first daily newspaper to publish the authenticated documents and the politicians who conveyed this information.

Grey areas

On the other hand, observers point out that the sooner Pravind Jugnauth comes to wash his honor by explaining all the gray areas of the Angus Road saga, the better it will be for the country and for his image as Prime Minister, he who boasts on all roofs of being a man of honor and principle. "It is necessary that Enforcement Bodies like the ICAC are free to investigate independently without any constraint even if it is the Prime Minister. What is at stake is the image we want to project of Mauritius on a regional and global scale."

Admittedly, there is a difference between the alleged involvement of any senior political figure in a country in a financial transaction and the inclusion of a jurisdiction on the FATF grey list. In the first case, this is a situation that must be examined by the judicial authorities of the country where the financial crime was allegedly committed.

However, in the second, it is the conclusion of an investigation carried out by the experts of an organization set up by the G7, the most influential countries in the world, but with 37 members and whose purpose is to detect any form of activity associated with money laundering and which is likely to to disrupt the financial system set up by the countries concerned.

The example of India provides insight into the difference between these two approaches. So far, no authority in India, a friendly country of Mauritius, has officially lent credence to the allegations made against Pravind Jugnauth. On the other hand, that was not the case in relation to the presence of the Mauritian financial centre on the FATF grey list. Because on this subject, the Great Peninsula has not made a gift to Mauritius.

Indeed, a directive from the Reserve Bank of India, issued in October, attests to this. It conveys the importance it attaches to the FATF decision when it decrees that a court has not operated in accordance with established standards in the fight against money laundering and the financing of terrorism.

According to this directive, the Central Bank of India announces that it will object to the emergence of any new company whose creation results from the direct investment of foreign currency from Mauritius. As an explanation, it submits that this position vis-à-vis the Mauritian jurisdiction applies to any country whose mode of operation is in breach of the standards established by the FATF.