Jugnauth Stands Firm on Phone-Tapping Claim Despite Police Statement

Former Mauritian Prime Minister Pravind Jugnauth is refusing to back down from his position on phone-tapping equipment — even after the Mauritius Police Force issued an official statement appearing to contradict his account. The dispute centres on whether Jugnauth was informed about the acquisition or use of telephone surveillance equipment during his time in office. The police communiqué stated that he had been briefed on the matter, a claim Jugnauth flatly rejects. Following the publication of that police statement, Jugnauth maintained his original position: that he had no knowledge of the equipment in question. He has not offered a revised version of events, instead holding firm against what he characterises as an inaccurate account by the force. **Background: What Is This Dispute About?** The controversy over phone-tapping equipment has become one of the more politically charged issues in Mauritius since the November 2024 general election, which saw Jugnauth's Militant Socialist Movement (MSM) suffer a heavy defeat. Questions have been raised in public and political circles about surveillance tools allegedly held or used by security services during the previous administration. Jugnauth led Mauritius as Prime Minister from 2017 until his electoral loss in late 2024. The current government, led by Prime Minister Navin Ramgoolam's Alliance du Changement, has signalled interest in reviewing security and intelligence practices from the previous era. The Mauritius Police Force — which falls under the authority of the Prime Minister's Office — issued a formal communiqué indicating that the former PM had received briefings on the surveillance technology. The force's statement appeared designed to clarify the chain of knowledge and responsibility around the equipment. Jugnauth, however, insists the police account does not reflect reality, setting up a direct and public clash between him and the institution he once oversaw. **What This Means** This standoff matters for several reasons. First, it touches on the sensitive question of who authorises and controls surveillance capabilities in Mauritius — a small island nation where concerns about political use of intelligence tools have long simmered. Second, it places the credibility of both the former Prime Minister and the current police leadership under scrutiny. If the police communiqué is accurate, it raises questions about Jugnauth's account. If it is not, questions fall on the force itself. Third, it signals that the political fallout from the 2024 election continues to play out through institutional channels, with the new government's security apparatus and the former ruling party now in open disagreement over matters of public record. No independent investigation has been announced as of the time of reporting, and no documentary evidence has been made public by either side. Source: Le Defi Media