Mauritius NCA Law: Can It Be Used to Target Political Opponents?

Mauritius's newly enacted National Crimes Agency (NCA) law has raised serious concerns among legal experts and politicians about whether it could be weaponised — either to shield allies in power or to pursue political opponents. In the third instalment of a detailed four-part interview conducted by ION News, lawyers Mohammed Hosenbux and Khadijah Hosenbux of M. Hosenbux Law Chambers dissect the legal architecture of the NCA legislation and address one of its most politically charged questions. **The political fear: a tool for selective justice?** Former minister Nando Bodha — a prominent voice in Mauritian opposition politics — is among those who have raised alarm that an agency of this type could be used to bury cases involving those in power, or conversely, to target their critics and opponents. This is not a new concern in Mauritius. The independence of prosecutorial institutions has long been debated on the island, where the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) — the constitutionally independent authority responsible for deciding whether criminal charges are brought — plays a central role in any criminal justice chain. **What legal protections exist — and why they fall short** The Hosenbuxes acknowledge that the NCA law does contain some mechanisms that a person could use if they believe they are being selectively targeted or unfairly protected from prosecution. These include: - **Judicial review**: A person could challenge a biased or politically motivated decision by the NCA's Director General (DG) in court, provided the decision goes beyond the DG's lawful discretion. - **Constitutional challenge**: Any provision or action that violates fundamental rights enshrined in the Mauritius Constitution can be challenged before the Supreme Court. - **Protection against self-incrimination**: Section 42 of the Act provides some safeguard for individuals compelled to give information. - **The DPP gateway**: Ultimately, criminal prosecution still requires the DPP's consent — a constitutional filter that, in theory, limits purely political prosecutions. However, the lawyers are unsparing in their assessment: all of these mechanisms are slow, cumbersome, and poorly suited to providing rapid relief. They emphasise that none of these remedies arrive *before* the damage is done — whether that is a reputational hit from a public investigation, the ordeal of arrest, or the freezing of assets. **What this means** For ordinary Mauritians, this legal gap matters. If the NCA were to pursue someone on politically motivated grounds, the available legal tools would likely only kick in after significant harm had already been suffered. Conversely, if the agency chose to ignore evidence against a politically connected individual, it could be equally difficult to force action. The debate reflects a broader tension in Mauritius between strengthening institutions to fight serious and organised crime — the NCA's stated purpose — and ensuring those same institutions cannot be captured or manipulated by whoever holds political power. The Hosenbuxes' series offers one of the most thorough independent legal analyses of the NCA Act available in Mauritius, and parts one through four are being published progressively by ION News. Source: ION News