14/12/2025
Legal action initiated under the Peopleโs Representation Act (PRA) of Mauritius in relation to electoral campaign expenditure declared by ๐๐ซ ๐๐๐ฏ๐ข๐ง ๐. ๐๐ฎ๐ค๐๐๐ซ๐๐ฆ following the general elections of November 2024.
Pursuant to sections of the Peopleโs Representation Act governing election expenses, every candidate is under a statutory obligation to submit a true, accurate, and complete return of electoral expenses, strictly within the maximum ceiling authorised by the Electoral Commission. These provisions are fundamental safeguards intended to preserve electoral fairness, equality between candidates, and the integrity of public democratic processes.
In the present matter, Mr Kevin C. Lukeeram, in an affidavit filed before the competent court following his election, declared an amount of electoral expenditure which prima facie exceeds the legally authorised limit prescribed under the Peopleโs Representation Act and the applicable regulations of the Electoral Commission.
The filing of such a declaration raises serious questions of legality and compliance, as any excess in campaign spending constitutes a material breach of electoral law, with potential consequences including invalidity of election, disqualification, and other statutory sanctions, subject to judicial determination.
Given that:
โข the matter is currently ๐ฌ๐ฎ๐ ๐ฃ๐ฎ๐๐ข๐๐,
โข it involves the use and regulation of public and campaign funds, and
โข the integrity of democratic representation is directly engaged,
it is respectfully submitted that the continued holding of office by the member concerned, while the proceedings are ongoing, undermines public confidence in the electoral system.
In accordance with the principles of good governance, accountability, and constitutional propriety, and without prejudice to the presumption of innocence, it is strongly urged that mr Lukeeram steps aside on an interim basis until the final determination of the case by the court. Such a step would reflect adherence to ethical standards expected of elected representatives, particularly in matters involving public trust and compliance with electoral finance laws.
This case is not merely a personal dispute but a matter of public interest, as it touches upon the rule of law, the transparency of electoral financing, and the equal application of statutory limits imposed by Parliament.
All parties remain bound by the outcome of the judicial process, and it is anticipated that the courtโs determination will reaffirm the ๐ฌ๐ฎ๐ฉ๐ซ๐๐ฆ๐๐๐ฒ ๐จ๐ ๐ญ๐ก๐ ๐๐๐จ๐ฉ๐ฅ๐โ๐ฌ ๐๐๐ฉ๐ซ๐๐ฌ๐๐ง๐ญ๐๐ญ๐ข๐จ๐ง ๐๐๐ญ and the authority of the Electoral Commission in regulating electoral conduct in Mauritius.
