Blog: Sir Gaetan Duval and his dark side

It is important to remember that Duval's early career was marred by several controversies, including the divisive and demagogic nature of the tactics he employed.

During the visit of Anthony Greenwood, Secretary of State in 1965, Duval mobilised the crowd in big popular meetings to deploy his vehement opposition to independence and his preference for an association with Great Britain, even though the British parliamentarians who were in Mauritius to assess the needs of the Mauritian population said that there was no question of any integration or association with Great Britain.

The situation was rapidly deteriorating. On 10th May 1965 communal quarrels tore the Creoles and Hindus apart. This fury was the result of political excitement by the Duval's political party, Parti Mauricien, and hence intensifying racial conflicts.

During the constitutional conference in London in 1965, the Parti Mauricien pleaded that independence meant literally handing the country over to the Hindu majority which would lead to Mauritius to be annexed to India and, therefore, such an action would be detrimental to the minority groups.

In the meantime, the Parti Mauricien changed both the leadership and appellation which became the Parti Mauricien Social Démocrate (PMSD). Gaëtan Duval was the new leader. In order to gain the Hindu electorate, Duval registered many Hindu candidates. This strategy led to division and sub-division of the Hindu majority in to several groups of minorities.

As the new leader, Duval, changed the political strategy and tactics of the party. The electoral campaigns of the PMSD created insecurity in the economic sectors, hampering economic growth and development, causing further unemployment. Some people were so frightened that they felt convinced by Duval's campaigns that the situation was beyond any hope of recovery. They, therefore, withdrew all their savings from the Post Office Savings Bank and commercial banks.

The PMSD wanted to woo the electorate. The slogan of the PSMD changed as well: from “malbar nous pas oulé” or “bateau langouti p attande zotte” to “Hindu, mon frère”, which was rather a deceptive slogan.

To be sure, by playing the ‘Hindu hegemony’ and ‘Hindu peril’ card, the PMSD failed to effectively propose an ideology to the electorate nor did they offer an original economic and social programme which would have rallied the majority behind them and which would have alleviated the conditions of the masses.

Luckily, his divisive efforts and demagogic campaigns to hamper the wheel of progress during the colonial phase failed.