This influence extended beyond mere advisory roles, with claims that she had control over various key decisions. This has been particularly contentious in areas like parastatal governance, where political appointments were often made without regard for professional merit. Critics have argued that this led to inefficiency and mismanagement, particularly in key state-owned entities like Air Mauritius and the Central Electricity Board, where leadership changes were often abrupt and not always in the interest of stability
One notable consequence of this period was a general decline in the quality of governance. This was evident in issues such as inadequate disaster preparedness, as the country struggled to respond effectively to frequent cyclones and flash floods, with poor infrastructure exacerbating the challenges
The lack of a coherent and well-structured emergency response system pointed to broader governance failures during this time.
Moreover, the country's economic performance during this period also suffered from these leadership issues. While Mauritius had long been praised for its economic growth and diversification, critics pointed out that under the previous government, the economic planning lacked foresight, leading to problems like stagnation in job creation and rising concerns over corruption
.
Mauritius' decade of mismanagement was marked by an unhealthy concentration of power and a lack of accountability. The influence exerted by figures outside the official government structure led to inefficiencies and governance crises that continue to affect the nation. Addressing these issues will require a robust reform of both political practices and institutional structures to ensure a more transparent and effective government for the future.