Mauritius PM wins major court victory in decade-long cash case

Mauritius Prime Minister Navin Ramgoolam has secured a significant legal victory after a court dismissed charges linked to millions of euros found in safes at his homes in 2015. Prosecutors have vowed to appeal the ruling in the long-running case.

The Intermediate Court of Mauritius has dismissed the case against Prime Minister Navin Ramgoolam in the so-called safe deposit box affair, bringing a dramatic twist to a legal battle that has lasted more than a decade.

The ruling, delivered on June 8, found that key issues raised by the defence had not been adequately investigated, making it impossible for the proceedings to continue fairly.

Judges concluded that maintaining the prosecution under such circumstances would amount to an abuse of process.

The case began shortly after Ramgoolam's electoral defeat in 2014.

On February 7, 2015, investigators discovered cash in multiple currencies worth the equivalent of €3.62 million in safes located at his residences.

The former prime minister was subsequently charged with 23 counts related to cash transactions allegedly carried out between 2009 and 2015 in breach of anti-money laundering legislation. The transactions at the centre of the case totalled approximately €1.15 million.

Ramgoolam consistently denied wrongdoing and pleaded not guilty to all charges.

In its ruling, the court highlighted what it described as serious shortcomings in the investigation.

Among the concerns raised was the failure of police to properly examine allegations that the prosecution may have been politically motivated.

The judges said those issues had not received sufficient scrutiny and that continuing the trial would undermine the integrity of the judicial process.

Ramgoolam welcomed the decision, describing it as a victory for justice after years of legal uncertainty.

The verdict represents a major boost for the veteran politician, who returned to power as prime minister in November 2024 while the case was still before the courts.

Supporters argued throughout the proceedings that the prosecution was politically driven, an allegation that had remained a key element of the defence strategy.

The Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions quickly signalled that the legal battle is not over.

Prosecutors announced plans to appeal the judgment, arguing that the court's decision contains significant legal errors.

"The judgment is manifestly flawed in law," the prosecution said, confirming that an appeal would be filed without delay.

Ramgoolam's legal team had already prepared for a potential appeal by retaining a British K