While it embarked itself on a very long and tough journey for the enquiry in the Molnupiravir case, the Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) must leave no stone unturned to fully achieve its objectives of being impartial and acting in the public interest.
A lot has been said about the ongoing enquiry, but it appears that ICAC has been making its case through the media by imparting information which are favourable to the way they are functioning. But in the end, this is jeopardising the very same enquiry.
It is public knowledge that the Commission does not communicate on its current enquiries. Upon calling the Communication Officer for information on the enquiries, journalists and reporters are often told that this is not permissible.
However, to their great dismay, during the next hour or on the next morning, while listening to the radios or reading the newspapers, they would often find statements given either by an unnamed enquirer or a source close to the enquiry.
On a news web site, It could be read : « Dans ce genre de cas, il est vraiment très rare qu’un homme d’affaires entretienne des contacts avec plusieurs fonctionnaires à la fois. C’est compliqué. C’est plus facile de bouger les pions en ayant la complicité d’une personne et la connivence des autres », nous explique un enquêteur de l’ICAC.
This could literally be translated to: “In such cases, it is really very rare for a businessman to have contact with several officials at the same time. It is complicated. It is easier to move the pieces by having the complicity of one person and the complicity of others,” explains an investigator of the ICAC.
This doesn’t feel right. Often, people being interviewed are surprised to find the content of their statements being splashed in the news bulletin while they are still at the enquiry stage at the Réduit Triangle.
Such situations can only undermine the sanctity of the enquiry and weaken ICAC’s position. It is even worse when high ranking officials, ministers, businessmen or media driven sensational enquiries are being held.
Several barristers have protested against this situation. That led the ICAC to issue a very important communiqué on 18 March 2016 where it stated the following regarding the Dayal Case:
“18 March 2016
The Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC) has taken note that some press articles have been speculating on potential investigations and even setting the agenda and pace in respect to investigative steps to be taken by the Commission in the course of Preliminary Inquiries.
The Commission wishes to draw the attention of the public that at the stage of Preliminary Inquiries, the main focus of the investigation are to:
- Proceed with a thorough verification of facts, and
- Establish whether there is enough evidence connected or conducive to an act of corruption or money laundering that would warrant further investigations.
We stress that Section 20 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act states that the Commission shall act independently, impartially, fairly and in the public interest. We further stress that all steps taken by the Commission are in strict compliance with the above.
Consequently, we would like to appeal to one and all to exercise caution and not to pre-empt and/or prejudge the ICAC’s processes.
For the Ag Director General
The Communication Unit”.
The emphasis is ours. From the above, it is clear that failure from the Commission to preserve its enquiries from undue influence and or sensationalism can only be detrimental to its course of action.
ICAC seems to have lost its way between what to probe into and what to leave out. Being under immunity, the leader of the Opposition has publicly asked the government to buy Molnupiravir in parliament at its sitting of the 9th November 2021. Xavier Luc Duval had deplored the lack of «pre-order» of Molnupiravir. « Not one single stock! And Molnupiravir, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, many, many countries have pre-ordered; countries like Australia, Malaysia, USA, Singapore, all these have pre-ordered. In Mauritius, zero pre-order… »
But what happens next does not seem to be the concern of the enquiring officers. Everyone has got the sacrificing lamb, i.e CPN distributors and some low-ranking officials. So, the case is done or at least, seems to be done.
But an in-depth enquiry shows that several other importers have brought the generic drug in Mauritius as follows:
Molena: Laboratory: Emcure, Local Technical Representatives are: Mauritius Pharmacy and Scott Health
Movfor: Laboratory: Hetero Biopharma, Local Technical Representative: Trident Distributor/Scott Health
Molvir: Laboratory: Based in BANGLADESH, Local Technical Representative: A.E Patel
Molflu: Laboratory: Dr Reddy’s, Local Technical Representative: Hyperpharm
Molxvir: Laboratory: Sun Pharma, Local Technical Representative: Healthactiv (IBL)
The enquiry should have looked at the prices at which those drugs are being sold. In the case of the 800 000 pills of Molena, they have been supplied by Emcure at the price of Rs 9.30. The same pill is now on sale at the price of Rs 1200 per box of 40. This gives us a unit price of Rs 30, which is much higher than the proposed price given to the Ministry of Health. It is clearly a case to be probed into by the ICAC. We cannot find pills at Rs 9.30.
This is contrary to what Emcure said in its press release on or around the 31st December 2021 which stated: « We understand that price comparisons are being made relative to other suppliers and that our offer is being questioned as being relatively low. However, while we recognize that all companies have their own cost structures, we stand by the price which has been submitted and would like to point out that it reflects the actual API (Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient) cost on the Indian market. »
Here is a glimpse of the prices of the other drugs of Molnupiravir currently on sale in Mauritius.
- Movfor from India by Scott: Rs 2, 302 i.e Rs 57.55/unit
- Molflu from India by Hyperpharm Rs 2, 800 i.e Rs 70/unit
- Molvir from Bangladesh by A.E.Patel Rs 2, 375 i,e Rs 54.58/unit
- Molena from India by Mauritius Pharmacy (Seegobind) Rs 1,200 i.e Rs 30/unit.
Any businessman should have certainly seen a business opportunity. It is abundantly clear that the profit margin in this field has risen up abundantly for some and they want to be portrayed like angels. This is where ICAC should intervene and not toss the ball away by stating that this is not their business. We also know that the Ministry of Commerce has fined several wholesalers and retailers of drugs. But no-one knows about the outcome of those enquiries.
Why is there this cartel or monopoly on the importation of drugs in our country? Is this a domain reserved only for a person’s hand or for a section of importers? Do public servants have to pay the price for helping the ministry save lives? Do we want to eliminate or get rid of new distributors who are trying to break the monopoly and the privileged of some? ICAC must not persistently blinker its enquiry and but should focus its attention on the real issues.
