State of Origin.

New Zealand Herald's article confirmed by a report by the Australian, on the recovery efforts of the Australian Black Hawk helicopter that crashed last year inside Fiji waters, prior to the events of December 5th, may have stalled due to both the embarrassing location of the wreck and the embarrassing causes.

News Limited web article confirms that the crash of the Australian Black Hawk was related to a mechanical failure. Australian Defence Force has conducted research into reports of cracking of the internal panel. Air Systems Branch, an arm of U.S Army Research Labs has also published a study into the vibrational analysis of the helicopter rotor machinery. To date the underlying causes of UH-60 failure, are yet to be determined.

Sydney Morning Herald report estimates the recovery operation in Fiji, at a hefty price tag of A$8 million.

Perhaps the Fiji episode may have opened a new chapter of scrutiny in the murky track record of mechanical failures of the Black Hawk, used extensively by Australia, UK and the US military.
Here are other occurrences of Black Hawk crashes reported by media sources.

Bagram Airforce base, Afghanistan-Jan 30th 2003

Kuwait- Feb 25th 2003.

Fort Drum, New York- March 12th 2003.

Karbala, Iraq-April 2003

Tikrit, Iraq- Nov 8th 2003.

Florence, South Carolina-April 26th 2004.

Waco, Texas-Nov 2004.

Fort Hood, Texas-Nov 30th 2004.

Columbia, January 2005.

Al-Anbar province, Iraq- Aug 8th 2006.

Seattle, WA- Dec 20th 2006.

12km East of Tal Afar, Iraq-Jan 5th 2007.

Diyala Province, Iraq- Jan 20th 2007.

A news aggregator of Black Hawk crashes, provides a treasure trove of similar incidents.

Project of Government Oversight (POGO) website provides additional resources on Black Hawk manufacturer, Sikorsky Aircraft.

This is an excerpt of an article by News Channel 8 WTNH:

Team 8 Investigates
Problems with Sikorsky helicopters?

(WTNH, May 10, 2006 11:00 PM) _ Sikorsky Aircraft has filed a first-of-its-kind lawsuit against the Defense Department that would stop the government from releasing documents to News Channel 8 on quality control problems on the Blackhawk helicopter.

Team 8 Investigator Alan Cohn broke the story three years ago about defective parts being installed on Blackhawk helicopters.

This case is unique. It's not often the Defense Department and the Bush Administration go to court and fight for the release of what a defense contractor believes is confidential information to a reporter.

The question, the Defense Department tells us, is not if Sikorsky has been cited for continued quality problems on the Blackhawk, but how many times.

It's a simple, obvious question and with so many servicemen depending on Blackhawk helicopters in Iraq and Afghanistan, never has it been never more important.

Has Sikorsky fixed the quality control problems Team 8 first uncovered three years ago? If it has, why is the company blocking News Channel 8's efforts to find out.

"The fact there are obstacles being placed on the truth coming out really bothers me that there are priorities other than just making sure the troops are safe," says Danielle Brian, Project on Govt. Oversight.

In May 2003, News Channel 8 reported some of Sikorsky's own employees were saying defective parts from subcontractors were slipping through the company's quality assurance system and onto aircraft.

They provided us with this corrective action request from the Defense Department agency which oversees Sikorsky listing 19-quality issues including installation of unqualified parts and vendor quality control.

Sikorsky's response at the time; it's fixed its quality control problems.

Is that true? To find out, we filed a Freedom of Information request with the Pentagon asking whether Sikorsky has been issued any additional corrective action requests.

Now, the question itself is setting off a historic legal battle here at Federal Court in Washington, DC. For the first time ever, a defense contractor, Sikorsky Aircraft, is suing the defense department over the release to News Channel 8 of documents concerning quality control problems on the Blackhawk helicopter."

Initially, the Pentagon turned down our request for documents, then it suddenly reversed itself in December.

"We took another look at it and decided that the corrective action request you asked for should be released," says Richard Finnegan, Defense Contract Mgt. Agency.

The decision was made at the highest level.

"There is an appeal authority here that is the Chief of Staff," says Finnegan.

And as soon as the Defense Department told the company it was releasing the documents, Sikorsky slapped the Pentagon with a lawsuit.

"For us this is unique,

Government watch dogs and aerospace industry analysts we talked to say the case is fascinating. On one hand the military is spending billions on new Blackhawks. On the other hand in a rare push, the Pentagon is trying to release documents that could embarrass one of its most important contractors

"What it means to me is there are people inside the government who wanted to make sure you got this information."

"I could see the government is gaming this as wanting to release this information to embarrass Sikorsky to improve in manufacturing processes," says John Pike, globalsecurity.org

In its suit, the company is clearly concerned what the records we're seeking say, "Competitors would undoubtedly use the information (in the car's) "to unfairly disparage Sikorsky's manufacturing processes and quality assurance system in the eyes of Sikorsky's customers and potential customers."

"Is that something that is taken into consideration?

"No that's no part of the law. Embarrassment isn't an issue under FOIA," says Cathy Alphin, Defense Contract Mgt. Agency.

Sikorsky also warns if the documents are released, the company would seriously consider limiting the information it shares with the Defense Department in the future.

"My general view is these documents should probably be public," says Congressman Chris Shays. Connecticut Congressman Christopher Shays has looked into quality problems on the Blackhawk helicopter in the past and says in a time of war, when lives are on the line and with the Blackhawk playing such an important role...

"My basic view is the tax payer provides the money and the taxpayer via the media has the right to know what's happening and what's not happening," says Shays.

What does Sikorsky have to say? Nothing. The company is declining comment saying the Freedom of Information Act is clear. The Justice Department is asking the court to throw out Sikorsky's law suit. If that doesn't happen it could be another year until the issue is resolved.

There is a second case very similar to this one and it involves another United Technologies company, Pratt and Whitney, which is also suing the Defense Department to block release to the Hartford Courant of records concerning quality problems on a military aircraft engine.

Video of flying in a Black Hawk over Iraq.

Back to Fiji Politics, the announced cancellations of the scheduled team marches in Wellington, is a disappointing start to New Zealand's premier Rugby international; a title which the Fiji Sevens team are defending.



(Above image: Image of historic fort in Sigatoka valley).
The historical Tongan fortress is located on the West Coast of Viti Levu, up towards the head waters of Sigatoka river.




The issue of having a central state Government is a question with a turbulent history in Fiji. The question of central authority then became a socio-religious conflict with tribal roots. The historical article by Fiji Times will perhaps prompt a much needed reflection on the forces of change in Fiji politics.



(Above: Image of a similar pacification by the Government troops in the Ba highlands at the same period, described in the F.T article.)

A letter to the Editor of the Fiji Times reminds the public, of the cost in having a native state within a state.

Corrupt natives

I AGREE with Eliki Gaunavou (FT 26/1) that one area that deserved an immediate mopping-up is the Ministry of Fijian Affairs including the NLTB and the Native Lands Commission dispute resolution tribunal.

Land title disputes are based on a history of tension within family communities and oral tradition. [Disputes] have and will continue to be at the centre of major disputes. [Disputes] have become increasingly important because of lease money. Whenever a dispute arises, lease money is likely to be withheld.

Consequently, local and foreign economic activities stagnate, children stay home or roam the streets, poor families get poorer and the inherent indigenous dependency syndrome on lease money aggravated.

Mr Gaunavou rightly concludes that continuing disputes over vanua titles contribute to a "corrupt native society" and calls for the abolition and replacement of the Fijian Affairs ministry with a Ministry of Native Affairs.

The Fijian Affairs ministry is in fact just that a ministry of native Fijian affairs. It begs more questions which have been raised many times before by your editorials.

Why should indigenous Fijians continue to be doubly governed, first under the Constitution and then reduced to be subjects of native regulations administered by the Ministry of Fijian Affairs?

Isn't it time for indigenous Fijians to be governed as full citizens of the Republic of Fiji and Rotuma just like any other citizen? After 36 years of independence, is not one government and one set of rules sufficient for all who call Fiji and Rotuma home?

Everyone wants to soar like an eagle, including indigenous people the world over.

Fijians have long known their disadvantage. They cannot soar as long as they are subjected to the currents of two laws the mainstream one and another especially just for them.

Morgan Tuimaleali'ifano
Suva

Club Em Designs

Seeing Trees or a Forest?

Fiji Village reports a landmark ruling by the Suva High Court, which has given the landowners of a Serua Mahogany plantation the ability to apply for a forestry harvest license.

This is the excerpt of the Fiji Village article:

Serua Mahogany Landowners Entitled Harvesting License
By fijivillage
Jan 19, 2007, 17:19

In a bench mark ruling, the Suva High court yesterday ordered that Serua mahogany landowners are entitled to a license to harvest their own mahogany.

High court judge Jiten Singh ruled that they are now entitled to a license from the Native Land Trust Board to harvest mahogany planted on their land after the mataqali Naua applied to the NLTB for a license to log the mahogany which was denied.

In his judgment Justice Singh highlighted that the evidence before him indicates that the financial benefits to the landowners are far superior if they log their own mahogany since they have ready buyers for their products

Lawyer representing the landowners Isireli Fa said they have already negotiated a price for the mahogany which is estimated to earn the landowners $1.8 million after costs of extraction.

Prior applications filed by the landowning unit, was understood to have been denied by the agency responsible for indigenous land in Fiji, the Native Lands Trust Board (N.L.T.B).

This court ruling has also inextricably set up a new paradigm, allowing other native landowning units to contest the multitude of resources available on their ancestral land. This new found ability, further underscores the inability of the Great Council of Chiefs (GCC) to achieve such empowering actions, for the people that they supposedly spoke for.

Another contention is that, why these avenues of livelihood were denied in the first place by the N.L.T.B? The agency charted with responsibility of acting and managing these prime acreages of real estate, with the best interest of the landowners in mind; only had dubious intentions, well embedded in greed and subterfuge.

This court ruling has also confirmed firmly held suspicions that, these native institutions were created for the sole purpose of benefit ting this minority indigenous elite in Fiji. The unintended consequences of the agenda driven influences from a clumsy aristocratic hierarchy was, the political dramatization of class warfare in Fiji, resulting in a track record of coups.

Club Em Designs

Poll Position

According to the new interim Minister of Commerce, Industry, Investment and Communication- Mr. Taito Waradi, is adamant that the staggering financial mess within Fiji's treasury was the result of the creative accounting and failed monetary and fiscal policies employed by the SDL Government, as reported by an article from Radio New Zealand.

To get a better handle of the financial quagmire within the Fiji treasury, it is prudent to outline what and where the lion's share of Government funds had been squandered on. Readers will have to look no further than the Great Council of Chief's new bachelor pad, an icon of myopic decadence and entitled exuberance. Albeit, on the tax payer's tab.


Fijian Affairs Trust Fund has been long rumoured, to be the underlying barrier to the social empowerment of indigenous Fijians from common stock. Presently this conventionally held wisdom still applies.

The Fijian Affairs Trust Fund is being perceived, as a ubiquitous symbol of cultural enslavement. Although, the Chairperson of the Trust fund proudly unveils the new G.C.C building in this Fiji Times article. There still remains an embarrassing and inconvenient question to ponder:

How does this benefit the aspirations of the indigenous?

The future of the new GCC complex, built unashamedly with a $F20 million state loan, which was converted mysteriously to a grant, will perhaps now reach the overarching system of check and balances; long denied. By denying this corruption, the machinery of native institutions perpetuated and rewarded, an ingrained system of cavalier expenditure and a system that was unfettered with chronic abuse.

It is an ideal window of opportunity to correct this duplicity in Fiji governance, especially after the recent military council order, which forbade the GCC from meeting without their approval.

Sadly, what is left in Fiji's state treasury, is basically what had not been consumed by personal profit, hidden revenue streams of kick-backs. Unravelling all these cobwebs of impropriety, is the task of the new interim Finance Minister.

Due to the vast extent of this deficit financing in Fiji, a new budget is expected to be created by the interim Government as reported by Fiji Live article.

This is the excerpt of the Fiji Live article:

New budget expected, says economist
Wednesday January 17, 2007

The recasting of the 2007 Budget by Fiji's interim Government is necessary and was to be expected, says an academic. The ousted government's 2007 budget was thrown out by the interim regime led by interim Prime Minister and army commander Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama.

But University of the South Pacific economist Dr Biman Prasad said while there will obviously be implications on revenue measures that have already been set out in the 2007 Budget, the recasting was necessary.

He said people should look at the way this is done particularly the allocation to key sectors and the delivery of public services including health, education and infrastructure.Prasad said investors will look at how the re casted budget will affect strategies promoting export and investment.

"It's important for the interim Government to give the right signal to investors in terms of fiscal incentives," he said.

"There should be emphasis on improving and developing new infrastructure for both agriculture and tourism growth."

Another aspect that needs urgent attention is the agriculture sector which he says has a lot of potential but is not realised. Prasad said a long-term objective in this sector should be to create productivity and opportunities for employment.

For the sugar industry, Prasad said there needs to be a concerted effort by stakeholders to first gain the confidence of farmers, cane cutters and others dependent on the industry.

He said the amount of restructure done and funds poured into the industry will come to nothing if there are no farmers out there. Accordingly, there should be appropriate measures in place to entice farmers to stay on.

Fijilive

Although deposed Chief Justice, says the appointment is a disgrace and a breach of his trust in a Fiji Times article.


[Deposed]Chief Justice Daniel Fatiaki checks out The Fiji Times, the front page on which is his successor, Justice Anthony Gates.

This is the excerpt of the Fiji Times article:

Gates broke trust: Fatiaki.

Thursday, January 18, 2007


Chief Justice Daniel Fatiaki has labelled the appointment of Justice Anthony Gates in an acting capacity as an unfortunate development.

Justice Fatiaki said Justice Gates' appointment and his acceptance of the post was a breach of trust.

High Court judge Justice Gates was sworn in as the acting Chief Justice at Government House by the President, Ratu Josefa Iloilo, on Tuesday.

That came as a result of Chief Justice Fatiaki and Chief Magistrate Naomi Matanitobua being sent on leave by military commander Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama.

The military said that was done to facilitate an inquiry into the judicial system.

But Justice Fatiaki said as far as he was concerned, he had not received any formal notice of any allegation or charges against the judiciary. He said Justice Gates' appointment was unnecessary.

"They could have recalled me but they did not," he said. He said the interim administration should not have interfered if it was really concerned about the independence of the judiciary.

"Why did the Attorney-General ask another judge to call a meeting of the Judicial Services Commission?

"The meeting for the commission is only supposed to be convened by the chair of the Commission which is the Chief Justice.

"It doesn't mean that if I'm on forced leave that is, that I cannot come in and call a meeting of the Commission," he said.

Acting Chief Justice Gates yesterday said he had no comment to make on these remarks. Judge Nazhat Shameem yesterday said she was saddened to hear Chief Justice Fatiaki's statements.

"I am saddened to hear his remarks about me,'' said Justice Shameem, on criticism that was reportedly levelled against her and Justice Gates by Chief Justice Fatiaki.

She would not comment on the appointment of Justice Gates as acting CJ or changes to the judiciary. Justice Gerard Winter declined to comment.

Interim Minister for Justice and Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum said comments by Justice Fatiaki, who is on leave and was probably ill-informed about what happened at the Judicial Services Commission meeting, were unfortunate and "with respect, inappropriate for a judicial officer".

"It is precisely this sort of conduct of some judicial officers that is of concern," Mr Sayed-Khaiyum said.

"As for the meeting itself it was convened after independent legal advice was obtained from Queens Counsel. It was conducted in accordance with our Constitution," he said.

He said the most senior substantive puisne judge who was the natural successor to the Chief Justice was asked by the Attorney- General and Minister for Justice to chair the Judicial Services Commission.

"The Judicial Services Commission allows the judiciary to take control over its own processes, independent of the Government and of any other institution and persons,"Mr Sayed-Khaiyum said.

He said one would expect all persons interested in the independence of the judiciary to support the holding of the commission's meeting and the subsequent appointment of Justice Anthony Gates.

"Other judges may feel aggrieved that they were not chosen by the JSC to act as CJ, however I was advised by Judicial Services Commission that the most senior puisne judge after Justice Shameem was Mr Justice Anthony Gates.

"So his appointment is uncontroversial and constitutionally correct," Mr Sayed-Khaiyum said. Fiji Legal Aid Commission director Vilimone Vosarogo said he supported Justice Gates' appointment.

"He is a highly decorated lawyer and competent by his own rights,'' said Mr Vosarogo. "As a judge he has done his job well."

"As solicitors we should be able to trust that we are appearing before judicial officers who are not biased and who are confident of upholding the integrity of the judiciary,'' said Mr Vosarogo.

He said the recent judicial changes had had little effect on the running of the courts. "It hasn't really affected our timetable. We've set trial dates for most of the High Court trials and we intend to stick to it. The judiciary has informed us of the same stand and that it would like to dispose of those cases quickly,'' said Mr Vosarogo.

However, the new appointed Chief Justice Anthony Gates calls for an efficient system of justice, in this Fiji Village article.

Justice Gates calls for more efficient justice system
By fijivillage
Jan 17, 2007, 13:03


Newly appointed Acting Chief Justice, Anthony Gates has today made a statement on the way forward for the judiciary as certain parties continue to argue whether his appointment is constitutional.

In a statement released to Village News, Justice Gates said Fiji must have a more efficient justice system as the current inadequacies of the legal system are now notorious and have undermined the rule of law.

The Acting Chief Justice said the manner of dispatching business by the courts should change as efficiencies need to be improved by the judicial officers.
Justice Gates said we often hope that life will continue on as before and indefinitely but it is now inappropriate for the judiciary to say that it will be business as usual.

The Acting Chief Justice said there have been too many serious allegations but the independent role of the judiciary will not change. He said the judiciary can and must and will stay independent, and the final bulwark of liberty is the courts, the independent guarantor of freedom under the law.

Justice Anthony Gates said the constitutionality of the present situation inevitably will be raised before the judges. He said at that time, the only appropriate time, those judges will hear from the parties concerning the evidence and the law, and then give their decisions in accordance with their oaths in office.
Justice Gates also welcomes the comments of the Interim Attorney General that the military should not abuse the rights of ordinary inhabitants. The Acting Chief Justice said a wise army remains a disciplined army and there is no time for vindictiveness, petty bullying or score settling.

Justice Gates said if claims of abuse of human rights are made out, litigants will obtain necessary redress from the courts. He said the need for a comprehensive 'no stone unturned' inquiry into the serious allegations raised about certain judicial officers and practices is self evident.

Justice Gates said he will meet shortly with his fellow members on the Judicial Service Commission, President of the Law Society and the Chairman of the Public Service Commission, to map together a plan for the creation of a robust, healthy and efficient legal system in Fiji.

Should the Fiji public imply from his comments that, the deposed Chief Justice Daniel Fatiaki represented an inefficient system of justice?

Regime's illegal: Lawyers

Thursday, January 18, 2007

THE interim administration is illegal and interference with the judiciary is wrong, the Fiji Law Society maintained yesterday.

The society, reiterating its position, follows speculation it had changed its stand because of reports it was part of the Judicial Services Commission, which recommended that High Court judge Justice Anthony Gates be appointed Acting Chief Justice.

Yesterday society vice president Tupou Draunidalo said the society's earlier statements on the legality of developments that had unfolded since the December 5 military takeover were unchanged. She refused to elaborate or respond to further queries.

Ms Draunidalo made the comments in response to questions regarding issues raised by Suva lawyer Richard Naidu in a column in this newspaper on Tuesday.

Mr Naidu had said, among other things, that the return of power by military commander Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama to the President, Ratu Josefa Iloilo, was futile because it did not legitimise the events that unfolded on December 5.

Society president Devanesh Sharma said while they accepted the society would deal with the administration without prejudice to any legal action on the validity of its appointment, it should not be assumed that it meant they accepted the interim Cabinet to be legitimate in the eyes of the law.

The society met last weekend to discuss its stand on the issue. Mr Sharma said Ratu Josefa had the power to make constitutional appointments only in compliance with the provisions of the Constitution. "He (the President, Ratu Josefa) can not act unconstitutionally himself," Mr Sharma had said.

He has asked Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum to impress on the military the importance of the independence of the judiciary and the need to allow Chief Justice Daniel Fatiaki and Chief Magistrate Naomi Matanitobua to resume duties.

He said the society was reviewing its options to shortly institute legal action against the ban on land sales and the forced leave of Justice Fatiaki and Ms Matanitobua. "The society deplores the attempts made by the RFMF to interfere with the judiciary. The Chief Justice and the chief magistrate must be allowed to immediately resume their official duties," Mr Sharma said.

Interim Attorney-General and Minister of Justice Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum said the appointment of all individuals under the regime, including interim Cabinet ministers, were mandated by the President.

He had earlier said the military regime upheld and respected the Constitution. Mr Naidu had said in an earlier interview that the system of things as they were was illegal.

He said if the Constitution was indeed being upheld, where was the Vice President, Ratu Joni Madraiwiwi, who was appointed by the Great Council of Chiefs during the reign of a democratically elected government.

Although, Fiji Law Society was infuriated with the decision to replace Justice Fatiaki described in this Fiji Times article, the new Chief Justice's comments provided solid justifications, on this latest series of rolling reforms.

Despite the swearing ceremony of his successor, the deposed Chief Justice still clutches onto the office, as Fiji Sun article confirms.

I’m still the CJ: Fatiaki

By HAROLD KOI

Chief Justice Daniel Fatiaki, who was forced to go in leave by the military regime, yesterday maintained that he is still the CJ. And he angrily denounced the appointment of Justice Anthony Gates as acting Chief Justice as a disgrace.

"I am still the Chief Justice," he said. Justice Fatiaki also criticised Justices Gates and High Court judge Justice Nazhat Shameem for "betraying my trust" and the judiciary by supporting the military. Justice Fatiaki said actions by the High Court judges that supported the military were cowardly.He said no investigation had been initiated on allegations of corruption against the military.

Said Justice Shameem: "I am sorry to hear the CJ's reported comment about me but it's not appropriate to comment on the matter as a judge". Justice Gates declined to comment.

However, the Fiji Law Society maintains that there are no new judicial appointments.
President Devanesh Sharma said there were no new appointments within the judiciary.
"In actual fact, people are completely mistaking the issue," he said.
"The judicial service commission is a body that deals with recommendations and it is the president that makes the recommendation."

Mr Sharma said the appointment was within the Constitution. "The only one that has been announced is an acting CJ," he said. "What that simply means is in the absence of the CJ (Fatiaki), who is on leave at the present time, it is permissible to appoint an acting CJ.

"And the acting CJ will step down as soon as the CJ comes back." Interim Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed Khaiyum said Justice Fatiaki was on leave and was probably ill-informed about what had happened at the Judicial Services Commission meeting.

"It is precisely this sort of conduct of some judicial officers that is of concern," he said. "As for the meeting itself, it was convened after independent legal advice was obtained from the Queen's Counsel." Mr Khaiyum said it was conducted in accordance with our Constitution. "The most senior substantive puisne judge who is the natural successor to the Chief Justice was asked by the Attorney-General and Minister for Justice to chair the Judicial Services Commission," he said.

"The Judicial Services Commission allows the judiciary to take control over its own processes independent of the Government and of any other institution and/or persons.
"One would expect that all persons interested in the independence of the judiciary would support the holding of the commission's meeting and the subsequent appointment of Justice Anthony Gates.

"Other judges may feel aggrieved that they were not chosen by the JSC to act as CJ. However I was advised by the Judicial Services Commission that the most senior puisne judge after Madam Justice Shameem was Mr Justice Anthony Gates. "So his appointment is uncontroversial and constitutionally correct."

The case of Sugar Cane Growers Council Chairman, Jagannath Sami who recently won a reprieve in the Lautoka High Court, contesting his illegal removal by the military post 2006 coup, may reflect the Archilles heel of the Fiji Army's legal precedence; if not corrected in a timely redress.
Fiji Village reports that, Messr Swami returns hopefully to his position in work, unmolested and unrestrained. Fiji Times article emphasizes the court order to the military, in dessisting any 'overly friendly' influences.

Despite the overwhelming availability of experts in Civil Liberties and Human Rights in Fiji; the following report by Niu FM, underlines the desperation of certain media outlets, in obtaining reliable and credible sources.
Niu FM podcast interviews 1987 coup leader and self-declared expert on Human Rights, Sitiveni Rabuka on the recent performance of Fiji Human Rights Commission.

Club Em Designs

Fiji Auditor General Accused of Stonewalling Findings.

Discrepancies into the affairs of the office of Fiji Auditor General is paramount among the priorities of new interim Minister of Finance, Mahendra Chaudary. The new incumbent has raised interesting questions regarding certain select 2005 findings that, were withheld from being tabled in Fiji Parliament.

"There is enough evidence in those reports. I have reason to believe the reports were shelved because the contents compromised the ousted Soqosoqo Duavata ni Lewenivanua Government.

"You will remember that the Auditor-General was summoned by Laisenia Qarase when he was Prime Minister, where he was talked to. Thereafter, a general slacking from the Auditor- General was evident," Mr Chaudhry said, accusing Mr Vatuloka of being selective in his reports.

Select findings reported by the Fij Times, is as follows:

Two reports obtained by The Fiji Times show there were no travel guidelines for State CEOs overseas travel, enabling them to capitalise on loopholes without telling the Public Service Commission in time.

One report said the Minor Tenders Board in a Flying Minute in September 2002 approved the purchase of three return tickets from Nadi to Geneva for an Inter-Parliamentary Union meeting.

The trip for then Speaker of the House Ratu Epeli Nailatikau, backbencher Filimoni Banuve and former FLP backbencher Vijay Singh cost taxpayers $26,187. Former Secretary-General Mary Chapman joined the contingent at an additional $8729 without the approval of the Minor Tenders Board or an explanation for the last minute inclusion.

The report highlights the need for State ministries and departments to file supporting documents for official trips overseas, after it was discovered organisations funded air fares and per diem allowances for MPs.

Former MPs cited in such instances include ex-SDL Cabinet member Mataiasi Ragigia, ousted Commerce Minister Tomasi Vuetilovoni, Isireli Leweniqila who at the time of the report was Sports Minister, Simione Kaitani, who was then Information Minister, Solomone Naivalu as Health Minister and then Public Enterprise Minister Irami Matairavula. The report cited breach of an agreement the Government had with Air Pacific Fiji Limited on all overseas travel services for civil servants.

Included in this were former Home Affairs Minister Joketani Cokanasiga, Mr Naivalu and Agriculture CEO Luke Ratuvuki, who travelled Qantas Airways for business purposes.

Club Em Designs

Ab Absurdo Australis

Australia's meddling into the political affairs of Pacific island nations, has now received a stern rebuke by the Melanesian Spearhead Group.
China Post article dissects the news of this dispatched communique which included a statement of solidarity and support of Fiji's new interim Government.

An article by The Age newspaper title uses the word "Bully" in the title. In another opinion piece by The Age, reflects on the foreign policy and the diplomatic engagements designed by Canberra, which is described in the article as "lacking in imagination".

This is the excerpt of the article:

Our parlous region

January 13, 2007
Page 1 of 3 | Single page

Australia's policy in the South Pacific is obsessed with security concerns and market-driven solutions to theproblems of poorer nations, write Shahar Hameiri and Toby Carroll.

THE recent release of a commissioned progress report into the largest Australian-led state building program in recent history demonstrates the need for a qualitatively new approach to assisting the Pacific. After three years of extensive involvement through the Regional Assistance Mission to Solomon Islands, the report paints a disturbing picture.

Although the security situation has thankfully improved under RAMSI, the same cannot be said for the economy, with Solomon Islanders suffering prohibitive prices for basic goods and low employment prospects.

Unfortunately, the Australian Government's approach to the Pacific region is constrained by a lack of imagination that does little to improve the development prospects of our neighbours or advance Australia's long-term security interests.

Indeed, not a day has gone by in the past year without news of political and social unrest in the Pacific. In some circles, the island states to Australia's north and east have acquired the dubious moniker of the "Arc of Instability".

Important questions relating to the nature of this instability, as well as to Australia's approach to ameliorating it, need to be raised. This is because the fundamental reading in Australia of the Pacific quagmire is biased in favour of promoting stopgap measures that are difficult to implement and, when implemented, can amplify the root causes of the problem.

Crucially, the Australian Government's short-term interests are with curbing immediate regional security threats in the form of migrant outflows, international crime and breeding grounds for terrorists.

In the long-term, the Government's plan is to stabilise the region and implement so-called "good governance" programs, which are seen as the bedrock of market-led development. Market-led development, in turn, is seen as generating stable societies, thereby guaranteeing Australia's security.

The short-term concern for stability goes some way towards explaining the Howard Government's recent decision not to intervene in Fiji after the military coup — preferring the use of diplomatic sanctions and other softer measures. In sum, the existence of a capable Fijian military, while detrimental to democracy, is congenial to Australia's immediate security interests, as perceived by the Australian Government.

In the Solomon Islands, the situation has been very different. In the Solomons, before the Australia-led intervention, no such circuit-breaker existed to control unlawful elements. This meant that the Australian Government had a more elemental interest in stabilising the security situation as a precursor to governance and economic reforms.

The problem with the Government's approach in the Pacific is that it almost never works. Even in the Solomon Islands, where the intervention was initially lauded as a great success, devastating riots and increasing tensions reversed this appraisal drastically, as the report suggests. In Fiji, where Australia is a leading donor, we also see the limits of "good governance" programs.

A report such as the RAMSI one can lead to knee-jerk reactions from those who are already sceptical of the utility of Australian aid. We should be clear that we do not advocate reducing or eliminating Australia's efforts in the Pacific. We do, however, argue for a qualitatively different framework.

Pacific states are geographically small and widespread, have limited natural resources and face significant environmental challenges — especially those associated with climate change.

The problems of the Pacific cannot be solved with the logic of comparative advantage, so critical to market-led development approaches. For example, in the Solomon Islands, deforestation has created massive social and environmental problems, making the industry unsustainable and divisive.

There are many possible policy alternatives to those being promoted by Australia and other major donors.

First, there should be a stronger shift away from "boomerang aid" that often ends up in the pockets of Western companies and consultants. Rather than playing a Keynesian-style role in developing local economies, this form of aid has very little impact on kick-starting domestic markets.

While critics might be concerned about corruption in the process of financial distribution, this should not preclude considering such policies in tandem with suitable checks and balances.

This is because corruption has both played a part in the development of Western economies and actually continues to play a role in promoting Western economic interests in developing countries. To focus on corruption as the primary cause for development failure is to miss the bigger picture.

A second measure has been endorsed by the Labor Party's foreign affairs spokesman, Robert McClelland, and the World Bank. This involves opening up Australia's labour market to temporary workers from the Pacific. At present, Australian employers in seasonal industries, such as agriculture and hospitality, cannot meet staffing demands. In the Pacific, on the other hand, we see a "youth bulge" and massive unemployment. In the Solomon Islands, for example, the median age is just under 19, whereas in Australia it is about 37.

The final policy option relates to a combination of tax concessions to promote Australian foreign direct investment in the Pacific, controlled transfer of technology associated with productive output, and preferential trading arrangements for Pacific states.

But preferential trading should not take the form of free trade agreements, which invariably give preference to the most powerful party.

New trading regimes should nurture budding industries and protect them from competition, where appropriate, within a regional framework.

The World Trade Organisation is a potential barrier here, but the present international trade regime is part of the problem that needs to be tackled.

Far from radical, some of the policies were flagged in 2003 by a report of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee. But the report's recommendations have found little expression within Australian Government policy.

The present approach of the Australian Government is not only tight-fisted, it is inefficient in generating outcomes congenial to regional stability.

The debate on regional engagement needs to be expanded beyond its ideologically and politically constrained boundaries.

Shahar Hameiri and Toby Carroll research regional economic development and security issues at the Asia Research Centre, Murdoch University.

Club Em Designs