Wednesday, November 22, 2006

Fiji-A Nation Torn By Corruption or Eroded by Coups?

Above Image: Papua New Guinea P.M, Sir Micheal Somare and Fiji P.M, Laisenia Qarase at the recent South Pacific Forum meet.


Despite being tainted by his legal maneuvering in post-2000 coup events; Chief Justice of Fiji, Daniel Fatiaki has made a bold declaration in an Fiji Times article that, brutally casts aside any significant research done by experts of neuro-science, sociology and anthropology.

Fatiaki 's hypthesis is that, Fijian youth are no more pre-dispositioned to undertake criminal acts than any other ethinicity in Fiji. His remarks are based soley on the data sourced from criminal files. Any readers of S.i.F.M's post-Morality of Fiji Politics may find some dichotomy in the methodology used by the Chief Justice.

This is the excerpt of the article:

Youths lack parental guidance, says Chief Justice

Thursday, November 23, 2006

Fijian youths are no more criminally inclined than youths of other ethnic groups, says Chief Justice Daniel Fatiaki.

Speaking at a youth forum on Education, Youth and Justice in Suva yesterday, Justice Fatiaki said almost all youths with criminal convictions were committed by those who came from broken homes where parental guidance and control were absent.

"Six out of 10 times, the cases are linked to alcohol and drugs, to which the suspect pleads guilty," he said.

The cases are sufficiently recurrent to warrant closer examination, Justice Fatiaki said.

He said the rural urban migration was a contributing factor particularly because children were forced to leave their parents and communities to further education in urban schools, he said.

Justice Fatiaki said the location of secondary schools and tertiary institutions needed examining, as well as an overhaul of the school curriculum to redirect it from academic subjects to one that identified talents and abilities.

The changes need to come at an earlier stage than present, he said.

"The disruption and upheaval caused by these young boys and girls in being removed from the stable, caring and loving protection of their parents and traditional village and being thrust into the new unfamiliar, and indifferent surroundings of an urban centre with its permissive lifestyle, cash economy and numerous distractions is plainly obvious," Justice Fatiaki said.


These cavalier assertions on the human behavior by a flawed legal expert, lacks any in-depth scientific evidence and in the same stroke makes a mockery out of the professionals who diligently apply their knowledge in science. Perhaps the Justice could have just published his opinion in a academic paper for perusal at a reknown publisher of Scientific journals.

Controversial decisions are no stranger to the present Chief Justice of Fiji. This report from International Commission of Jurist outlines a decision by Justice Daniel Fatiaki.

Here is the excerpt of the Commission's report.

Following the 19 May 2000 coup, the military Commander Bainimarama assumed executive authority and began to rule by decree. Apparently, the Chief Justice, Sir Timoci Tuivaga was involved in drafting the Administration of Justice Decree No.5 of 2000. The Fiji Law Society received information about the Chief Justice's offering advice to the military government and wrote on June 9 2000 to the Chief Justice to express its concern. In his response, Sir Timoci Tuivaga confirmed his involvement in drafting the Decree and justified his actions by arguing that he "took the opportunity that had presented itself to ensure that the Administration of Justice Decrees of the military government took cognisance of the freedom and independence of the courts to maintain a system of law and order and justice in the country". The Chief Justice also stated that this was his pragmatic approach to the fact that "the 1997 Constitution has been unable to provide a solution to the current political and constitutional morass in the country."

It seems that most lawyers in Fiji are still deeply dismayed at the Chief Justice's conduct. However, certain judges have supported the Chief Justice. Justice Michael Scott of the Suva High Court wrote individually to the Law Society in response to the Society's letter stating that there is no possible justification for the Law Society's "nasty, cliché-ridden, and almost hysterical" protest letter. Justice Scott went so far as to refuse to allow Ramesh Prakash, a senior lawyer, to appear before him in order to argue a case for a client. Apparently, Justice Scott's refusal is linked to the fact that Prakash was one of the eight members of the Law Society that endorsed the letter to the Chief Justice. Justice Daniel Fatiaki criticised the Society's letter saying that it was "needlessly provocative, blatantly discourteous and unduly censorious".



Pacific Island Business published an opinion article from Auckland based writer Rajendra Prasad and author of book "Tears in Paradise". This is the excerpt of the piece.

Restive army -an anxious State

Since the mutiny, Bainimarama has not rested. He changed from a reluctant and vacillating commander during the coup to one who has put others on their toes... However, the Government also strengthened its position since its election in 2001...

Rajendra Prasad in Auckland
Fri, 3 Nov 2006

VIEWPOINT


A restive army is a fear for every nation and when the Prime Minister and other government ministers respond to the media with "no comments" it means that the fear factor has registered. Recent threats to the Government by Commodore Bainimarama, commander of Fiji's army, are a cause for concern and anxiety in many circles. The situation arises from the Government's insensitivity towards the army that suffered the deaths of eight of its soldiers in a mutiny. The mutiny followed the May 2000 civilian coup, which left a divided army and an edgy nation.

Interestingly, following the May 2000 coup led by renegade George Speight, it was Commodore Bainimarama who installed Lasenia Qarase as interim Prime Minister to head an interim administration. Those that comprised the interim administration were largely from the Fijian extremist fringe. They were quietly celebrating the restoration of political power in their hands while the deposed Prime Minister, Mahendra Chaudhry, and many of his parliamentary colleagues, after being incarcerated in the Parliament Buildings for 56 days, were left to ponder their future, as Indo-Fijians were rudely reminded that their future remained precarious in this enigmatic land.

The interim administration, until it went to the polls in August 2001, contrived its own elaborate plans to entrench its power. A clandestine plan was to remove Commodore Bainimarama as the head of the army and appoint someone more amenable to its sinister designs. In covert operations, the army was infiltrated by those sympathetic to the interim administration. They successfully destabilised the army, which led to a mutiny with dire consequences. However, the objective of the mutiny was not achieved and Commander Bainimarama regained firm control of the army.

Since the mutiny, Commodore Bainimarama has not rested. He changed from a reluctant and vacillating commander during the coup to one who has put others on their toes, some on the edge of the cliffs and a few prominent chiefs in jail. However, the Government also strengthened its position since its election in 2001 that had returned those anointed nationalists.

They had unfinished business. Their debt of gratitude to those who executed the coup now languishing in jails, including Speight marooned on Nukulau Island, was like a millstone around their necks. Having regained power through the works of those blessed hands they had an obligation to reward them for their courage, bravery and sacrifice. In their eyes, they were worthy recipients of indigenous awards for their feat and spending their time behind bars was a slight to the indigenous dignity.

However, the army was firm and it insisted that the perpetrators of the coup, including some of the high chiefs that included the Vice President, Ratu Jope Seniloli, Tui Cakau and Minister for Fijian Affairs, Ratu Naigama Lalabalavu and Qaranivalu Ratu Inoke Takiveikata bear the full brunt of the justice system. The Government could not evade and the heroes of the 2000 coup soon found that they backed the wrong horse.

Many observers hold that if it were not for the insistence of the army none of those involved in the execution of the coup would have faced the justice system. Arguably, the 1987 coups had emboldened the chiefs and coup makers to be as defiant and daunting as Rabuka and his associates who were granted immunity from prosecution. With such knowledge and assumption that the army would align itself to the indigenous cause, the chiefs and their rowdy supporters became bold and adventurous.

In their flight of madness, they made another cardinal error in cruelly removing Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara, President and Fiji's most powerful chief. It did not feature in the initial stages of the coup as the indigenous flag was wildly waved to garner support of the Fijian people. The indigenous call invited hysteric and frenzied response from the ordinary Fijians who gravitated to the Parliamentary complex en masse to support the indigenous cause, unaware that it disguised the removal of Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara.

They came and met and shook hands with their newfound hero in George Speight. Already the Counter Revolutionary Unit of the Army that joined him to support his cause buoyed him. The parliamentary complex became a stage for theatrics where George Speight performed his feats with masterly skill to the joy of his followers. In the later stages, once the emotions welled and the road of reason was lost, George Speight became more spirited and daring.

He laid down his conditions for the release of his hostages, which included the removal of Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara from his position as President. The groundswell of support that Speight had gathered provided him the ammunition to dictate. With its armoury looted, the army was unsure if it could assure security of the President and his family. The army relented and it is reported that Commodore Bainimarama, with former Prime Minister Rabuka, prevailed upon Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara to step down from his office presumably on the grounds that the army was not in a position to guarantee his security and that of his family including his daughter Adi Koila Nailatikau who was one of the parliamentarians held captive by the Speight group.

Without the support of the army, a chief who earned laurels for his country and people had never imagined that, at the sunset of his public life, his own people would betray him. He stepped down from his position under duress. This singular event would go down as the greatest betrayal of a high chief in the annals of Fijian history.

Undoubtedly, this event took its toll and Fiji's greatest chief and political leader never recovered from it. Commodore Bainimarama has not spoken much about this sordid affair but some observers claim that he carries the guilt of having failed his own chief and being party to his crude banishment.

This, together with the attempt on his life, has transformed him and he is out to avenge what was inadvertently lost in the sad saga of Fijian politics. He is now poised like a tiger, to use the muscle power of his army to ensure that the Government does not engage in activities that are immoral and unjust. The proposed Promotion of Reconciliation, Unity and Tolerance Bill and Qoliqoli Bill have earned his wrath. The Promotion of Reconciliation, Unity and Tolerance Bill was blatant in its intent to facilitate the release of those convicted for their involvement in the 2000 coup but the title given to the Bill was a monstrous lie. It had nothing to do with reconciliation or redressing the pain and suffering inflicted on the Indo-Fijian community but to facilitate the release of those who were convicted and jailed for coup-related offences.

Ignoring the above, many critics have questioned the need for Fiji to maintain such a large army that consumes millions of dollars of state resources. Fiji has no external threats nor is it torn by any internal strife that the police cannot handle. There is no doubt that there is intense racism in Fiji but unlike other countries, it has not descended into to violence or confrontation mainly because Indo-Fijians, are not attuned to violence and it poses no threat for the future that intervention of the army may be required.

If it was meant to dislodge any Indo-Fijian Government and restore it into the indigenous hands then it was achieved in 1987. However, in May 2000 coup, a group of civilians achieved the same objective virtually with sticks and stones at a fraction of the cost negating the need for massive intervention of the army. What little the army was called on to do could have been attained by the Police Mobile Unit.

Historically, what was considered an army that would acquiesce to the interests of the Government and Fijians is now at odds with it. The Government has real problems on its hands as it cannot disband the army or remove Commodore Bainimarama. It is a situation identical to what the Chaudhry Government suffered when the NLTB acted unilaterally in 1999/2000 instigating landowners to evict Indo-Fijians from their land except that the threat posed by the army to the Qarase Government is far more serious.

I think it was President Kennedy who admirably captured his thoughts saying that governments who chose to ride the tiger of terrorism (army) to rob their way to power may one day find it difficult to dismount and may even find themselves inside its stomach. Some people leave their imprints through their walks and some through their talks. We need to take heed of their wisdom to retain our sanity and our path to attain that intricate balance.


Rajendra Prasad is former town clerk, Ba and author of "Tears in Paradise - Suffering and Struggles of Indians in Fiji 1879-2004" (Revised Edition 2006). The views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily subscribed to by islandsbusiness.com.



On the other end of the spectrum of orderly chaos, the Fiji Army has revealed to Fiji Village news, part of their intelligence on evidence supporting the notion that, pressure was forced on Fiji Police Commissioner Hughes to investigate the Fiji Army Commander for sedition.

Frank Bainamarama is currently visiting relatives in New Zealand and has remarked that all will be revealed on his return to Fiji.




This interference of the Police Force has amounted to the non-completion of crucial investigations relating to the 2000 coup. Added to that, other similar descriptions of corruption has surfaced during the High Court trial of Kunatuba; who was recently found guilty by accessors.

On the surface the Police investigations into the Agricultural Scam was relatively straight forward. However, there are loose ends that stick embarassingly out and make the public think otherwise. For an example, Pacific Islands Report article published the matter of Inspector Ali and his removal from the case as primary investigator.

The excerpt of this article is as follows:

PACIFIC ISLANDS REPORT

Pacific Islands Development Program/East-West Center
With Support From Center for Pacific Islands Studies/University of Hawai‘i


FIJI PRIME MINISTER IMPLICATED IN FRAUD CASE

By Harold Koi

SUVA, Fiji (FijiSUN, Oct. 4) – Fiji Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase and other Cabinet ministers were suspects in the multi-million-agriculture scam, the High Court was told yesterday.

The trial of the former agriculture permanent secretary, Peniasi Kunatuba, continued with the leading investigator Inspector Nasir Ali claiming evidence showed there was a conspiracy between senior government officials and hardware company executives.

However, he was removed from the investigation and could not obtain a statement from Qarase and other Cabinet ministers, he said.

Inspector Ali told the court he was stopped from conducting the agriculture scam investigation after he revealed new evidence of fraudulent activity by senior officers within the Fiji Police Force. He said that before he was removed from the scam investigation, evidence he gathered showed there was a conspiracy that involved the former Minister for Agriculture, Apisai Tora, and others.

He told the court that there were also allegations of conspiracy that pointed to the ministers, assistant ministers, executives of Suncourt and RC Manubhai to conspire to defraud the government.

And he claimed the Suncourt hardware store in Nabua was deliberately burnt down to hide evidence.

Inspector Ali said he had written to President Ratu Josefa Iloilo that there was a conspiracy to defraud the government but he was not able to complete his investigations. He said he and his team were unlawfully detained and an official handover of evidence and documents on the scam case was not carried out.

He said he and his team discovered Suncourt Hardware documents revealed fraudulent activity by senior police officers and later ordered that the documents be seized from the police pay office.

Inspector Ali said he was not able to complete his interview with certain prominent people, including Qarase, and other Cabinet ministers over their trip to Rotuma with FJ$300,000 [US$174,418] worth of free farming and fishing equipment.

He said he had planned to interview those that he needed to, despite their positions in the government.

Inspector Ali said the rest of the pending interviews were rounded up by the investigating officer that replaced him. He said certain officers later accused him of involvement in dealings with Suncourt.

The claims jeopardized his involvement in the investigation. Inspector Ali said investigations of Suncourt staff were never carried out after he was removed on September 20, 2004.

He said he was transferred to uniform duties in Nausori and later suspended from the Fiji Police Force.

October 5, 2006

FijiSUN: http://www.sun.com.fj/


Outstanding Police investigations and mis-reported facts are the climate which corruption thrives. In Fiji, these conditions are so rampant and contribute more to the turn-off factor of foreign investors than, the logger heads between the Government and the Army.

Excerpt of Fiji Sun article underlines the extent of corruption within the Fiji Police Force.

Court acquits farm scam investigator

A police inspector suspended after corruption allegations by other senior officers was acquitted yesterday. Inspector Nasir Ali said he was accused of compromising his position as a police officer while leading a major investigation in the multi-million-dollar agriculture scam. However, Inspector Ali said he had raised complaints against two senior officers when they tried to interferer with the investigation.

“The two then raised allegation against me claiming I had compromised my position as a police officer with Suncourt Hardware that was under investigation then,” he said. Inspector Ali made the same statement earlier when testifying as State witness in the case of Peniasi Kunatuba, the former Ministry of Agriculture permanent secretary who was found guilty of misusing $8million in public funds. Inspector Ali told the court he was removed from the investigation when he complained about the two officers.

He said he was waiting for the decision of Police Commission Andrew Hughes to reinstate him. “I will continue to fight against corruption and make it my business that the two officers involved are investigated,” he said. Assistant Superintendent Fasaitu Kava acquitted Inspector Ali of all allegations because of insufficient evidence. “It had been two years, two months since I was suspended from the force, and I have always maintained my innocence,” he said. “The charges against me were fabricated to defer the investigation in the agriculture scam case.”





Above image: Snapshot of the Fiji T.V segment.

Fiji TV news Tuesday Nov. 21st 2006, 6pm segment reported that, Justice Gerald Winters had issued a stern warning to the Daily Post publisher and editor for mis-informing court proceedings.


This is an excerpt of a Letter to the Fiji Daily Post Editor that castigates their opinion page "Qurukutu". The mis-representation from this Government daily has not gone unnoticed from the judiciary as well.

Qurukutu’s cheap talk
22-Nov-2006

Sir,

I HAVE been following your weekly column titled ‘Under the Microscope’ from Qurukutu and they are often laced with innuendoes gossip and cheap talk with a lot of misinformation and distortion.

The Fiji Daily Post, commandeered and run by a first cousin of the Prime Minister is now becoming the official mouth piece of the SDL-led Government using the newspaper to help camouflage the growing nepotism that exists in Government which is fast turning the current administration into being a haven of crooks and self-centred individuals.

The recently concluded High Court case and the impending one on Peter Foster has now surely become a laughing stock for the whole world to see what is now the true colours of some of our representatives in Parliament.

My first suggestion to the newspaper is be true to the apt title of its column and perhaps proceed on a microscopic overview of how the Fiji Daily Post is now the family abode or hide away of yours truly, a son or, the yam expert from Kaunikuila and a daughter and son-in-law combination at the expense of taxpayers’ money.

This is nepotism of the highest order and perhaps in its most glaring example fully supported by fourth floor Government Buildings, which some years ago via their cronies at the Public Service Commission issued a directive that all departments must fully subscribe and advertise all official Government messages in the Post to ensure its continued existence in particular for the family quartet.

Then following this, I will further suggest that they take their microscope and if I may add their cutting edge to the Prime Ministers Office and therein similarly look closer at the flouting of regulations and indeed the existence of perhaps at higher level and degree of nepotism compared to the Daily Post.

Some years ago, a Deputy Secretary recruited her own daughter into the staff establishment of the office following deregulation of intake procedures from the PSC. This did not go down well with his boss who later decided not to interfere since they were all from the same origin I suppose.

However, some months down the line the boss saw the dream of his life and his gift from heaven who was then employed in another ministry which according to prevailing conditions of delegation of powers, a transfer can only be effected through the trade-off of an existing staff member.

This therefore became the neat and best opportunity to alleviate what is perhaps the greatest degree of nepotism in the highest office in the land. Well what happened to that bed of roses is best forgotten, but I would suggest to columnists to have a serious look at other areas in the civil service and assist get rid of corruption, nepotism and affairs at very high places.

If that is still not enough to fill perhaps their daily columns up until the last issue of the year, then these would be other good ones for a try. What about the love affair between two Chief Executive Officers in Government who once attended a seminar in Hawaii under the guise of being husband and wife when he was in attendance in his capacity as Chairman of a leading statutory body. Their more recent government paid trip through taxpayers’ money was to Australia again as Mr and Mrs.

And if that is not enough, what about the case of a mixed blood millionaire who gave $1.5 million to the SDL for its 2006 General Election campaign and who is now getting restless for not being given the correct bargain in as far as a payback agreement is concerned?

What about the 45 sets of rugby jerseys bought under the Taiwan Grant in the Prime Ministers Office during the lead up to the election and delivered to perhaps all corners of the group including the outlying islands?

What about the outboard motors, brush cutters and cooking pots that is often stocked up at the office as a lure or bait to win votes?

Also the countless number of church leaders who benefited in cash or kind from this grant so that they will at all times, reserve their loyalty to the SDL-led Government. The Tamavua Village and Nadera Church Community Halls are best examples.

Definitely, there is more out there than what meets the eye that your columnists and observers will, I believe better expose for public scrutiny and consumption.

Now let me finally turn to the events particularly after May 19 2000 which many will find amusing and of course news to them. At around 2pm that day, George Speight now into the fourth hour of the parliamentary siege and of course with the non appearance of the real perpetrator of the civilian coups decided without any further options to issue three decrees following advice from his legal practitioners of what the appropriate way forward was for the coup plotters.

At the time, the commander was away in Europe on official business. The first of these three decrees was the Fiji Constitution Revocation Decree 2000. Interim Government Decree No. 1.

This decree was dated Friday 19th May 2000 and issued under Fiji Gazette of that day published as the gazette said at the top of the page, by authority of the Interim Government.

In it, the now established coup maker said, in exercise of powers vested in me as Taukei Civilian Takeover Leader, I hereby make the following: 1. This decree may be cited as the Constitution of the Fiji Islands 1997 Constitution Revocation Decree 2000.

The RFMF knows and is of the view that your column is really based on some files now gathering dust at the Fijian Affairs Board in Suva or what your sources like Ratu Epeli Kanaimawi are spreading misinformation as a means to discredit the nation saving role which the army took upon itself in 2000.

There is no denying this fact as now engraved in our proud history. It will rest there for time immemorial becoming a fitting testimony to the men and ‘women of the security forces who toiled day and night and for some paying the ultimate sacrifice to ensure the security of all people of Fiji’.

Also on the same breath, George Speight issued Decree No 2 titled Republic of Fiji Military Forces – Appointment. In this decree, again signing off as Taukei Civilian Takeover Leader, he appointed Colonel Ulaiasi Vatu and Colonel Filipo Tarakinikini as commander and chief of staff respectively of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces.
The third Decree again issued immediately after the first two was titled the Constitution Abrogation – Interim Government and Finances Decree 2000.

This particular piece of legislation enacted by Decree and therefore was forceful as law at the time had among other provisions legitimised the illegal takeover and the appointment of an Executive Council headed by Ratu Timoci Silatolu as interim Prime Minister and furthers the “legal abrogation” of the 1997 Constitution.

Also it was an indication of how those in SDL party and now in Government felt it was time the commander should be removed because they feared that he will forever champion truth and justice to save this country.



Iliesa Cewanivavalagi,
Davuilevu.




Club Em Designs

Tuesday, November 21, 2006

Hollywood Minute in Fiji.


The fresh list of ideals by Fiji Army commander is the prime cause of the low-investor claims the Prime Minister and dramatically pleads with the Army. This is after the Commander left to attend a family function in New Zealand, whilst the request for a meeting delivered by the office of New Zealand Foreign Minister Winston Peters is yet to occur.

This pleading is the example of exceptional acting and glosses over the fact the Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase is the primary architect of the failed Fiji Government policies, controversial Bills and unethical decisions of the past 6 years. The center piece of such financial wizardary is known as stagflation by the U.S consumers and that same phenomena is now being made known to Fiji in the proposed budget.

Resistance should not be a surprise for the P.M after seeking the resignation of the FLP members of Parliament for voting against the 2007 budget.
Despite all the fine words delivered by the Leader of Opposition, Hon. Mick Beddoes' budget address lacked any delivery in terms of voting. That seems to sum up the life in most Fiji visions in excellence. The unbridled sentiments of the greater public is published by Fiji Times online feedback link.

After all the Prime Minister is more proud of the private sector growth than the national growth , in an opening ceremony for ANZ facilities covered by Fiji Times article.

In a another development on the literal sense, a
New book written by Academic by Ganesh Chand covering racial discrimination was launched.

Radio N.Z Pacific update podcast is available here.

Club Em Designs

Monday, November 20, 2006

Morality of Fiji Politics.


This entertaining and educational pod-cast from Radio lab examines the illusive debate of morality and the absurd applications of certain choices.
Moral sense is a special human ability and there has been extensive research into how some inconsistencies are present in some human beings but not in others. The segment also brings into discussion how the sense is developed at a young age as well as, documenting other cases of morality.
The pod-cast also reviews the methodology of a U.S medical researcher who uses a M.R.I to examine the brain functions of people when asked certain moral questions.

The subject of morality is one that, may have entered the minds of individuals recognized in the canals of Fiji history. The moral choices of these Fiji citizens, have contributed actively to the present socio-cultural and socio-economic position of the nation.

The case of Sitiveni Rabuka is a person also notorious in Fiji history. News of Rabuka case in Suva High Court been declared a mis-trial may also revisit the principles of morality. In addition to that the involvement of the Great Council of Chiefs in the 1987 and 2000 coup, including trying to act as a mediator, may paint the institution as immoral.

Letters to Fiji Times.

Lies to people

THE truth will surface sooner or later.

Anyone who was watching the TV program Noda Gauna will get the message the commander has been saying all this time.

To those who have been following the political turmoil of late, it shows the thickness of corruption and personal gain that top government people have enjoyed for some time and which the army is trying to eradicate.

A good example is the forceful removal of SASL management and loyal staff from their workplace by the Police Tactical Response Unit on the evening of November 16.

I wonder whose authority the unit was following. I ask Fiji TV to play the program and have translation in all languages.

No more lies to the people because the army is coming to get you.

Nemani Tueli
Nadi


Politics and money

LEADERSHIP is about people. It's about shaping our future and how we can contribute to achieving our common goal.

It's a trend now that Pacific Islanders demonstrate grievances and their political agenda with force and violence.

Is it because we fear our identity, future, and all associates taken away by foreign elements or outside forces?

Our isolation and vulnerability makes us react in such a manner because our belief contradicts how democracy handles grievances and rights issues.

It is of great interest to look at these happenings in great depth and analyse the evil behind the social unrest and takeovers.

These are X factors which creep in and push the red button.

In the Solomons, Asian businessmen were targetted and blamed for backing what many called a corrupt government. In Tonga, the story is the same while in Fiji businessmen have been highlighted in previous coups.

Whatever the underlining factors it certainly rings a bell. Our laid-back Pacific way of progress can be an area of exploitation for foreign investors and businessmen who have one of the most influential thing on the planet money.

They pay to get things done their way they buy everything and anything to fulfil their ambitions.

Even the war in Iraq is seen by many analysts as an oil war.

We need to dig into what is happening in Fiji and ask ourselves if the X factor is involved or are we really genuine in our effort to build a better Fiji?

Australia, New Zealand, the US have been told to back off because it is our affairs.

It is wise to say the same to those who try and influence our decisions.

Let us not allow the X factor to buy off the Qoliqoli Bill and what is fading away our identity.

I believe the Government is wise enough to accommodate everybody in the Qoliqoli Bill. Leave democracy to take its course.

Fiji's history has its untold story of exchange of land with guns, whiskey, cigar pipes and so on.

Let's not repeat history by following that road again. I hope the force behind the impasse is clean and not bringing an omen to the Pacific.

It's time we realise that our recourses, smile, culture is so rich and worth billions of dollars and right now on sale on the global market.

Let's pray for our leaders and hope that good sense prevails. Time will tell how genuine we are.

E Sokidrau
Yasawa




The rosy scenarios of Fiji's financial position drawn up by the Reserve Bank of Fiji has been ridiculed by Fiji economist, Ganesh Chand is a Fiji Times article. Calling into question the moral integrity of state institutions, may be just a dirty job which many observers of Fiji have seldom accepted; at the expense of truth.

Civil service

THE Prime Minister is upset with the actions of civil servants who contribute to the Auditor-General's yearly report.

Every year, the Auditor-General will highlight all different types of abuse of office in the service.

Yet, the very next year the same problem will arise in the same department or another.

Why?

Is it because nothing is done about the report or is it because there is no internal audit system in each department?

Whatever reason they come up with, the bottom line is that those in charge are sleeping on the job.

As a result, all the people working in the civil service including all department chief executives, the Public Service Commission and ministers who receive abusive comments from the public.

One way to solve the problem is to lay off civil servants whose actions bring the whole organisation into disrepute.

Since 3000 need to go in the next five years, it is only fitting that those who abuse the system should take a walk.

It is not fair to lay off new employees by using the last-in first-out principle'.

Another way is to hold the annual civil service excellence awards after the Auditor-General's report comes out.

It is pointless giving awards to agencies that appear in the A-G's report for abuse of office or abuse of privilege.

I hope that by this time next year, the Auditor-General would have less to report on.

Savenaca Vaka
Tailevu



This is an excerpt of the article:

Academic blasts Reserve Bank's forecast

Tuesday, November 21, 2006

The Reserve Bank of Fiji's forecast for the month ended October 2006 lacks credibility, says an academic.

Economist Doctor Ganesh Chand said the forecast was inconsistent as the forecast given during the 2007 budget presentation was 2 percent growth but the RBF October forecast was more optimistic.

"So obviously there is a conflict," he said. Dr Chand said both the government and RBF needs explain the inconsistency.

The review said on balance, monetary and credit growth slowed further to August and total money supply grew at 16 percent, around the same rate of growth in July, driven around the same rate of growth in July, driven largely by further expansion in time deposits.

It said interest rates continued to rise, with commercial banks time and savings deposit rates at 6.23 percent and 0.81 percent, respectively at the end of August.

It said the weighted average lending rate rose by 5 basis points to 7.65 percent. Dr Chand questioned that if lending by commercial bank increased then why the demand for credit falling.

Another economist from the University of the South Pacific Sunil Kumar said there are a number of fundamental issues that the RBF Economic Review overlooks or does not seem to report clearly.

"While generally optimism is good, it does not solve problems of the kind that are affecting the Fijian economy," he said.

Dr Kumar said review opens up with the global economic prospects as good with higher global economic growth implying a similar prospect for the economy.

Dr Kumar said the report however quite rightly points out higher energy prices as an impediment to growth.

"It does not however point out the fundamental problems with in the Fijian economy that need to be dealt with to improve growth. Not raising this appropriately at the right time is misleading and damaging to the perceptions of the policy makers," he said.

"The statement "domestically, partial and forward-looking indicators continue to present an encouraging growth scenario" is an overstatement', he said

Dr Kumar said Fiji's economy has very weak links with the global economy as a whole and it largely depends on its traditional markets.

"The global economy is no panacea for the internal structural problems," Dr Kumar said.

He said the Fijian economy is drastically sliding downwards and it's a public knowledge right now. Dr Kumar questioned that how could the outlook be good when the tourism sector and the sugar sectors are declining?

He said basically all the real sector economy is declining. Dr Kumar said the two key sectors (tourism and sugar) of the economy are in the worst decline at the moment.








Club Em Designs

Sunday, November 19, 2006

Age of Reason.

Image above: Map depicting the 1492 view of the world.

Here is a link to Monday Nov. 20th 2006 podcast from Radio NZ interview that comprehensively covers the Tonga riots and the debate on democracy in an objective way.

Tonga's business community's angry reaction to the spate of violence is covered by this interview. The interview covers the cost of damages, as well as raising the idea of charging the people advocating democracy in Tonga.
Tonga P.M, Dr Sevele has already contemplated rebuilding and also refused to resign in the wake of the carnage, in addition the Tongan P.M vows to bring the rioters to justice.

The subject of idealogy and philosophy using democratic principles has forced itself into the Pacific arena of discussion.

Fiji Post article in their Monday issue reveals the disconnect between the floating series of judgements from Colonial era Fiji that do not meet the standards of modern governance. The riots and savage violence under the name of democracy in Tonga have jolted pangs into the native institutions in Fiji.

The excerpt of the article is as follows:

“RESPECT GCC”
20-Nov-2006

UK expert urges army commander to respect Fijian values

THE military Commander Commodore Frank Bainimarama is a Fijian who should respect the Fijian people and indigenous issues and give a chance for democracy to survive, says Chairperson of the Justice, Peace and Harmony of the United Kingdom Doctor Imam Adbuljalil Sajid.

And he added that the Great Council of Chiefs (GCC) decision to resolve the impasse between the military and Government should be given adequate respect.

“We in the European Union (EU) are talking to all sections of the community to get views in resolving of any particular conflict,” said Dr Sajid. He added that true inclusion of the society means that all sections of the community’s decision should be respected and GCC’s word of wisdom should be listened to at all costs. “GCC is the major body to make decisions on the resolution of the current impasse between the military and Government.”

Dr Sajid added that Government at its own level has to talk to their own members and the military should bear in mind that they cannot work alone without seeking advice and support from Government.

“We need to learn to co-operate so that we can bring at least some happiness to our own citizens and the neighbouring countries.”

He said the fear of the military-Government standoff which exists among people will only go away when people will learn the give and take policy.

He added that the people of Fiji are hard working and they are entitled for littlie empowerment but not dictation nor control from any party. “Government and military should have a dialogue, however, sometimes in Governmental level it is difficult to talk openly because there are certain things that should be kept confidential.”

He said the military is not the permanent solution to any problem and the Commonwealth government always takes seriously that military powers are not accepted and the rules are there to be followed.

He added that the British government will not tolerate the military to take over Government because it is elected democratically by the people’s choice.

By NAVIN KUMAR


One prudent way to views these intellectual subjects, is to superimpose the fundamentals of justice and reconcile that with the datum of truth, in order to validate the claims of the learned scholar.

One such datum which predates the scholars's idea of democracy, is the journal titled "The Leviathan" pennned by English writer Thomas Hobbes in 1660.

This is an excerpt from the ageless reservoir of knowledge.

CHAPTER XIX:
OF THE SEVERAL KINDS OF COMMONWEALTH BY INSTITUTION, AND OF SUCCESSION TO THE SOVEREIGN POWER


There be other names of government in the histories and books of policy; as tyranny and oligarchy; but they are not the names of other forms of government, but of the same forms misliked.

For they that are discontented under monarchy call it tyranny; and they that are displeased with aristocracy call it oligarchy: so also, they which find themselves grieved under a democracy call it anarchy, which signifies want of government; and yet I think no man believes that want of government is any new kind of government: nor by the same reason ought they to believe that the government is of one kind when they like it, and another when they mislike it or are oppressed by the governors.


Citizens Constitutional Forum Chairperson also ponders the same debate in an article published by Fiji Times in their Thursday Nov. 16th issue. This is an excerpt:

@: Front page » Opinion

Chiefs must stand against political manipulation

Aquila Yabaki
Thursday, November 16, 2006

GCC members at the GCC meeting in Lami+ Enlarge this image

GCC members at the GCC meeting in Lami

The Great Council of Chiefs has been back in the media spotlight after its emergency meeting last week.

Its core function, says the Fijian Affairs Act, is to advise the President on questions relating to the good government and well-being of the Fijian people.

Other important functions of the GCC are set out in the Constitution.

They include appointing the President and Vice President of Fiji, and appointing 14 members of the 32-member Senate.

The Reeves Commission in 1996 made recommendations for sweeping reform of the GCC, most of which were ultimately not adopted by Parliament.

Among these was a proposal to expand the core function of the GCC to include consideration not only of the well-being of the Fijian people, but matters affecting the nation.

Another proposal was that the GCC should no longer nominate senators, but should itself be responsible for approving any alteration of native land laws or the Fijian Affairs Act.

The Reeves Commission reasoned that taking laws dealing with native land, and so on, out of the hands of Parliament could help to remove these laws from the political process and allay fears that a multi-ethnic government might put indigenous group rights at risk.

Had these proposals been adopted, they would have substantially increased the powers of the GCC.

Recognising that greater power implies greater responsibility, the Reeves Commission recommended that the GCC should be autonomous from the Ministry of Fijians Affairs and the Fijian Affairs Board in matters relating to its secretariat and funding, and that a provision be included in the Constitution to ensure the GCC acted independently of the Government and any political party.

Perhaps most significantly of all, the Reeves Commission recommended reform in the GCC's membership.

It proposed that the President, the Fijian Affairs Minister and the heads of the three confederacies should remain ex-officio members, 20 members should be selected jointly by the heads of the confederacies, five should be nominated by the chairperson of the GCC, 14 should be elected by the provincial councils and one should be elected by the Council of Rotuma.

A representative of the Rabi Island Council was to be invited when matters relating to the Banaban community were under discussion.

Clearly, this would have produced a quite different GCC to the one that exists today.

Most notably, the Prime Minister would not be a member and there would be no appointments on the nomination of the Fijian Affairs Minister (where there are currently six).

It seems likely that the Reeves Commission's proposal would have produced a GCC that was less political in its membership and more independent of the Government.

In 2004, a review of the Fijian Administration commissioned by the Fijian Affairs Ministry and conducted by a team of local experts (including the current Vice President) recommended reform of the GCC, and paid particular attention to its membership.

The review team was more cautious than the Reeves Commission in recommending an expansion of the GCC's functions.

However, it too proposed that the GCC should be able to advise the President on national matters, and not just those affecting indigenous people.

On the GCC's membership, the 2004 review team commented:

"There is concern that the election of delegates to contribute to the (GCC) is not always based on merit and often influenced by chiefs in the provinces or others with their personal agenda to ensure that their views prevail."

To address this concern, the team emphasised the need for the GCC to act, and be seen to act, independently of the Government.

They recommended that the overall size of the GCC be reduced to 35, with 30 of its members selected by Bose Vanua ni Yasana (new bodies comprising the heads of the vanua in each province) and the Council of Rotuma; the Fijian Affairs Minister as the only ex-officio member; the heads of the three confederacies; and, if the GCC wishes, Sitiveni Rabuka.

Like the Reeves Commission, the review team proposed a reduction in government representation on the GCC and the abolition of ministerial nominations to it.

However, like the Reeves Commission, the recommendations of the 2004 review team for reform of the GCC have not been adopted.

This may reflect relative satisfaction on the part of successive governments with the functioning of the GCC as it is.

For example, only last week the Prime Minister described the GCC as "a repository of chiefly wisdom and authority" and complimented its role in dealing with the coups in 1987 and 2000 in the following terms:

"In 1987 and 2000 (the GCC) demonstrated its ability to deal with the fundamental issues of peace and stability."

It must be said that this statement is frankly offensive to those of us who stood up for democracy and the rule of law in 1987 and 2000.

The fact of the matter is that on both occasions, when the country was in crisis, the GCC found itself unable to clearly condemn the violent and illegal overthrow of democratically-elected governments.

For the Prime Minister to suggest that, by condoning the coups, the GCC helped to promote peace and stability in Fiji, is patent nonsense.

A coup is the exact opposite of peace and stability.

It does not matter who leads the elected government whether it is Timoci Bavadra, Mahendra Chaudhry, or Laisenia Qarase himself.

Under no circumstances can a coup promote peace and stability.

So what happened to the GCC in 1987 and 2000?

The emphasis placed by the Reeves Commission and the 2004 review team on the need for the GCC to be independent of government suggests they were both concerned that the GCC, in its existing form, is vulnerable to political manipulation.

The Citizens' Constitutional Forum shares this concern.

We are not anti-GCC.

However, when the high chiefs of Fiji allow themselves to become the mouthpieces of the Soqosoqo Duavata ni Lewenivanua, ethno-nationalist thugs, or any other political party or interest group, they bring discredit on the GCC and the chiefly system.

To take a recent example, consider the fate of the immediate past-chairperson of the GCC, Ratu Epeli Ganilau.

Ratu Epeli served on the GCC from 1999, when he was appointed on the nomination of the then Fijian Affairs Minister.

In 2001, he was elected chairperson.

In that role, Ratu Epeli was outspoken in promoting multi-racialism, and calling for the perpetrators of the 2000 coup to be brought to justice.

In 2004, the Government, allegedly through the manipulation of Attorney-General Qoriniasi Bale and the CEO in the Prime Minister's Office, Jioji Kotobalavu, unceremoniously dumped Ratu Epeli by declining to renew his GCC membership.

No reason was given, but comments made by Cabinet ministers at the time made it clear they did not welcome Ratu Epeli's assertive brand of leadership of the GCC.

While the Government may have been within its rights not to renew Ratu Epeli's membership in 2004, the decision demonstrated that politics and (in the case of ministers then facing coup-related charges) self-interest were uppermost in the minds of Mr Qarase and his Cabinet members in selecting their GCC nominees.

In 2005, political manipulation of the chiefly system was again in evidence in the debate on the Promotion of Reconciliation, Tolerance and Unity Bill.

Amid widespread public opposition, government representatives toured the provincial councils to secure their support for the Bill.

Non-government representatives were excluded from these meetings, and it later emerged that many members of provincial councils did not attend either.

Many of those who did attend had no opportunity to read the Bill for themselves.

Unsurprisingly, with one or two reservations here and there, the 14 councils obediently declared their support.

When it came time for the GCC to consider the Bill, however, the high chiefs of Fiji gave a hint of their true potential.

Instead of simply falling in line behind the provincial councils and the Government, they invited the Bill's opponents to make presentations, including representatives of the Fiji Labour Party, the military and civil society.

This was of course essential if the GCC was to gain a meaningful understanding of the debate.

In its resolution on the Bill, the GCC did not oppose the Government, but nonetheless called for the concerns of the Bill's opponents to be addressed.

In other words, in accordance with Pacific tradition, the chiefs called for more dialogue.

Last week, when the GCC met to consider the stand-off between the Government and the military, the RFMF commander declined to attend. He clearly felt the GCC was acting as a tool of the SDL, and that it would not give him a fair hearing.

That perception is very damaging for the GCC.

It cannot help to resolve disputes if it is not seen by both sides as an independent arbiter.

The CCF believes the GCC's functions should be formally expanded to include advising the President on matters affecting the nation.

This would will legal support to the current practice, and be consistent with intentions expressed publicly by the President.

However, the CCF believes that the problem of political manipulation of the GCC needs to be urgently addressed.

The Reeves Commission recognised the problem.

So did the Fijian Affairs Ministry's 2004 review team.

The Government should be represented on the GCC by one ex-officio member the Fijian Affairs Minister and it should not nominate any other member of the GCC. Options could be explored for shielding the position of chairperson from outside pressure. Another useful exercise would be to reassess relationships between the provincial councils and their GCC representatives.

If provincial councils are to continue electing GCC delegates, should the membership of the provincial councils be reviewed?

The 2004 review team certainly thought so.

Finally, the GCC must have an autonomous secretariat and its own team of expert advisors.

Does anyone really think it is okay, for example, that the GCC's chief legal advisor over the past several years, Qoriniasi Bale, happens to be the Attorney-General?

The potential for conflicts of interest in this arrangement was amply demonstrated in the scandal over Ratu Jope Seniloli's early release from prison in 2004 and simultaneous retirement as Vice President.

In the modern age, any credible leadership body must have its own, independent advisors.

The GCC will shortly be housed in a $20-million waterfront property, and yet it continues to share a lawyer with the Government.

It must have its own lawyer, independent of the Government or anyone else along with an accountant, a political analyst and other relevant experts as well.

The CCF believes the GCC is a vital institution in Fiji's national development. It represents the link between tradition and modernity a meeting place for our indigenous heritage and multi-cultural aspirations.

The GCC can and should be a place where traditional leaders come together to protect and develop the best traditions of their people, while being mindful of the needs of all communities.

Given Fiji's racialised politics, however, there is an ever-present danger that the GCC will be drawn into election campaigning or political debate in support of the dominant indigenous party of the day.

We must guard against this danger, or else the GCC will be weakened and discredited, and become increasingly irrelevant.

Reverend Akuila Yabaki is executive director of the Constitutional Citizens Forum.

Front Page Thumbnail Front Page

Download as a PDF file.

Use the free Acrobat Reader to view.

Kaila! Front Page Thumbnail Kaila! Front Page & Jingle

See the cover of our new newspaper for Fiji's young people.

Download as a PDF file.

Download the Kaila! jingle (MP3)

Your Say

Mahendra Chaudhry says he will sack the Labour Party Cabinet members who vote for the Budget. Prime Minister Qarase will sack those who do not. Does the multi-party cabinet really have a future given these attitudes?

Give us your view

Photo Galleries

Picture of the DayRelaxed and ready for the fun in the annual FMF Games at the Post Fiji Stadium

Visit our galleries for the best of the week's news and sport pictures.



Club Em Designs

Saturday, November 18, 2006

Pacific Beat MP3 pod-cast Update on Tonga and Pacific news.

Radio Australia's audio magazine has updated commentary on the Tonga situation.

read more | digg story

State of the Union-Fiji.

Above image: Artist view of the 19th century British House of Commons of West Minister traditions which Fiji Parliament is modelled on. Albeit selectively.

The issue of who should vote for the 2007 budget has been a niggling question for both the public as well as political pundits. Fiji Labour Party has taken immenient action and issued caveats to Politicians in the multiparty framework, who carried their flag and ideals during the 2006 elections.

Click to read Canadian resources on Parliamentary democracy. University of California-Irvine 's Center for Democracy has extensive reading material on the subject of democracy.

Above image: Fiji Labour Party leader and former Fiji P.M, Mahendra Chaudary(L) Felix Anthony(centre) Dan Urai (R) at their party conference at the Mocambo Hotel, Nadi.


Undeniably the chasm which faced the party post-elections has closed and differences placed aside to confront a common foe- the 2007 proposed budget.

Fiji Prime Minister advice for the Leadership forum is adequately case-in-point example, on its applications to the context in Fiji. Using the same rationale, the present financial quagmire which the nation feters in, is undoubtedly derived from bad leadership. An extension of this bad behavior is the mud slinging by State Minister of Provincial Development. A sad testimony that the character of both State Ministers, are cut from the same cloth of inferior quality.

Letters to Fiji Times Editor reflect the bad policies and bad judgement in the current S.D.L Government.

PM's house

I APPRECIATE the response by Mr M. Coalala to my letter on the PM's House.

For your information I am not a supporter of Mahendra Chaudhry or the Fiji Labour Party.

What Mr Chaudhry did by renovating his own house during his term as Prime Minister was wrong according to Auditor-General.

It is the duty of the police to deal with such cases. A few leakages in the PM's House has provoked him to demand a million dollar house while so many families in Fiji don't have a roof over their heads.

Surendra Kumar
Nadi

Cost of residence

IF our people live in shacks and try to survive with as little as $2 a day, I do not see why our Prime Minister cannot manage with a home costing $0.5million.

We know our previous Prime Ministers managed well without living in an official residence that cost $1m.

The other half a million can be better used to build 20 homes for the poor, the needy and squatters at $25,000 each.

Of course our PM does understand that these people and their children deserve better housing.

I am informed that a beautiful house could be built with $0.5m.

I request the authorities to reconsider the cost of building the PM's home taking into consideration the above, the present economic situation and the plight of the poor and the needy.

Suresh Chand
Nadi



Club Em Designs

Thursday, November 16, 2006

Fiji Nostalgia.

Fiji's Attorney General also attempts to deflect the sinister motives of the Police investigation into Fiji Army Commander's case.

Fiji Army's request for the resignation of the Police Commissioner Hughes has ruffled some feathers in both sides of the Tasman. Radio N.Z online magazine interviews a Professor of Governance from the University of the South Pacific. Vakaivosavosa blog post echoes the sentiments of the Academic in her posting.

Ironically the learned professor theoratical concerns for governance must now be applied to the Kingdom of Tonga.

The news of Tonga capital burning amid riots has also sent shock waves around the Pacific.
The riots have been reported as actions by pro-democracy supporters, it also is a reminder that the same kind of violence can be mirrored in Fiji; albeit on a larger scale.

Radio NZ podcast outlines the reverberations in their news segment. The commentary accurately describes the tensions as well as covering politics in Fiji and elsewhere.

Fiji Times Online posed readers with an intelligent question on the orgins of the calamity faced by the nation and the source of the altercation between the Fiji Government and the Army.



Club Em Designs

Wednesday, November 15, 2006

Smoky Backroom Deals.


Above image: Fiji P.M and convicted perptraitor in the 2000 coup and current Minister of Fijian Affairs, Niqama Lalabalavu at the recent GCC meeting.

Fiji Times article reports that, the Army will not accept the Biketawa Declaration application to Fiji. Clearly the Army believes that the obscure declaration designed by the Australian Government, infringes on Fiji's sovereignity and also has the ability to supercede the legal foundations of natural justice.

Much have been said on the Army Commander refusing to adhere to maligned wishes of the tainted Great Council of Chiefs(GCC). The cancer of truth impairedness has been counter-pointed by Commander Frank's new remarks, covered by Fiji Times article.
Commander Frank B unravels the absence of fresh perspectives seen in the speech of Fiji P.M to GCC (posted at the end).

The debate on the 2007 national budget in Fiji Parliament, also reveals an interesting angle in the content of these speeches by Ministers of the Cabinet, who have chosen to ignore the negative aspects of the proposal.

Below are links to 2007 Budget Address for the following Ministries:

1.) Hon. Kepa, Minister for Youth and Sport

2.) Hon. Qoro, Minister for Commerce & Industry


3.) Hon. Lalabalavu, Minister for Fijian Affairs Board and Provincial Development.

4.) Hon. Dutt, Minister of Labour and Industrial Relations.


Certainely Maverick individuals who actively fight for the silent majority are few and far between in Fiji. Among them are the Fiji Army Commander, another from that same mould is the Minister for Energy, Lekh Ram Vayeshnoi(FLP-Sigatoka Indian Rural)who revealed his moral courage and voted against the 2007 Budget; as well as rejecting any pressure to resign his post by the Prime Minister as described by this Fiji Times article.

The Ministerial 2007 Budget addresses posted, have been included on the Fiji Government website.

It is rather disappointing to learn that, the same 2007 Budget speeches have not yet been published on the Fiji Parliament website even though the speeches were part of the Parliamentary debates. This only further confirms suspicions that the digital divide in Fiji, is a really a function of ill-funding and misplaced priorities. Another question worth asking the Parliamentary Secretariat, if democracy is truly transparent in Fiji?



Although, the British Government was kind enough and responsible enough to provide funding for the project to create the website for Fiji Parliament; not enough allocation was assigned to the regular tasks of updating and maintaining the website. Is this merely a clerical oversight or indeed a part of a larger picture of
perceived and hollow good-governance, by design?

Inextricably, the democratic ideal of 'equal carriage' has not been given much credence by the past and present Fiji Governments. The Fiji Times Editorial comments on the rhetoric of Fiji P.M.

Yet these Fiji politicians and Government officials are quick to cloak themselves under the skirts of democracy; when the circumstances suit them. Equal carriage means equal treatment of individuals and equal allocation of resources. An E.U website provides some resources on the subject of discrimination.

Important questions must be thrashed out, on the ability of the Fiji Parliament to keep up with the recent Budget debates, as well as updating their website content of Hansard. The index of the Handsard page shows the new Parlaiment session of November 8th, 2006; However, the contents of the page are from the past August session.

Fiji P.M's speech to the Great Council of Chiefs has been published by Fiji Government website reveals the extent of how the mis-information and mis-representation has been layered thickly among the uneducated and out-of-touch layer of Aristcrats.



Hon. Qarase - Remarks at the Great Council of Chiefs meeting
Nov 9, 2006, 14:20

Hon. Laisenia Qarase
Prime Minister and Minister for Sugar and Investment

Tradewinds Convention Centre
Thursday, November 9th, 2006
LAMI 10.00 a.m
(English Translation of Fijian-language text)
Chairman and Members of the Great Council of Chiefs



I am grateful for this opportunity to speak to the Chiefs and representatives of the Fijian and Rotuman people (na i Taukei kei Viti kei Rotuma) at this Great Council.
It is one of our most revered institutions of State, with important constitutional responsibilities. Throughout its history, the Council has had a pivotal part in helping government authorities to maintain peace and order and to safeguard the well being of all the citizens of Fiji.

Its primary responsibility is, of course, to the Fijian and Rotuman people in all matters directly affecting their welfare.

We meet when our country is facing a major crisis with a direct bearing on long term peace, the rule of law and good governance. The immediate challenge is to bring an end to the fear and uncertainty that hangs over our country. The solution is clear. We need to put right the relationship between the Government elected by the people, and the State institution of the Army, charged with responsibility for national security.

I come before you to ask for your support and understanding on the approach I am taking to seek a resolution to this.


RESPECT FOR THE PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT


My first duty is to extend sincere gratitude and thanks to their Excellencies the President and the Vice President for their efforts to heal the Government-Army relationship.
I thought it would be helpful and relevant for me at this point to briefly outline the constitutional position relating to the office of the President.

It is specified in the Constitution that the President is Head of State; the executive authority of the State is vested in the President.

The Prime Minister is constitutionally required to keep the President generally informed about issues relating to the governance of Fiji. In fact, I regularly brief the President and the Vice President about decisions of Cabinet and other businesses of Government. I regard this as a vital part of my duties.

There are specific circumstances in which the President may act on his or her own judgement, as in the appointment of a Prime Minister. But, generally, the President acts only on the advice of the Cabinet or a Minister, or of some other body or authority prescribed in the Constitution.

These, then, are the constitutional measures that apply.
But, as a Fijian, I see them not just in terms of what the Constitution says and requires. There is a cultural context here as well.

The holders of these high offices carry with them the mana of high chiefs. That chiefly mana, from their respective Vanua, extends, through their appointments, to the whole of Fiji.

Let me reaffirm, therefore, that although I am the elected leader of the political Government, I have the greatest respect for the President and the Vice President and the roles they play.

As eminent traditional leaders, their Excellencies bring to their duties the Fijian way of dealing with issues. This draws on the inclusive approach of dialogue and discussion, where all views are heard and consensus is reached. At all times, there is an atmosphere of restraint and respect. The objective is to reach agreement through mutual accommodation.

Both the President and the Vice President have done their best to use this approach in dealing with our current problems. They have employed the traditional way while being guided, at the same time, by the provisions of the relevant law.

COMMITMENT TO DIALOGUE

I particularly appreciated the willingness of the Vice President, when he was acting as President, to use his influence and good offices to convene a meeting of the Army Commander and me. This was on 16th January this year.
The purpose was to establish procedures for direct dialogue between us, and for the issuing of public statements.

Chiefs of Fiji, allow me to say that if, in your view, I have fallen short in my efforts to improve the relationship between the Government and the Commander and the Military, then I offer my apologies and ask for your understanding.

In my broadcast to the nation last Wednesday (Nov 1st), I publicly renewed my pledge to engage positively with the Commander on issues that concern the Military. I can report that yesterday I received from the Army, a document setting out the matters they wish to discuss. I have sent an immediate reply, with an assurance that the Government is ready to meet with the Commander and his senior officers for consultations.

I will contribute to that dialogue with a view to finding answers that serve the best interests of Fiji.

I believe the basic difference between the Government and the Army involves the legal scope of the Army’s role in the nation.

INTERPRETATION OF CONSTITUTION


According to the Commander and his advisors, the Military has a wide mandate to ensure the wellbeing of Fiji and its people, as well as national security. They believe that this mandate, given to them in the 1990 Constitution, has been transferred to, and continued under, our present 1997 Constitution.

The Government’s position is that the current Constitution is limited to legitimising the continued existence of the RFMF as an institution of the State. It does not, in our view, give the RFMF the broader responsibilities included in the 1990 Constitution. This view is shared by many legal experts.

Clearly, the way to get a final answer on the question, is to ask the Supreme Court to give its opinion. We are doing this, in accordance with constitutional procedures. The Supreme Court will deliberate on the issues and give its opinion. This will help us to move forward as a nation.

I give an assurance that this is not about scoring points. It is about seeking the legal truth, to enlighten us all on the constitutional and statutory role of the RFMF.

This function of the Courts in resolving constitutional issues was demonstrated in our first term of office after the General Election in September 2001.
I had questions and misgivings about the setting up of a Multi Party Cabinet as stipulated in the Constitution. However, the subsequent ruling by the Court of Appeal provided the clarity that was sought. It paved the way for me to establish a Multi Party Cabinet after the May (2006) Elections.

This new approach in the Government of Fiji has received wide support locally and overseas. It has taken us into a new age of inter-ethnic co-operation in Government. What we are doing is regarded as a model for other multi-ethnic societies.

The Military have expressed concern about several items of legislation we have introduced. These are the Promotion of Reconciliation, Tolerance and Unity Bill, the Qoliqoli Bill, and the Indigenous Claims Tribunal.


PROCEDURES FOR ENACTMENT OF LAWS


Permit me to explain at this point the political and democratic procedure that brings legislation into effect. This is extremely relevant in light of some of the statements being expressed by the Army.

When a political party contests a general election it offers to the electorate a manifesto of policies it will enact if elected. If that Party wins office, it then has the authority to enact the legislation and policies it promised to the people. That is how democracy works.

Under Fiji’s Constitution, it is our Parliament which enacts laws. In proposing legislation in Parliament, Government has to follow certain procedures.
The first is that the Cabinet gives instructions to the Attorney-General and his Chambers to draft a particular law, or Bill. This drafting is not done in isolation.
The State Law Office, with the support of the Ministry responsible, consults the stakeholders who are directly concerned.

Once a draft is ready, it goes to a Cabinet Sub-Committee on Legislation. This sub-committee scrutinises the draft in terms of policy aspects, the resources needed for implementation, and to ensure its compatibility with other laws.

The Minister responsible for the legislation tables the Bill in Cabinet. This is then considered, taking into account the recommendations of the Cabinet Sub-committee.
When the draft is approved by Cabinet, it is ready for presentation to Parliament.

With the Multi-Party Cabinet in place, proposed legislation has the blessings, not only of the Prime Minister’s party, but also the endorsement of the entitled party. In the context of the present SDL-Fiji Labour Party Cabinet, a Bill tabled in Parliament has broad political support.

In the House of Representatives, a Bill has to go through three stages.

It is given a first reading and a second reading, when full debate takes place; it is then dealt with in a Committee of the Whole to allow for a clause-by-clause examination. When this is finished, a Bill is given a third reading. When it is approved, it is referred to the Senate.


CONSULTATION WITH THE PEOPLE


A new feature, introduced in the 1997 Constitution, is a system of Sector Committee deliberation that provides yet another stage of democratic consultation within Parliament, and in the community at large.
The Sector Committees cover broad areas of policy, including Justice, Law and Order, Foreign Relations, Economic and Social Services, and Natural Resources.
Ministers do not take part in the work of the Sector Committees. Membership of these comprises Government backbenchers, and the Parliamentary Opposition.
The Committees travel the country to give as many citizens as possible the chance to have their say on proposed legislation.

This is about government by the people, for the people.
Once this democratic process is complete, Committees prepare reports on their findings, summarising the views of the public, and making appropriate recommendations for the House of Representatives as a whole and especially for Government, to consider.
These reports help to determine the final form of the legislation, which maybe somewhat different to the original.

A prime example was the report of the Sector Committee that carried out very wide consultations last year on the Reconciliation and Unity Bill. This was, perhaps, the largest exercise in democratic dialogue that Fiji has ever had.

The Military was part of this. It had the opportunity to make its views known to its own Ministry, as well as to the Sector Committee.
The Committee delivered a very thorough and well- considered report that has been carefully studied and widely welcomed. It illustrates perfectly why it is important to subject proposed legislation to extensive community consultation.

The purpose of legislation is to serve the people and the country. Citizens will readily identify with the law if they feel they have had a voice in its formation.


RECONCILIATION AND UNITY BILL


Let me comment now on where we stand with the Reconciliation and Unity Bill. Government is using the report of the Sector Committee as the foundation for a comprehensive review of the original draft. This review continues. A redrafted Bill has not yet been referred back to Cabinet.

However, I can confirm that the Government has listened carefully to the many concerns expressed on the amnesty issue. Due consideration has been given to the views of the Military and important agencies such as the Fiji Human Rights Commission, and community groups like the Fiji Law Society.

The amnesty clauses have now been dropped. Factors we took into account included the constitutionality of the initial proposals and the comment by the Commissioner of Police that investigations into those implicated in the upheaval of 2000 are nearly complete. Most of those involved have been charged.

In the light of this, the legislation will now provide for a Reconciliation Commission with a limited and specific role. Its main purpose will be to bring together in reconciliation, victims of what happened in 2000 and those who acted against them.
These perpetrators would be people who were involved but could not be charged because of insufficient evidence.

The Commission will encourage the victims and the offenders to come together. Offenders will have an opportunity to confess and ask for forgiveness. Victims will have an opportunity to extend forgiveness and seek some form of reparation.

This reconciliation procedure will be particularly helpful to victims who might find the Court process too costly and complicated. They have a basic right to have their grievances considered and to be assisted.

People who have already been charged and sentenced can only seek relief by direct application to the Prerogative of Mercy Commission. They are also free to seek the assistance of the Reconciliation Commission. The Commission can then examine individual cases, on application, and submit a report to the Prerogative of Mercy Commission.

I emphasise, however, that any recommendation for mercy to His Excellency the President, can only come from the Prerogative of Mercy Commission.

The Reconciliation Commission will not have amnesty power as envisaged in the original Reconciliation and Unity Bill.

This means that the process will remain within the existing machinery of the law.

The rest of the Bill will focus on the establishment of a statutory body to be responsible for promoting national unity.
At present this is undertaken by a National Reconciliation and Unity council appointed by the Government.
Transferring this role to a statutory authority will create an independent entity with its own mandate and representing all the communities of Fiji.

I stress again that the revised Bill will in no way interfere with the independent authority of the Courts, the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Police.


QOLIQOLI AND INDIGENOUS CLAIMS TRIBUNAL

The Qoliqoli Bill and the Indigenous Claims Tribunal Bill are going through the same consultative processes as the Reconciliation and Unity Bill. We must allow this parliamentary and democratic procedure to be completed. The Government awaits the reports of the two sector committees concerned. The reports will provide the basis for complete reviews of the two original Bills.

I stress that these proposed laws are important to the Fijian people. They are an integral part of the Government’s Blueprint for Fijian and Rotuman development, which was endorsed by the Army and this Council.

I ask the GCC to look back to its meeting of July 13, 2000, when I was Prime Minister in the Interim Administration, with Commodore Bainimarama as Head of State. I had been appointed Prime Minister by the Commodore on July 8th. On July 11th, the Cabinet considered and approved the Blueprint and I informed the Commander on the same day.

The Blueprint contained measures I felt were crucially important for lifting the economic and social status of the Fijians and Rotumans. Included was the transfer of the administration of Crown schedule A and B lands from the Government to the Native Land Trust Board.

We have done this.

There was a proposal to set up a Fijian Trust Fund which would give the Great Council of Chiefs an independent source of income.

We have implemented this.


BRITISH PROMISE ON QOLIQOLI


The Qoliqoli Bill and Indigenous Claims Tribunal were part of the Blueprint’s legislative component.

The Qoliqoli law proposes to confer on Fijians the full proprietary rights for the ownership of their customary fishing areas. The Land Claims Tribunal will provide Fijians with a forum to present long-standing grievances about the alienation of some of their ancestral land.

The Qoliqoli Bill will finally bring to reality an undertaking given to the Council of Chiefs by Governor Sir William Des Voeux in Ba in 1881.

At a meeting in Bau in 1982, the GCC asked the Government to honour that undertaking.

This issue has been raised regularly ever since.


CONCERN OVER ANCESTRAL LAND

The Native Lands Commission and the Native Land Trust Board have in their records more than 500 petitions from landowning units detailing their grievances over loss of ancestral land. Many felt this had happened unjustly.

Right from the start of my service as Prime Minister, I have felt strongly that it is wrong to ignore the pleas and the oft-expressed wishes of the Fijians over these historical grievances.

So long as the undercurrents of unhappiness and discontent associated with them continue, we can never be assured about long term stability in Fiji.

When I first came into office in 2000, our Administration established a Commission, led by Professor Asesela Ravuvu, to review the Constitution and canvass the views of citizens throughout the country.

There were two significant features in its findings. One was that Fijians turned out in greater numbers to make representations to it than they did in response to the Reeves Commission whose work led to the 1997 Constitution.

PROTECTION OF FIJIAN INTERESTS

The second point was the widespread concern among the Fijians relating to the role of Government in the protection of their interests. The British colonial administration had accepted a specific responsibility for the wellbeing of the Fijians, as well as for Fiji as a whole. This created the belief among Fijians that Government has a duty to govern them righteously and in accordance with native usages and customs.

Following Independence in 1970 Fijians expected a continuation of this role by Government. However, the Election results in 1987 and 1999 were a harsh reminder that Fijian leadership in, and control of, Government could no longer be guaranteed in a democracy. Fijians now felt they could no longer look to the Government of the day for that protective role the British had established. This concern was exacerbated by what they perceived to be the anti-Fijian policies of the Peoples Coalition Government.
Their recommendations to the Ravuvu Commission proposed that the best way for the Fijians to safeguard their interests was through their own institutions.

The 1997 Constitution is the supreme law of Fiji. Among the principles of good governance it enshrines are equality under the law for all citizens and communities, and the prohibition of discrimination based on ethnicity.

We have all accepted this.

I have to say, however, that many Fijians are concerned that some constitutional principles are being used to challenge the constitutional validity of the various affirmative action programmes introduced by the Government. These are a sincere attempt to narrow the opportunity gap between Fijians and other communities and bring Fijians into the mainstream of the economy.

So, while Fijians have accepted democracy as integral to good governance, many also feel the safeguards they previously enjoyed are no longer there.

This is why there is such widespread support among the Fijians for the Qoliqoli legislation and the Indigenous Claims Tribunal. Through these pieces of legislation they will safeguard their interests through their own institutions of Fijian administration.
There is authority for this in Section 186 of the Constitution, dealing with customary laws and rights.

These two legislative initiatives formed part of the election platform of the SDL Party in the last elections (May 2006). Our Party received the overwhelming backing of the indigenous population.

Given the significance of these draft proposals and the endorsement they have received from the Fijians, they will not be withdrawn.

BILLS TO BE REVIEWED

But I give an undertaking that when the Sector Committee reports are tabled and studied, there will be extensive reviews of both Bills. These reviews will not only concentrate on the interests of the Fijians. They will also take into account the interests of the entire population.


IMPORTANCE OF GCC


Questions have been asked about why I decided to consult the GCC in all these matters. I say, with respect, that those asking these questions do not have a full appreciation of the legal and political significance of this Council in our affairs.
There is, of course, a specific requirement in the Fijian Affairs Act for legislation directly affecting the Fijians to be referred to the GCC.
But as all communities have acknowledged, the GCC has assumed a position of higher national importance. It is recognised as a fount of chiefly wisdom and authority.
Both the former Leader of the Opposition, Mr Jai Ram Reddy, and Mr Chaudhry, as Prime Minister, have appeared before you. They accepted, on behalf of their communities, the Council’s importance in building long-term peace, security and prosperity.

I come to you in accordance with the law and out of respect for your chiefly authority. I do not wish to pass to you a problem the Government must solve.

I do feel duty-bound, however, to share my thinking with you. At one level, the current crisis is between a Government and an institution of the State. But when we look deeply into it, we see that this concerns the relationship between a Fijian-led Government and a Fijian-led Army.

It is about us, koi keda saka na i Taukei kei Viti kei Rotuma. The GCC is the paramount council of the Fijian and Rotuman communities. I request you to give your blessings, to the Commander and to me, as we find our way to the path of peace and reconciliation for all.

May God bless this Council and may God Bless Fiji.


-End-



Club Em Designs