Sunday, November 26, 2006

Question of Integrity.


Above: Fiji Prime Minister exiting from Methodist Centenary church.
Nov 27th 2006 online article by ABC reports that Pacific Forum leaders have convened for a emergency meeting of the threats of a clean-up campaign by Fiji Army Commander.


Above: Fiji soldiers reinforced the President's compound main gate.

Pacific beat, Radio Australia online magazine podcast of Nov. 24th provides an Australian perspective on the latest rumours. Foreign Affairs Minister Alexander Downer is interviewed regarding the situation in Fiji. Downer's spiritual revelation on a coup plans being plotted in Fiji has been ridiculed by mercurial Opposition leader Mick Beddoes in this podcast.

Ideas floated in this interview covers:

  • The idea of Commander Frank B being the front person of a shadow group of disgruntled civil servants and foreign entities.
  • Australian Academic puts in his two cents on the socio-political and socio-economic forces at raising in Fiji and the Pacific.
  • Tonga situation and post-riot investigations.
Radio New Zealand update of Nov. 27th reports that counter warnings have been fired by the Fiji Army Commander across the bow of Australia's intentions of micro-managing Fiji's domestic affairs. ABC online magazine "The Word Today" reporter Emily Burke interviews foreign correspondent Micheal Fields in Fiji.

Fiji Live article reports, Minister of Home Affairs:Vosanibola vows that investigation into the sedition charges on Commander Frank will continue.

Army probe will not stop: Vosanibola
Sunday November 26, 2006

The military's demand to drop all investigations into Fiji's army commander Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama will not be met, said Home Affairs Minister Josefa Vosanibola.

"It is a total contradiction of their widely acknowledged principle that 'no one is above the law', said Vosanibola in a letter to the military dated November 10, 2006.

Vosanibola said that if Government were to stop investigations, it would undermine the general public's respect for the rule of law particularly if selective justice is accorded to military personnel who may have broken the law.

"Government is in full agreement with your commonly held view that 'justice must not only be done but seen to be done'," Vosanibola said.

"My power to give general policy directions to the Commissioner of Police is well outside the ambit of giving instructions on ordinary police matters like investigations.

"The Constitution is very clear in that section 170 (5) stipulates, like other Constitutional Office holders, the CP is not subject to the direction or control by any other person or authority in the performance of his constitutional duties or functions."

Vosanibola said in this regard, it is unconstitutional to direct Police Commissioner Andrew Hughes to stop all criminal investigations against the commander or any military personnel for that matter.

"It is unlawful on my party or government's for that matter, to also interfere with the 'independence' of the office of the Director of Public Prosecution," he said.

The DPP's office he said is currently handling many of the criminal cases against military personnel, including the commander, and any act to stop it would be a direct interference with the criminal justice system.

Bainimarama is being investigated over his alleged disobedience of lawful order, seditious content of public statements, unlawful removal of container of ammunition from the Suva Kings Wharf and the alleged plot to overthrow the Government.

Other allegations are unlawfully obtaining approval from the President to abort a Commission of Inquiry against him, non-cooperation with police on investigation into the deaths of CRW soldiers allegedly murdered at the Queen Elizabeth Barracks during the November 2000 mutiny, and abuse of office by senior army officers in approving payments through LPOs, (Local Purchase Orders) beyond their authorised limits.

Fijilive



Although, the Minister of Home Affairs finally acknowledges the illegality of the 2000 coup in this interview, the Minister's token affirmation fails to clear the stain of reality that, the financiers of the 2000 coup are yet to be convicted or even attempt to explain why convicted coup perpertraitors occupy Ministerial and ex-officio posts in Fiji Government.

Peter Rideway's June 2005 interview with ABC radio magazine "The Word Today" underlines the state of corruption in the halls of justice.

  • Fiji sends DPP Director packing



    The World Today - Friday, 17 June , 2005 12:38:00

    Reporter: Paula Kruger

    TANYA NOLAN: A senior Australian prosecutor who has spent the past four years in Fiji, winning convictions against key figures in the 2000 coup, has been denied permission to continue working in the country.

    Peter Ridgway is the former Deputy Director of Fiji's Department of Public Prosecutions. His contract expired last month, but he had requested a 10-week extension from the Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase, but it was turned down.

    Mr Ridgway's imminent departure comes amid increasing pressure on the Fijian Government, over its proposed Reconciliation, Tolerance and Unity Bill. The bill would free people jailed for their involvement the 2000 coup, if their crimes are deemed political and not criminal.

    Paula Kruger spoke to Peter Ridgway as he was packing up his home in the capital Suva.

    PETER RIDGWAY: The sticking point or rather the unsticking point seemed to be the Prime Minister, whose consent was required, but was being withheld.

    PAULA KRUGER: So we're not talking of an administrative error here. We're talking that you weren't given permission by the Prime Minister to continue staying in Fiji?

    PETER RIDGWAY: That seems to be the case. But what the motivation for that is, perhaps is not clear. The information that's been reaching me is to the effect that the Prime Minister was more than a little piqued at not having been consulted a good deal earlier on the matter, as protocol seems to require. His response seems to be as much the product of pique as anything else.

    PAULA KRUGER: There's been some criticism within certain groups in Fiji like the Law Council about the upcoming Reconciliation, Tolerance and Unity Bill. Can any connections be drawn between you not given permission to stay in Fiji and this bill?

    PETER RIDGWAY: It's hard to draw a direct one, there are inferential connections, obviously.

    When I set about this process of prosecuting those responsible for the 2000 coup I knew that it wasn't going to make me the most popular man in town, with at least half of the population. And that's proven to be the case.

    You'd be naïve if you went into this believing that you were going to be winning friends and influencing people. It was a hard job, and had to be done. So I never expected to be loved or even for that matter greatly thanked for it.

    PAULA KRUGER: Is it frustrating, though, that you've spent four years prosecuting people over that coup?

    PETER RIDGWAY: Oh yes it is, of course it is. Of course it's frustrating to see the process salvaged, virtually, from the wreckage of 2000, and made to work as it was properly intended, only to find that it's being unravelled for reasons which have very little to do with justice.

    PAULA KRUGER: So those reasons would probably have to do with the election coming up in Fiji next year?

    PETER RIDGWAY: Well, again, that's speculative, Paula, and to be honest, in my former position as Deputy DPP, I stayed out of politics. It was inappropriate to engage in the political debate. And it's the same thing with this bill. It is now part of a political process.

    PAULA KRUGER: You're packing up today. When are you heading out of Fiji?

    PETER RIDGWAY: Well, all being well we're expecting to fly out on Sunday week, the 26th of June. Now, that is a date of my choosing – it's not a date of the Government's choosing, it's not a date that's being forced on me.

    We're not being kicked out in that sense, we're merely… we have no further business here, and the time has come to go.

    PAULA KRUGER: Would it be sad to leave?

    PETER RIDGWAY: Oh yeah, very much so, because I have, in the last four years, I think, with all due false modesty aside, I've had a lot to do with resurrecting the rule of law and the criminal justice process in this country. I take a lot of pride in that, and I'm going to be very sorry to leave it behind me.

    TANYA NOLAN: The former Deputy Director of Fiji's Department of Public Prosecutions Peter Ridgway, with Paula Kruger.


The justifications for investigating over-spenders of Fiji Army budget is another concern that
question the motives for frivilous charges that pale in comparison to the treasonal offences of the 2000 coup.

2000 coup was illegal: Vosanibola
Monday November 27, 2006

It is a bygone conclusion that the events of 2000 were illegal, says Fiji's Home Affairs minister Josefa Vosanibola in response to a demand by the military that the Government publicly declare it.

As a result, perpetrators have been found guilty and have been convicted, he said.

"Countless number of people, including the former Vice President, traditional chiefs, civilians and former military personnel have been convicted, some have been released while others are still serving their term.

"Currently the case of former military commander and Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka is before the court. The Fiji Police have indicated that remaining coup-related cases are with the office of the DPP and will proceed with criminal proceedings if there are prima facie evidence in support of the charges laid," says Vosanibola.

He adds that if the military has any evidence that will assist police in investigating the overthrow of the government in 2000 including military personnel who have been implicated, they must submit it to police as soon as possible.

This he said, was important for the sake of public interest and to reassure them that justice must not only be done but seen to be done.

Vosanibola said the Government is extremely satisfied with the performance of the Fiji Police Force, in relation to the maintenance of law and order since 2000.

"The assumption made to connect the alleged moral decay in the nation to the current political leadership in Government is indeed confusing.

"Such an allegation is defamatory and I caution the military against relying on such unfounded and unsubstantiated allegations."

The military had earlier said the increase in lawlessness is the fallout of the 2000 events, "especially when coup perpetrators and those implicated are holding public offices".

"Their presence and involvement at strategic level indicated that the event of 2000 was right. The mass is taking their cue from this practice.

"There is an urgent need to educate our people in this area for them to get away from the 'coup culture' and respect the law," the military said.

The ongoing military-government impasse was reignited last month by a three-week military ultimatum for the Government to resign.

A committee of the Great Council of Chiefs has been formed to mediate between the outspoken Military Commander Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama and Qarase.

Commodore Bainimarama has issued conditions to the Government to adhere to in return for his silence.

Fijilive



This comment by Vosanibola will intricably conflict with the sentiments by Commissioner Hughes and the fact that the 2000 coup case is yet to be closed. Financers of the 2000 coup have yet to convicted and these claims and counter claims by authorities have yet to admonish that fact.


Commisioner Andrew Hughes also trying to deflect the blow-back of these politicaly inspired investigations in this Fiji Times article. In the interview, Hughes also defends the raid on the President's office stating that the proper search warrants were obtained.

What the Commissioner failed to explain :

  1. Why the raid was first denied by officials?
  2. Who approved the warrant?
  3. Who requested it?


This flip-flopping acknowledgement by Hughes of the raids on the Fiji President's office, can only raise a volley of suspicous questions. In another interview by Radio Australia on Nov 24th, Commissioner Hughes dismisses calls for his resignation by the Army. In the same interview Hughes avoids the question pondering if the Commander's comments were really seditious?

The token reply by the Commissioner reflected the doubts in the charge of sedition, which was requested by the Minister of Home Affairs. Obviously the explanations by Commissioner Hughes is damage control to conceal earlier flaws to the 2000 coup investigations.

The transcript of the interviews is as follows:

Last Updated 24/11/2006

FIJI: Police commissioner rejects calls for his resignation

In Fiji Police Commissioner Andrew Hughes has dismissed calls by the country's military for his resignation. Speaking at a press conference in Suva on Thursday, Commissioner Hughes also denied that he had come under pressure from the government to investigate military commander Voreqe Bainimarama. Commissioner Hughes had attracted strong criticism from Commodore Bainimarama, following reports that police were investigating the commander over allegations he made seditious comments.

Listen Listen | Audio Help

Presenter/Interviewer: Geraldine Coutts
Speakers: Andrew Hughes, Fiji Police Commissioner

HUGHES: Well there's been a lot of allegations being thrown at Fiji police and more specifically at me and I felt it was time to rebut what is being said by the commander, and also to provide an update on the progress of the investigations, the criminal investigations in respect to the commander and some other officers in the Republic of Fiji Military Forces.

COUTTS: To refresh people's memories commissioner can I ask you to perhaps refresh our memories as to what those allegations are, and what your rebuttal is?

HUGHES: Well they claim that, well first of all they sought my removal, they wanted me being sacked basically on the basis that I had compromised somehow my position in respect of not being neutral in relation to an investigation into the commander and into the unlawful removal of ammunition from the Suva wharf by the military. That I was being subject to political pressure to conduct these investigations, and finally that I was under foreign influences insofar as the performance of my duties were concerned, which of course are all totally false, and I'm certainly not going to resign.

COUTTS: Now on that issue of the Commander Frank Bainimarama asking the question or suggesting that the Prime Minister in fact was putting pressure on you to conduct an inquiry into his affairs at the moment. You say that's not at all true?

HUGHES: No it's not true, the background to all of this is that earlier in the year the Minister for Home Affairs had written to us complaining about constant outbursts criticising government to government policies from the military commander.

We commenced an investigation in relation to that, but then an issue arose, a legal question arose as to what the minister's powers were in respect of the commander of the military under the constitution. So the government has referred that to the Supreme Court for a decision. So in the absence of that clarification we continue to catalogue if you like these ongoing outbursts from the commander.

Until we got to one in particular, which occurred a few weeks ago, which of course is out there which was we will force the government to resign. Now when that came out of course alarm bells went off as to what that might mean, and did that amount to a seditious comment.

So we sort of had an off-shoot investigation in relation to whether that was a seditious comment or not. And that is the one that is likely to stand. But there's been no pressure on me whatsoever politically in relation to this or any other investigation.

COUTTS: And is it or was it a seditious comment?

HUGHES: Well that's still with the DPP, we expect an advice on that within the next 24 hours. But certainly the early indications are that it could amount to sedition intent yes.

COUTTS: What is your relationship now with the military after that event with the docks as you've mentioned where the military as I understand it gave a promise that they would not remove the ammunition from the docks until you gave permission. That in fact didn't happen; they took it without your consent. Where do we stand on that issue now?

HUGHES: Well it's not the military; I think it's important to make this point that the relationship between the police and the military is fine. What we're doing is that we're doing our job and we're investigating criminal offences that have been committed by a few in the military, including the commander. And this has obviously strained the relationship between me and the commander at a professional level, but so far as the two organisations are concerned the interaction is still good and the relationship is still strong.

COUTTS: But they did go against your word and take the ammunition from the docks?

HUGHES: Yes there are four officers now who we have briefs of evidence in with the DPP, and again we expect a decision in the next 24 hours on that and they will be prosecuted for a whole range of offences in relation to that unlawful removal.

COUTTS: What is the relationship between the three leaders if you like, the Prime Minister, yourself and Commodore Frank Bainimarama, because it seems that you're the only one that hasn't called for someone's resignation at this point?

HUGHES: Well I don't think it's an accurate portrayal to throw the three in the same sentence and say you know what is the relationship, because there's actually quite separate issues at stake here.

The relationship between me and the Prime Minister is a professional one and a strong one in respect of his role and my role, there's no issue there.

The relationship between the Prime Minister and the commander that's a separate issue, and the relationship between me and the commander is on a totally unrelated thing, which is his objection to me doing my job.

With the commander it seems that you either agree with him or you're his enemy, and he fails to grasp that I'm simply doing my job, I have no personal issue with him, but he sees this as like a personal attack and that me and the police are now the enemies.

COUTTS: In that you are responsible in large part for the national security, the fact that Commander Frank Bainimarama continues to threaten the government to overthrow or take over the running of it, must place you in some difficult position if not compromise you?

HUGHES: Well it doesn't compromise me; I mean my role is clear. In fact one of the investigations that is going in the background now is in fact this potential treasonable conduct by the commander over a period of time with an intention to what we believe to be an intention to remove the government. So there's no compromise there, my role is quite clear.

What we're also doing is we're looking behind this because we strongly believe it's not just the commander, that there are individuals and groups in the shadows, as we saw in 1987 in the first coup in Fiji when Rabuka was the frontman, again in 2000 when George Speight was the frontman.

These people operate in the shadows and manipulate and incite, there's a sort of conspiracy going on in the background. Now we're saying this time in 2006 if that is what the intention is to have a military coup then we are going to drag these people out into the sunlight for the world to see.

They can no longer operate in the shadows enjoying anonymity and continue to break the law and just rely on the commander to be the frontman. We're going to actually, they are now under investigation in a new phase of our overall investigations and they'll be taken to task.

COUTTS: Is it your feeling Commissioner Hughes that the threat of a coup by Commodore Frank Bainimarama was more than that?

HUGHES: It's unclear to be honest. We're getting mixed messages, I mean asked today publicly what does he mean by we're going to clean-up government? I mean what does that mean? And he said well I'll tell you when I come back, so he takes off to New Zealand to go to his granddaughter's christening for eight days and meanwhile we're all left back here wondering what on earth is in his mind, what's his intention. And I've said that that is just unfair to investors and potential visitors to Fiji want to know what he means. I have to find out what he means because of my responsibility to maintain law and order in Fiji, and the people of Fiji have a right to know what he means. It's unfair to keep saying these things and then take off overseas.








Club Em Designs

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