Fiji's Corruption Commission Wins Legal Challenge.

Radio NZ article reports on a case heard in Lautoka High Court, which dismissed an application to have the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption declared illegal. This particular case also represents a significant boost to the mandate of the clean-up campaign, undertaken by the Interim Fiji Government, which found massive irregularities in Native Institutions.

These discrepancies, could find the deposed Prime Minister of Fiji, Laisenia Qarase culpable for abuse of office. Earlier, Qarase had denied abusing his position to enrich himself or cordoning corrupt practices under his watch. Qarase counter accused the Corruption Unit of selectivity, by steering the investigations clear of the Fiji President, who was also appointed as President of Native Lands Trust Board, while Qarase chaired the board. Qarase's accusations, actually acknowledges that, the crime(s) took place.

It was during this time, approval of several questionable projects involving Pacific Connex and the illegal de-registering of native land without consent or approval of the native land owning units occurred. Other case that may involve Qarase includes the projects at Natadola and Yaqara; both locations of proposed major development projects, without the ownership and approval of the landowners. These projects placed NLTB and Fijian Institutions under scrutiny following complaints, involving coercion, misrepresentation and transactions under false pretenses.



Seed Newsvine









Club Em Designs

Fiji Hosts U.S Congress Democratic Commission.

Articles from the Fiji Times and Radio NZ reports, confirm an earlier Fiji TV news segment that, a delegation from the US Congress' bi-partisan Democratic Commission is in Fiji conducting their research into the political situation. The Democracy Commission's 2006 report is available here.

House Democracy Assistance Commission
341 Ford House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: +1 (202)226-1641
Fax: +1 (202)226-6062
Email: hdac@mail.house.gov

This is an excerpt of the article:

State expected to meet US reps

1100 FJT
Thursday, July 05, 2007

Update: 11.00am INTERIM Prime Minister Commander Voreqe Bainimarama and interim Foreign Affairs Minister Ratu Epeli Nailatikau are expected to hold talks with a visiting four-member delegation from the United States Congress, at the weekend, according to a report aired by Radio New Zealand.

The report says members of the House of Representatives Democracy Commission are charged with promoting responsive, effective governments and strengthening democratic institutions in emerging countries.

The congressmen, comprising both Republicans and Democrats, will also meet former Fiji parliamentarians.

A statement from the US embassy in Suva says the objective of the visit is to explore ways in which the US Congress can help Fiji return to a positive and democratic future.



The team will be led by Congressman Donald Payne (image right), a Democrat, from New Jersey.
Fiji Times Online has sought comments from the interim Prime Minister's office.

Below is a video of the Gentleman from New Jersey, who also Chairs the House Foreign Affairs Sub-Committee on Africa.



Payne's more recent video is posted below, questions an invitee to a hearing in the US House of Representatives, regarding the double standards of Human Rights on the US War on Terrorism; with respect to the issue of Iran.





Seed Newsvine









Club Em Designs

Breach of Trust.

Fiji Village article reports on a presentation by local USP academic, highlighting the increase of Native Lands Trust Board's expenditure rate, as well as identifying some irregularities in accounting standards.

This is an excerpt:

Concerns Raised Over Increasing NLTB Expenditure
By fijivillage
Jul 3, 2007, 15:00

Concerns have been raised on the increasing rate of expenditure by the Native Land Trust Board since 1975.

USP senior lecturer Dr. Mahendra Reddy during his presentation at an Economic Forum at the Marine Lecture Theatre this afternoon highlighted that NLTB's expenditure is increasing by over 32 percent per annum.

Reddy said he has found out that the NLTB is not following proper Accounting Standards. He said the income statement has been misrepresented and the whole accountability of the transactions of the contract with Pacific Connex is not shown.

Reddy said NLTB is also charging rates and not informing its shareholders about dividends. He also said that he doubts that NLTB is registered with registrar of companies.

It seems that more landowners have lost their faith and trust with NLTB, like this group from Vanua Levu who complained about the lack of consent for lease renewals, as reported in a Fiji Times article.
The aspect of NLTB's secret slush fund has been reported in a Fiji Live article, describing NLTB loaning money to the developers of Denarau Resorts in Nadi.

This is the excerpt:

NLTB recovers Denarau debt
Thursday June 26, 2003

The Native Land Trust Board has recovered the outstanding amount from a $2million loan to Denarau Investments Limited.

NLTB general manager Kalivati Bakani said yesterday the $2million loan was made to Denarau Investments Limited from the NLTB's trust funds while under the management of the late Maika Qarikau. The loan was to enable the company to develop the Hilton Hotel on Denarau.

Mr Bakani said the loan was originally scheduled to be repaid by July last year. However, following requests from the company, the board agreed to allow some deferment.

"At the beginning of June we served a demand on the company after which the outstanding amount was repaid in full," Mr Bakani said. The repayment covered interest and other charges.

Mr Bakani said the board was happy with the development because it involved trust funds that belonged to native landowners.

The Daily Post

It seems that NLTB has gone into the money lending business, after skimming funds from transactions from native land owned by poor villagers. It raises some moral questions, of why NLTB could not loan funds to the landowners themselves to assist in developing the land. Sadly, it seems the interests of native landowners has become a tragedy of the commons of sorts.
Serious questions are now being asked of NLTB's financial position, especially after the series of firing from NLTB's executive core, including Kalivati Bakani.

Following up on the post "Fiji Media and Ethical Deviations" Interim Finance Minister responded to the Fiji Times Editorial with a letter.

The following is an excerpt:

Get real

It is interesting that The Fiji Times in its editorial comment titled Get Real Mr Chaudhry (FT 2/7) is doing exactly what it accuses me of doing: shooting the messenger.

Indeed, it has stooped to character assassination rather than responding on issues.

I gave the media a message on Saturday: that continuous distorted and negative reporting by the media was having an adverse effect on investment.

Certain media organisations were not even providing fair and balanced news news doctoring, manipulation, distortion and even prejudice were plainly apparent in the reporting of The Fiji Times and Fiji TV. I did not make wild accusations. I cited a number of examples to back my statement. The Fiji Times should now tell the nation why it chose not to print the examples I gave.

In failing to do so, is it not guilty of selective, doctored news reporting?

Furthermore, I did not take a swipe at the media out of the blue. I spoke in response to a query during the question and answer session on whether negative media reporting was not turning away investors. I spoke in response to this question.

The Fiji Times deliberately chose not to put my statement in its proper context.

In fact, the Fiji Chamber of Commerce also criticised the media but I see no mention of this in The Fiji Times coverage. Again selective reporting?

I reiterate that during the current sensitive phase of our national transition, the media has a responsibility to exercise due caution in its coverage of reports relating to national issues. This is not to say that it must not report news as it happens. All I ask is that the views and explanations of the interim administration, get as fair and balanced coverage as that of the other side.

This does not always happen. It is frustrating when one issues a statement in explanation or responds to an attack, to find that either the statement is ignored, or just one short sentence or a paragraph is used which fails to adequately articulate the view point of the person responding.

I have had several such experiences with The Fiji Times.

This is what is meant by unfair and unbalanced reporting. A case in point: when the PM's office issued a statement in response to certain aspects of Ratu Joni Madraiwiwi's speech in Canberra, The Fiji Times did not bother to run the government reply. On inquiry, a highly abbreviated version appeared some two days later.

It is onerous on the news editor of media organisations to ensure that, on sensitive national issues, at least, both sides get adequate and fair coverage.

In its editorial comment The Fiji Times says: "Any responsible media will not want to mislead or deliberately lie to the people". The operative word here is, of course, responsible. The paper refers to letters in the open column as an indication of public opinion.

We all know a number of these letters are from ghost writers. In any case, we are often told by people that letters they write in support of actions of the interim administration do not get run by The Fiji Times. So much for responsible presentation of viewpoints.

I also refer The Fiji Times to criticisms of bias and unfair reporting leveled against it in 2000 by none other then the former Head of the School of Journalism at USP, David Robie, in an address he gave to a media forum in Brisbane. He held The Fiji Times responsible, in no small measure, for inciting the 2000 crisis.

The Fiji Times should know that I am not in the habit of making wild attacks. If I criticised certain media organisations, it is because I had reason to do so. And I stated my reasons.

Let me make it categorically clear: the media is not entitled to unfettered freedom it is accountable to the people.

Alongside the freedom it enjoys, goes very stringent responsibilities regarding media ethics and national sensibilities.

The Fiji Times takes an unfair advantage by shooting volleys from behind its editorial columns.

I invite it to a public debate on this issue. At least, this will give me the opportunity to present my case fully supported by all the evidence. Let the public then decide on who indeed is shooting the messenger.

Mahendra Chaudhry
Interim Minister for Finance
National Planning and Sugar Industry

Editor's note: Mr Chaudhry feels we have just been reporting negative news. In the main we agree because the news has been negative. That is not our fault and we do not believe we have slanted or doctored it. The Reserve Bank says the economy is in crisis and Mr Chaudhry himself on Saturday said the economy was in a bad shape. We would love to report good news but we need facts and figures, not just words.

(Examples withheld by Fiji Times)

This newspaper has tirelessly campaigned for the good of our nation and will continue to do so that is our job and we take it seriously. We have praised the interim Government on those occasions we have considered it has done something right. We have condemned it when we believed it has been wrong.

We did the same with past governments and we will do the same with future governments. We believe the interim Government needs to get behind tourism. It is the quickest and easiest way to bring in money to this country. Mr Chaudhry's dream of a once again buoyant sugar may happen but not 'overnight' and right now this country needs an 'overnight' solution. Give us the facts and figures to back your good news Mr Chaudhry and we will print it.

Fiji Times website had provided a link to a comments page, discussing the story of Fiji Times unbalanced coverage. This link was then hidden and further comments blocked by the webmaster, to prevent the page from taking on too many comments critical of Fiji Times. An example of double standards of Freedom of Expression, used by the old media.



Seed Newsvine









Club Em Designs

Fijian Holdings Ltd. Stock Dump.

South Pacific Stock Exchange (SPSE) website published a list of Unexecuted Orders report (PDF) for Fijian Holdings Ltd, following the news of the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) investigative visit to the offices of Fijian Holdings and Fiji Development Bank, as reported by Fiji Times article.

This is the prospectus (PDF)of Fijian Holdings appearing on SPSE website.

It was reported that, South Pacific Stock Exchange was also in the cross hairs of FICAC, in a Fiji Village article. SPSE Board of Directors is listed on their website. Note with interest that Fijian Holdings representative sits on the SPSE board, including 2 representatives of Fiji National Provident Fund and a representative from Fiji Development Bank.

Blog: Why Fiji Is Crying posting comments on the Fijian Holdings stock price on the South Pacific Stock Exchange, claiming that trading may be suspended.
The following is an excerpt of Fijian Holdings Ltd (FHL) stock transactions, published in SPSE website, listed as "Unexecuted Orders". From the table below, it can said that the biggest transaction was from Broker/Dealer No. 171 trading 52, 201 FHL shares, at $4.05. The same broker also appeared to have been the most frequent trader of FHL stocks.

Price ($F)	Quantity	Broker/Dealer No.
3.50	528	170
3.50	7,500	172
3.50	518	172
3.51	8,169	171
3.51	975	172
3.59	300	171
3.60	2,000	175
3.60	500	168
3.60	200	150
3.60	500	172
3.60	2802	172
3.60	500	171
3.60	700	171
3.79	500	175
4.00	3,500	172
4.01	1,430	171
4.03	2,443	169
4.03	1,000	171
4.03	446	169
4.03	500	168
4.03	1,571	171
4.03	1,229	171
4.03	1,428	171
4.04	662	171
4.05	52,201	171
4.05	1,370	171
4.05	1,520	172
4.06	1,356	171
4.06	7,272	171
4.06	2,000	171
4.06	1,850	171
4.06	500	171
4.06	1,000	171
4.08	500	168
4.09	565	171
4.10	4,236	171
4.10	1,000	171

The Next Call Market Session will be held on Monday, 2nd July 2007 at the SPSE Trading Floor at 10.30am .

Seed Newsvine









Club Em Designs

My Brilliant Career. (Update)

Following up on the S.i.F.M post titled "7 Seven Sins of NLTB" - apparently there has been some developments regarding the sins from the Teflon coated executive of APRIL, Keni Dakuidreketi.

This case raises serious questions into the integrity of the entire criminal justice system in Fiji pre-2006 coup. Among them, Why didn't Natadola raise red flags in the Criminal Investigation Department (CID)of the Fiji Police? Surely, someone had an idea of the alleged impropriety and illegalities in the dealings of Dakuidreketi.

It appears that Dakuidreketi was recently suspended from the board of Native Lands Trust Board (NLTB) for questionable dealings, as reported by Fiji Times article and confirmed by Fiji Live article.

Reactions to the story was captured on the Fiji Times web site and readers who commented on the particular story, were overwhelmingly scathing of Dakuidreketi's series of alleged actions, which was tainted with corporate malfeasance.

This is the excerpt:

Dakuidreketi suspended

Fiji Times
Wednesday, June 27, 2007

INTERIM Fijian Affairs Minister Ratu Epeli Ganilau has suspended Native Lands Trust Board member Keni Dakuidreketi after the independant investigation team into Fijian institutions cited certain allegations against him.

In his letter dated June 25, Ratu Epeli wrote to Mr Dakuidreketi stating the allegations surfaced over his role and capacity as a member of the NLTB board, chairman and director of Viti Development Company Limited and director of Pacific Connex.

"In view of these rather unfortunate circumstances, it would not be prudent if you were to continue to sit on the board of NLTB," the letter stated.

"Therefore in the interest of the NLTB and as chairperson of the Fijian Affairs Board, I am suspending your FAB membership of the NLTB board pending the outcome of the investigations into these allegations."

Mr Dakuidreketi confirmed receiving the letter yesterday but described the wording as 'generic' as it talked about allegations. "They are citing certain allegations which I do not know therefore I cannot comment yet," he said.

"Anyway, I am meeting the minister tomorrow and hope to discuss the matter with him."

Mr Dakuidreketi said his position as chairman of VDCL was an appointment sanctioned by the NLTB board.

Both suspended general manager of the NLTB, Kalivati Bakani and IT manager Mojito Mua were handed their termination letters citing 'no cause' recently by Ratu Epeli last week.

Fiji Village article quoted Dakuidreketi saying, "He has nothing to hide". Dakuidreketi met with Interim Minister of Fijian Affairs Board, Epeli Ganilau regarding the suspension letter he received, labeling its contents as "generic".

Fiji Times article reports that Ganilau and Dakuidreketi had a "fruitful" meeting.

This is the excerpt:

We had a good talk: Ganilau
Fiji Times
Thursday, June 28, 2007

INTERIM Fijian Affairs minister Ratu Epeli Ganilau said his meeting with suspended Native Lands Trust Board member Keni Dakuidreketi yesterday was fruitful.

[Ganilau]said they discussed issues stated in the suspension letter which was sent to Mr Dakuidreketi on Tuesday.

"It was a good meeting and I managed to explain the reasons of the letter and what was required from it," [Ganilau] said.

Mr Dakuidreketi agreed the meeting was "a good one" and they had discussed issues which were "well articulated". "There are certain allegations and I will have to look at answering these allegations but I am satisfied with the meeting," [Dakuidreketi] said.

On Tuesday, Ratu Epeli suspended Mr Dakuidreketi after the independent investigation team into Fijian institutions brought up allegations against him.

In his letter dated June 25, Ratu Epeli told Mr Dakuidreketi that the allegations surfaced over his role and capacity as a member of the NLTB board, chairman and director of Viti Development Company Limited and director of Pacific Connex. "In view of these rather unfortunate circumstances, it would not be prudent if you were to continue to sit on the board of NLTB," the letter stated.

"Therefore in the interest of the NLTB and as chairperson of the Fijian Affairs Board, I am suspending your FAB membership of the NLTB Board pending the outcome of the investigations into these allegations."

Mr Dakuidreketi described the wording as "generic", on Tuesday as it talked about allegations. "They are citing certain allegations which I do not know therefore I cannot comment on yet," he had said. Mr Dakuidreketi was also a central figure in the Natadola resort project in Nadroga.

Another Fiji Times article reports that, Interim FAB Minister has received the report from the NLTB investigative committee, which will be tabled in the next NLTB Board meeting. It is unclear if Dakuidreketi will be formally charged anytime soon, however S.i.F.M remains optimistic that the case will be heard in court.

Island Business article covers the initial investigations into APRIL and Natadola project, which began to unravel this web of dubious deals.
French born APRIL co-principal, Louis Gerard Saliot was confronted with his criminal past which he failed to declare on his application for an Foreign Investor License and subsequently APRIL's license was suspended, throwing the entire million dollar project into dire straits. It is interesting to note that, Fiji Trade & Investment Board (FTIB) which issued the Foreign Investor License had undertaken background investigations into Saliot, according to their website.

Unfortunately, this background check by FTIB, forgot to compare notes with Interpol and this error contributed to the present financial quagmire at Natadola. One would hope that the system of background checks has been rectified, but time will tell.

Natadola Development Limited
Posted: Wednesday 28 March, 2007

Natadola Development Limited was granted approval on 26 October 1995 to develop the proposed Natadola Hotel and Tourism Development. The shareholders in the venture were the AD Group Asia/Pacific and Gerard Saliot.

The application went through the investment approval regime which existed at that time where the investment application form did not require an investor to make a declaration whether he had a criminal record or had been declared bankrupt. However, as a safeguard, the Bureau required investors at that time to submit a bank reference.

Mr. Saliot submitted a bank reference, which prompted the Bureau to undertake a due diligence with Dunn and Brad Street. The exercise did not produce any adverse findings on Mr. Saliot’s business conduct and his bank advised that he had maintained a proper current saving account with the Hong Kong Bank.

Based on this finding, the Bureau submitted the proposal for approval, which received Ministerial endorsement in 1999.

On 10th August, 2004 APRIL Fiji’s accountant’s applied for a change in the group’s structure, which saw the formation of Natadola Land Holdings Limited (NLKH). In this new venture, Fiji National Provident Fund owned 51% of the shares and Natadola Marine Resort Limited the remaining 49%. It was on this same application, where one of the director’s declared that none of the shareholders were undischarged bankrupt.


Based on the information provided in the application form, on 23 August 2004 APRIL Fiji was issued with a foreign investment registration certificate to undertake consultancy services for the development and management of Natadola Integrated Resort Development by Natadola Holdings Limited.

On 6th October, 2005 Natadola Marine Resort Limited’s accountants advised FTIB of a change in company name and shareholding. The new name of the company is Hotel Property Pacific Limited. Under the new shareholding structure, Euro Asia Management Limited owns 95% of the shares and Euro Pacific Trade and Invest Propriety Limited own the remaining 5%.

The Bureau strongly views that any lending agency that lends out funds to an investor or companies should carry out their due diligence on the investors and FNPF is no exception. On the same note other government agencies should have carried out their own due diligence before granting approvals/licences etc. Investor screening is a responsibility of all agencies giving approvals.

Given the latest findings on Mr Saliot, the Bureau will now go through the process of reviewing the registrations granted to the NRML and APRIL. The relevant government agencies will be advised accordingly.

Sainiana Waqainabete
Senior Public Relations Officer

Factions of native landowners had threatened to withdraw their land, prompting the Interim Minister to appease their concerns with an official visit and even dangled out equities into the Tourism project, in exchange for the landowner's approval. Fiji Live article reported that, Interim FAB Minister urged the landowning faction of four tribes, out of the total seven; to think of their children's future.

Think of future generation: Ratu Epeli
Monday June 25, 2007

Fiji’s interim Fijian Affairs minister Ratu Epeli Ganilau says Natadola landowners should think of their future generation by making choices that will ensure the development of their land.

Speaking to landowners last week, Ratu Epeli said there is nothing better than investing for future generations.

His advice follows comments by spokesman for the Vanua O Nahoqo at Natadola, Ratu Osea Gavidi, that landowners will be taking their land back from the developers of Natadola Bay Resort and re-investing it for other use.

Ratu Osea said the allegiance of landowners no longer rests with the developers of the resort after they felt they had been mistreated. “There are certain issues that need to be resolved by the landowners and the developers but right now we are thinking of canceling the land lease which was issued to them.”

“By doing this we are able to do something on our land and we are thinking of leasing it to someone else,” Ratu Osea said.

Ratu Epeli however said landowners need to be consulted on such matters.

Fijilive

The final decision from this native faction with regards to the future of Natadola project, is pending. This faction is represented by Osea Gavidi, a colorful character from the same province of Nadroga. According to a Fiji Live article, it is same Gavidi who had attempted to set up an indigenous owned commercial bank with a $6 Billion donation from a fictional organization named: Office of International Treasury Control (OITC).

Former Senator, Dr Atu-Emberson Bain's speech regarding the 2002 Bill to amend the Native Land Act and Native Land Trust Act, is perhaps an impartial look at NLTB's role and underscores the smoke and mirrors behind this amendment in legislation, spearheaded by the SDL Government.



Seed Newsvine









Club Em Designs

The 7 Sins of NLTB.

In a follow up to a S.i.F.M posting on Natadola, an article published by Fiji Sun reveals the gross malpractice in the negotiation phase of the project. Other investigations, as reported by a Fiji Village article-that FNPF was investigating the allegations of the loan being unsecured.

Recent report by Radio NZ of a whistle-blower from Fiji National Provident Fund outlining the alleged malpractices in Natadola, sent to the office of APRIL's Chief Executive Keni Dakuidreketi. Ironically, it was the same Dakuidreketi who was heavily involved in securing the native land in question, by virtue of being a board member of Native Lands Trust Board. This issue has ignited heated dicussions in online forums like Fiji Exiles and My Fiji Friends.

APRIL's foreign investor license cancelled
Friday June 01, 2007

The foreign investor license for Asia Pacific Resorts International Limited (APRIL), the sacked project managers of the multi-million dollar Natadola project, and two other related companies has been cancelled.

Interim Commerce Minister Taito Waradi confirmed that the licenses have been cancelled by the Fiji Islands Trade and Investment Bureau. It is understood that the FTIB had initially issued a notice of cancellation of licences for APRIL, the Natadola Land Holdings Ltd and a related company Hotel Property Pacific Limited (HPPL) early last month.

The companies were given 15 days to reply. The licenses were cancelled two weeks ago.
Waradi says if the companies wanted to appeal the decision, they have to appeal to the ministry. "And it hasn't come yet. So I don't know whether they are going to appeal or not," [Waradi] said.

A principal of APRIL, Keni Dakuidreketi says he does not wish to comment on this "because there is a legal process involved".

No comments could be obtained from FTIB on why the licenses were cancelled. Both FTIB chief executive officer Lailun Khan and board chairman Jim Ah Koy are out of the country. Ah Koy said he has been in New Zealand for three weeks and could not make a comment.

APRIL has been in the spotlight since the newly appointed Fiji National Provident Fund board axed the company along with contractors COTEBA in March claiming the Natadola project was 26 weeks late and only 10 per cent of the work had been carried out after about $60 million was pumped into it.

Felix Anthony, the chairman of Natadola Bay Resort Ltd (NBRL) also claimed that Interpol reports show that the promoter of the Natadola project Gerard Saliot had a criminal record, which he did not disclose when obtaining a work permit.

APRIL and its chief executive officer Saliot are the founders of the Natadola project. Anthony went on to reveal details of Saliot's past and cancelled APRIL's contact as project managers.

In 2004, the NBRL had hired APRIL to be project managers for this development. Saliot is the principal of the three companies.

Fijilive

APRIL subsequently had their Foreign Investor License revoked as reported by Fiji Live article; the decision of which, is currently being appealed by APRIL according to a Fiji Village article.

The following is an excerpt from a Fiji Sun article:

Natadola has no proper documentation
Fiji Sun.
Last updated 6/21/2007 8:28:02 AM

The ousted project manager of the Natadola Development Project did not provide proper documentation on the project, the Fiji National Provident Fund claims in its report to Cabinet. The FNPF also alleged that with the native defects it has, the Natadola investment does not have valid security.

Defects that are sufficient to void the native land lease include;

• No survey carried out over the native land as requirement of the Native Land Trust Board


• De-reservation of native land not completed on the date of sale on July 2, 2004


• De-reservation of native land for the new lease not completed


• No evidence exist that section nine of Native Land Trust act was satisfied objectively prior to the issuing of the lease of the land sold to NLH


• Dissatisfaction by landowners manifested in Civil action 33 of 2007


• Conflict of Interest that exist at all times between NMRL and NLTB on the issue of common directorship

The report also stated that the value attributed to the land and the concept contributed by APRIL, $20million, was greater than valuations of land prepared by Jones Lang LaSalle and Colliers, which was $5.5million.

• APRIL was entitled to a 15 per cent ‘special dividend’ on gross land sales


• APRIL secured fees from Management Works, was paid a monthly fee of . The whole Natadola project is unknown and it is not prudent investment procedure to have such an investment


• APRIL gained from contributing a defective land lease and not cash to finance the project


• Management services appear to have been given to APRIL to undertake because of its existing involvement in the project. The basis of APRIL’s dollar value of monthly fees is unclear and there appears to be no tender process in this regard


• Feasibility Studies were done by Euro-Asia Management which is an donkey of APRIL and thus independence is questionable


• NBRL continues to pay outstanding invoices to contractors who were contracted by APRIL since August 2006


• Due diligence and analysis originated from APRIL and not from FNPF or FIL


• Increases in total budgeted costs by $73.1 million from $270 million in 2003 to $343 in 2005.

Fiji Times article, quotes the Interim Fijian Affairs Board Minister who commented on the unsecured lease of the land occupied by the Natadola project. Undoubtedly, this very aspect of unsecured lease of native land, raises serious questions on the integrity of NLTB and quality control mechanisms into their entire portfolio of hotel projects in Fiji.

Lease hinders resort: Minister

Saturday, June 16, 2007


THE issue of the unsecured native land lease title at Natadola Resorts could have been ironed out had there been a clear line of communication between all the parties involved and the Native Land Trust Board, interim Fijian Affairs Minister Ratu Epeli Ganilau says.

He said while the Fiji National Provident Fund required a properly secured lease to release the funds, the NLTB said a provisional or temporary licence was enough for the developers to begin work and even use this provisional title to solicit funds for development purposes.

However, yesterday landowner representative Ratu Osea Gavidi said landowners would now take their land back and would not allow Fiji National Provident Fund Investment Limited to continue development in the area.

Ratu Osea said landowners had been neglected in the ordeal and they were now doing what was best for them. [Gavidi] said they would consult the NLTB regarding their options and if the NLTB did not act in their best interests, they would seek legal redress.

Ratu Epeli said the NLTB's stand was that after issuing the provisional title developers could then secure the permanent title while development continued.

A subsequent article by Fiji Times in light of these discrepancies in Natadola, forced the Interim Minister to offer equity of the Hotel project as a good will gesture to the landowning units, after being manipulated by officials employed by NLTB.

Shares offer for landowners

Saturday, June 23, 2007

LANDOWNERS at Natadola have been offered equity shares in the multi-million dollar hotel project being developed on their land.

This was revealed by interim Minister for Fijian Affairs Ratu Epeli Ganilau at his first meeting with the landowners of the vanua Nasoqo, at Sanasana Village, in Nadroga, on Thursday.

[Ganilau] said the meeting was prompted by a visit initiated by landowners of Nasoqo, who raised several concerns about the Natadola project. He told the villagers they would have to clarify with the FNPF the company they would invest in and how much shares would be offered.

"This was the first vanua delegation to have visited me in my capacity as interim Minister for Fijians Affairs and Provincial Development," [Ganilau] said. Ratu Epeli said at the meeting it was clear to him the issues they wanted to him to look into, which was why he wanted to update them on progress made since then.

The delegation requested: The continuation of development at Natadola; that another meeting be held between the Fiji National Provident Fund and the landowners before they make a decision on APRIL, the original land developers; that the trickle effect of development on the land not be reserved to the lease premium or royalty but equity shares be offered by the FNPF so they could have ownership of the overall development.

Ratu Epeli said the FNPF had decided APRIL no longer held the licence to develop the area. He warned landowners to be vigilant of rumour monger."I urge you, the landowners, to be firm and to love one another in this matter," he said.

What is concerning is that, why weren't these project shares part of the original negotiations by NLTB?
Reviewing the reports into Natadola, it is now apparent that officials within the NLTB had undercut the landowners for their own financial gain. What irks most landowners and the greater public is that, Why didn't these transactions raise any red flags in the entire system of Fiji's land tenure?
What happened to accountability, checks and balances?

A Fiji Live article covers the preliminary investigations in Native Lands Trust Board and their involvement with Hotel developments in Fiji.

NLTB investigation report ready
Thursday June 21, 2007

A report on the investigation into Fiji’s Native Land Trust Board will be submitted to the Interim minister for Fijian Affairs tomorrow. The report will be submitted by the Independent Investigating Team into Institutions Fijian (IITIF), which was set up by the interim Government to investigate all Fijian institutions.

“A report will be handed over to Ratu Epeli and interim Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama for their scrutiny and also if the need arises than the Fiji Independent Commission against Corruption (FICAC) will be involved,” said board member Ponipate Lesavua.

“Altogether 68 cases of corruption, illegal land sales, misuse of funds and secret dealings between certain chiefs and hotel developers are contained in the report,” he said.

He also said contained in the report are investigations regarding Fiji-born millionaire, Ballu Khan concerning his involvement with NLTB. “Although the NLTB board has carried out its own investigations into Khan, our team have come out with a different matter altogether.”

“Credit should be given to KPMG after auditing NLTB and this has also made our work much easier.”He said certain discrepancies have been labeled against Khan which is contained in the report.“This will not be revealed until it has been scrutinized by Ratu Epeli.”

A prominent chief is also under investigations for allegedly swindling thousands of dollars out of landowners and making dubious deals with hotel developers in the Coral Coast.“The case regarding the chief has been classified as a criminal case and we will surely involve police in this matter.”

IITIF have wrapped up investigations on the Native Land Trust Board and will be moving to the Ministry of Fijian Affairs soon before a ‘clean up’ at the Great Council of Chiefs begins.

The team comprises Colonel Apakuki Kurusiga as chairman and Ratu Luke Yavaca as deputy chairperson. Other members are former Senator and police inspector Ponipate Lesavua, Kalaveti Batibasaga, a consultant on indigenous affairs and Alifereti Roko, the senior auditor at the Ministry of Finance.

Other Fijian institutions subject to scrutiny by the team include the Fijian Affairs Board, Native Land Commission and all other interdependent institutions like the Fijian Scholarship Unit and Provincial Councils.

Fijilive

Club Em Designs

The Collective Good.

In a follow up to the S.i.F.M post: The Squeakiest Wheel, aFiji Times article quotes NZ lawyer, Janet Mason who commented on the issue of incitement, made by the GCC lawyer.

This is an excerpt of that article:

NZ lawyer queries military over Dr Sahu Khan comments

1447 FJT
Friday, June 01, 2007

Update: 2.47pm A NEW ZEALAND lawyer, who fled the country last week, is questioning why the military did not take any action against Ba lawyer Dr Shamsudin Sahu Khan when he floated the idea that native land not used by landowners be returned to the State.

Janet Mason says despite a State of Emergency warning against incitement, the military took no action against Dr Sahu Khan for his comments, according to a report by Pacific writer Michael Field.

Ms Mason says when lawyers Kitione Vuataki and Savenaca Komaisavai, who are representing the Great Council of Chiefs over its suspension, questioned the paper, the military accused them of inciting the indigenous people and hauled them into their barracks for questioning.

Ms Mason, who worked with the two lawyers in the GCC case against the interim regime, found that curious.

''If Dr Sahu Khan has recently presented this paper without being detained for inciting instability then I would have imagined that, for instance, I should be free to present alternative views at workshops around the country without fear of being detained,'' she said.

The New Zealand lawyer fled the country after she and her husband were robbed in their Lautoka home.

Realistically, the comments by Dr Sahu Khan was made in his submission to the proposed Qoliqoli Bill, launched by the SDL Government. In addition, Khan's remarks did not address the indigenous populace or make innuendos advocating violence. Mason's remarks to the Fiji Times prompted a scathing letter to the Fiji Times.

This is the excerpt to the response:

Janet Mason

I have been reading with interest the comments by New Zealand lawyer Janet Mason. She indeed highlights a few interesting points about the situation in Fiji.

However, it is ironic that she now goes to the media to raise her voice. After all, she would have had a lot of information way before she came to Fiji for the GCC suspension case.

After all, her husband would have been reading daily reports and analysis of the Fiji situation. Her voice was never heard when Qarase was trying to resolve the impasse with the army. I am sure her husband had a lot of information in regards to information analysis at the time.

Never at any time did she voice her opinions on the army stance against the Government. That was at a time when her opinion may have made a difference for Mr Qarase and his deposed ministers.

Instead, like our so called "big brothers" she waits for the noose to tighten before she actually tries to make her presence felt. It makes it look like the "knight in shining armour".

[Mason] should leave our problems to us to solve. She has chosen New Zealand ahead of Fiji and we don't need her expatriate views on Fiji.

We certainly don't need her belated concerns and advice.

Josaia Sovea
Suva

Fiji Sun's new look website published an interesting "Letter to the Editor". This is an excerpt of the letter:

Democracy and NGOs
Last updated 6/1/2007 11:52:59 AM

It will be oversimplifying to say that democracy is a form of government in which the sovereign power is in the hands of the people, because it is a bluff.
Having heard so much about the word recently, that is magic to some, I can only say that it is vile to me. The practitioners of democracy, and who are in Australia, New Zealand , Canada , USA are mostly Anglo-Saxons, Normans, Dutch, Scandinavian, Spaniards and Mediterraneans - in other word Europeans, a branch of the Caucasian racial group.

The natives of these states do not sit as a majority in their respective Houses of legislature. Why? In short, the natives were hunted and slaughtered like animals by new settlers (the polite term) who put strategies in place to starve them out of their God-given land.

These states have not been tested in the true essence and operations of this magic word. What is successful democracy to them is to be in a comfortable environment of compatible ethnic/racial groups. If not, then why are the natives of Australia, New Zealand and the Americas not represented as a majority in power sharing?
A century and a half and more has passed with this set up and mind set, making it difficult for them to perceive the reasons for the coups in Fiji; why Fijians are nervous about the Indians, which is yet another story.

One of the legs on which democracy stands is "the people's voice," but specifically the underprivileged groups. In brief then, the yardstick if democracy is really at work is to continually, if not continuously, monitor whether the lot of these groups is improving during the term of governments, or as some people like to hear, a democratically elected one.
What is an election, an opposition, all in the name of democracy, when the lot of the poor cannot be gradually improved to a decent level from one government to another?
We have had some 30 years of this system without success and peace. There are other models that would work better for Fiji; it is a matter of will to try it out; or we should be asking the 'experts' what type of democracy is best suited. They have had enough time to work that out.

Indeed the lot of the rich has got better in leaps and bounds. Those mushrooming 20 years age are now multimillion dollar organisations, well entrenched and self-serving. Which Prime Minister has not gained assets directly attributable to his Prime Ministership? The same question can be asked of cabinet ministers. Democracy is for the poor but instead it has been raped.

What is the NGOs' understanding of democracy, the underprivileged, and their human rights? Their comments seem to be rigorously channeled to the military only. What are 30 or 50 persons called to the camp compared to thousands whose human rights have been eroding throughout the years? If NGOs were true to their call we should have heard their rigorous criticism throughout the years a not only over the last five months.

Club Em Designs

The Squeakiest Wheel.

Kitione Vuataki, Lawyer for the GCC members contesting their recent suspension has been taken in for questioning as the Fiji Live article reports. Vuataki has been accused by the Fiji Military of inciting the passions of the indigenous populace. This very allegation was raised by a S.i.F.M post, in particular regards to the affidavit filed in the Suva High Court by Vuataki.

The following is an excerpt of the Fiji Live article:

Army blames GCC lawyer of inciting
Friday May 25, 2007

The army says Great Council of Chiefs lawyer Kitione Vuataki has been detained for "inciting the indigenous people" against the military.

Vuataki was taken from his office in Lautoka earlier today by soldiers and later questioned at the Edinburgh Barracks.

It remains unclear when Vuataki will be released.

"I don't know when he will be released," said army spokesman Major Neumi Leweni.

"He will definitely be questioned for his statements on radio."

Vuataki and his colleague Savenaca Komaisavai filed fresh papers in court this week on behalf of several members of the 52-member GCC who are challenging their suspension by the interim Fijian Affairs Ratu Epeli Ganilau.

Vuataki said outside the court that the documents would enable the GCC to meet without interference saying the interim government had no right to suspend the council.

He said that the interim administration must keep in mind that the GCC was not formed for the benefit of the (interim) Prime Minister or the interim Government.

He said that discussions on how to make changes in the Native Lands Act would be impossible without the GCC.

"So now we have for the third time in our history an attempt to get our land back while the GCC is not sitting to amend the Native Lands act. We are not going to sit behind and let that happen," Vuataki said on radio fiji.

"From 1873 the British Government knew the Great Council Of Chiefs would keep the peace, now they have been dispelled. The protection of our land is now at stake.

Vuataki also questioned Ratu Epeli's authority to bring about changes to the GCC.

"This time the Minister in question is not one that is entrusted by our people... we don't know where he came from... his appointed by the interim regime who looks after their own benefits and not the benefit of our people."

Ratu Epeli was replaced as GCC chairman by Ratu Ovini Bokini, one of the plaintiffs in the case, amidst much debate two years ago.

The GCC's case will be heard in the High Court on June 29.

Undoubtedly, the allegations against Vuataki represents a similar strain of the ethnonationalistic ideology framed, before and after the 2000 coup in Fiji. Scoop publishes a letter addressed to the GCC, written by coupster, George Speight.

This is an excerpt:

Speight's Letter To Great Council Of Chiefs
Thursday, 25 May 2000, 3:23 pm
Press Release:
22 May 2000 CONFIDENTIAL DRAFT

Parliamentary Complex, Suva Fiji 21st May 2000

Excellency


I am writing on behalf of the group of indigenous Fijians who took over the Parliaments of Fiji on Friday 19th May 2000. The illegal and unconstitutional action that was taken is acknowledged. It represented a year's efforts on the part of a wide spectrum of the indigenous community to bring to the attention of the Government, our increasing concern in the way the People's Coalition Government began to address issues that are of fundamental importance to the indigenous community of Fiji.

For example, the nature of the tenancy of indigenous-owned landed to Indo-Fijian cane farmers, the progressive removal of affirmative action for the indigenous community which has lagged behind in every sector of the Fiji economy - in education, in commerce, in the professions, in Management, in technical staff, etc.

The 1997 Constitution was rejected by eight of the fourteen Fijian Provinces, however by a combination of Parliamentary and no-so- Parliamentary manoeuvring, the Great Council of Chiefs approved the amended Constitution. In fact, the 1997 Constitution is not an amendment of the 1990 Constitution but represents a brand new Constitution.

To compound this serious error of judgement on the part of the indigenous political leadership, the SVT Government with lack of foresight and prudence, at the tai1 end of its Administration, introduced a completely New Electoral Legislation. Worse still, it did not give itself sufficient time, nor made any effort to understand the complications to the new Electoral Law.

There was also at this point of time, a growing discontent on the part of segments of the indigenous community. There was a 'ganging up' of at 1east two indigenous parties in its allocation of their preferences which ultimately led to the defeat not only of the SVT-led political party but also of the National Federation Party (NPP) which had been the premier party, overseeing the interests of the Indo-Fijian community over the east 30 years.

The People's Coalition Party was the major beneficiary of the Constitution and the new Electoral Legislation. Of the 71 seats in Parliament the Fiji Labour Party won 35 seats. With the support of other parties it was able to control some 61 seats in Parliament. The Government that was subsequently formed comprises the Fiji Labour Party, the Fijian Association and two other smaller parties.

One of the basic concerns of the indigenous people when the draft of the Constitution was being discussed was the like1y loss of indigenous politica1 leadership and contro1. The indigenous people remain distrustful of the Indo-Fijian political intentions. The subsequent events following the formation of the People's Coalition Government in May 1999 confirmed and convinced indigenous body politic that their fears and trepidation of Indo-Fijian political leadership were well founded.

The SVT Party, which lost the election, won only 8 seats even thought they obtained 38 percent of the votes. One small indigenous parties which won 9% of the votes where given 2 seats in Cabinet. Another indigenous party which won l9% of the vote was given a Deputy Prime Minister post plus three other Cabinet positions. A provincial based indigenous was given two Cabinet seats. The SVT party, which had won 38% votes, had given certain conditions when it was invited to join the Government, Understandably, the Prime Minister, the Hon Mahendra P Chaudhry rejected the response of the SVT.

If the Prime Minister were to lead the country successfully he would have allowed the dust to settle, temperatures to coo1, and then come back for a dialogue with the party that represented 38% of the electorate.

Over the 1ast 12 months the indigenous pcep1e have watched, with dismay, concern and resentment, Mr Chaudhry's blatant attempt to weaken, or if possible destroy important indigenous institutions, namely the Native Land Trust Board (NLTB), the Great Council of Chiefs(GCC).

Of course central to indigenous concern is their land. The indigenous people of Fiji own some 86% of the land. But the ownership is not by individuals but by clans (mataqali). In fact every indigenous generation has the right of usage of the land for which they have. It is their obligation to ensure the land, which the clan owns, is protected and passed on to next generation.

It is interesting to note though that some of the best land has been completely alienated to private ownership, or has been used by Indo-Fijian cane farmers far the last 100-120 years. The 1ease fees for these lands, under cane farming, to put it charitab1y, are miserable. In the last 25 years for instance, Fiji has been allowed to sell 160,000 tonnes of sugar to European Union, at a rate that is three to four times the world price. Not a cent of this windfa11 has been given to the indigenous landowners, apart from their uneconomic lease fee. More over, it should be noted that over the years cane farmers owe a substantial amount of arrears to the NLTB.

The Agriculture and Landlord Tenancy Act (ALTA) which originally came as the Agriculture and Landlord Tenants Ordinance (ALTO) is now coming to an end. Under the Act, farmers were given 30 years to lease the land.

Every farmer that entered a leasing arrangement, under the Act, new that he had 30 years to farm the land, after which the lease expires. When lease expires, unless the landowners wish to renew the lease, the tenants have to move out. Since 1997 or thereabouts, a number of farms under the ALTA arrangement have their 1eases expired, and tenants are expected to go elsewhere if the indigenous 1andowmers decide not to renew the lease.

Since Mr Chaudhry came into power he has attempted to coerce the NLTB to continue granting leases to tenants under ALTA. This goes right against the face of a clearly stated policy of the Great Council of Chiefs and the NLTB that any renewa1 of 1eases will come under Native Land Trust Act.

As far as indigenous landowners are concerned, ALTA must and should be repealed. As far as the indigenous landowners are concerned, ALTA is dead. Yet Mr Chaudhry has continued to fight the indigenous landowners on this issue. He seems unable to accept that the indigenous landowners have the right to decide the terms and conditions on which their land can be leased.

The Fiji Labour Party since 1987 has advocated the establishment of a Land Use Commission. The late Dr. Timoci Bavadra who subsequently became Prime Minister when the Fiji Labour Party won the election in l987 first presented the proposal to the Great Council of Chiefs. Since the Government came into power in 1999 one of the most important elements in its policy p1atform is the establishment of a Land Use Commission.

Again the NLTB representing the indigenous landowners rejected this proposa1. What is worse is that the Government, ie, PM Chaudhry with his usual arrogance, which has become the trade mark of his sty1e of political leadership is dismissive of the stand taken by the NLTB and his insistence that Land Use Commission be established in spite of the indigenous landowners opposition.

In fact, in an attempt to hoodwink and subvert traditional indigenous leadership, a representative group of indigenous chiefs were sent by PM Chaudhry to observe traditional 1and owmership in Sarawak, Ma1aysia.

The troubling aspect of the Chaudhry-led Government is its ongoing attempt to divide the indigenous people of Fiji. He has certainly mastered the tactics of Divide and Rule.

For some time the previous Government (SVT) had to put in place policy initiatives to assist the indigenous community to catch up', particularly in the feild of education, and commerce, where indigenous participation, is non existent.

Indeed, when one reflects on the debate that led to the passage of the 1997 Constitution, the Indo-Fijian political parties, conceded absolutely nothing particularly in the field of commercial participation where their community hold all the cards.

Even before the People's Coalition Party came to power, Mr Chaudhry was a leading opposition spokesperson, who was always critical of affirmative action in favour of the indigenous community. And Mr Chaudhry made sure when he came to power that this affirmative action, in favour of the indigenous community was removed.

In its place, the social justice provisions of the 1997 Constitution was implemented with unbelievable speed and lack consideration and consultation with the indigenous community. As of now every community in Fiji will be put on an equal basis in spite of the fact that the Indo-Fijian community control the economy.

The events that took place on May 19, 2000 represents the culmination 12 months of frustration, anger, disappointment, and outrage in the manner in which Mr Chaudhry Government dealt with matters of importance to the indigenous community. What is worse is that the 9 indigenous Ministers in the Cabinet, two of who are Deputy PM appear to be completely 'under the thumb' of the PM.

They are, to put it elegantly, are impotent almost to the point of being eunuchs in their inability and failure to safeguard what was perceived by the indigenous community, as important to them. In fairness to the indigenous Cabinet Ministers the above judgment may appear to be unduly harsh. It would seem that none of the indigenous ministers was ever able to articulate either privately, let alone publicly, what was important to the indigenous electorate, which they purport to represent, and had elected them to Parliament.


It is useful to view the current crises in Fiji in the context of numbers. The indigenous people of Fiji, represent some 51% of the Fiji population of approximately 790,000. From a global perspective, the indigenous community of Fiji does not merely have to dea1 with the 300,000 Indo-Fijians who are now citizens of the country.

Against this number, the indigenous community of Fiji have to take cognisance of the one billion people of India itself, and a substantial number of people of Indian origin, in other parts of the world, notably Mauritius, Trinidad, Guyana and parts of East Africa. As well as this group, there are those who man some of the most important international institutions, such as the World Bank, the IMF, and the United Nations system for development.

As an indigenous people, we are part of the world's indigenous communities whose interests and precarious position (some of which borders on extinction) were singled out for special attention by the international community through declaration, the Decade of Indigenous People.

Indeed, the indigenous peop1e of Fiji are under threat and this dangerous threat is being undertaken by a Government that was constitutionally elected and uses the provisions of the Constitution that would put in place laws that would bring greater disadvantage to the indigenous community of Piji.


This letter is an attempt to provide your Excellency, with a background of why the events of May 19th 2000 have taken place. There is no going back. If the indigenous community do not assert their rights now and with urgency, to govern their own country, they will in next to no time become history.

The indigenous people of Fiji are not alone in this precarious position. Even the indigenous communities in our largest South Pacific states often find the going difficult.

The President of Fiji's dismissal of the genuine concerns of the indigenous community compounds the impasse of the last two days. The president appears reluctant to address these real and growing concerns.

The events of May 19, 2000 could have been avoided if Mr Chaudhry has the ability and the politica1 courage to listen to the growing unrest of the indigenous people and step down. The country would have avoided all trouble if in his place a leader was appointed who would at least listen and dialogue with the indigenous people with urgency, from the start of his administration.

In fact from all his recent pub1ic statements, PM Chaudhry dismissed the marches as being the work of agitators and those who could not accept that they had lost the election. The present crises lies squarely at the door of Mr Chaudhry, whose arrogance and refusal to listen to other view points, contrary ta his, are hallmarks of his style of governance. This of course is nothing new to those who knew him in his days in the opposition. Chaudhry banked very much on the fact that he had an absolute majority in Parliament, and that was sufficient mandate for to run "rough shod" over the concerns of the indigenous community.

Added to this, the grievance of the indigenous community was that the President ignored the grounds of dissatisfaction of the indigenous community as expressed throughout the media over the last 12 months. This then led to the two public demonstrations which was then subsequently followed by a third demonstration that culminated in the entry of representatives of the indigenous people into Parliament.

There is no denying that the events of May 19, 2000 represents an assault of democracy and constitutionality. The events represent 'the last straw' to many members of the indigenous community. It was not meant to be vengeance nor violent. Those who did what they did on May 19, 2000 did so because it was the only way available to them to bring to the attention of the powers that be, that the concerns of the indigenous are real and need to be addressed with urgency.

It is well within the high moral position of the President of Fiji to persuade the PM and his Government to voluntarily resign. It would give the opportunity, under the State of Emergency, to appoint an Interim Government drawn from all major political parties. The task of such a Government is first and foremost to address the grievances of the indigenous community in the light of the 1997 constitution.

Unfortunately to date, the President appears reluctant to adopt this path that could lead to immediate stability, reconciliation among the major communities, economic growth and development. This would be well within the legal powers of the President of Fiji since he has dec1ared a State of Emergency. Such prudent and statesman like action would have found acceptance and approva1 by the international community.


ENDS

Other disturbing perspectives, was Native Lands Trust Board's role in promulgating the Deed of Sovereignity, post 2000 coup.

The following micro excerpt, is an archived article published by Fiji Live:

Fijilive web site, Suva - June 23, 2000

Fiji: Police investigating Native Land Trust Board over Deed of Sovereignty

Police are investigating the Native Land Trust Board [NLTB] for its part in the promulgation of the controversial Deed of Sovereignty document.NLTB's Lautoka office was raided and a senior executive was interrogated by police for three hours before he was released.Originals of the deed were confiscated in the raid.The deed, for which NLTB has claimed authorship, calls on clan chiefs to cede their lands to a Taukei civilian government.

That 2000 article by Fiji Live was corroborated by an article by Radio New Zealand International:

Radio New Zealand International, Wellington - June 7, 2000

Fiji rebels circulate "deed of sovereignty" among clan leaders

The rebels in Fiji have begun circulating a document among indigenous clan leaders, detailing why power should be handed over to rebel leader George Speight, Radio New Zealand International reported on Wednesday.It quoted Radio Fiji as saying that the 24-page "deed of sovereignty" says "all power" should be handed over to Speight's self-appointed interim civilian government.

Subsequent to NLTB's role in the "Deed of Sovereignity" was the application of grease to the indigenous wheels. Scoop published the master plan, which was titled:'Blue Print for the Protection of Fijian Rights' and was presented to the GCC by Laisenia Qarase. As of 2007, it has been confirmed in court testimony of the Kunatuba case published by a Fiji Times article alluding to the greater scheme of misappropriating state funds; which the defendant claimed was willfully ignored by the auditing team employed by the Ministry of Finance.

This is the exceprt of the Fij Times article:

Finance team 'crucified scheme'

Wednesday, November 01, 2006

THE Ministry of Finance team that audited the agriculture farming scheme was accused of carrying out shoddy work because it crucified the scheme without having perused all the necessary paperwork.

Testifying in his trial, former Agriculture permanent secretary Peniasi Kunatuba said the audit procedures were meant for normal times when ministry officials would have had the time to provide all the necessary information to the audit team.

Instead, the audit was conducted on the eve of the 2001 elections when the scheme was at its peak and ministry staff was limited. He said it was near impossible to organise the arrangement of accounts, which was running at about $200,000 a day and to do justice in attending to the audit officers doing the investigation.

He said in all possibilities, records and data while available would not have been readily accessible to the audit team then.

He said while most of the audit team's findings were outlined in an interview it highlighted the major findings and did not go into any in-depth discussion of these.

He said as a consequence the non-availability of what they would be seeking during the audit proper, would have left things hanging and without any follow through.

He said the investigating team faulted firstly in declaring that this was a new scheme.

He added that the prerequisite approval for funding of the scheme was given by none other than the Finance Minister.

He said his home gym set that police seized was a second hand one bought from one Manoj Bhika, a manager for Suncourt for $500.

Meanwhile, Mr Kunatuba said while police had revealed several discrepancies in the operation of the scheme by the ministry, the suppliers including Suncourt, Repina Wholesalers and Asco Motors were an integral part in the investigation.

He said without interviewing them the whole story of the scheme would not be completed and charges laid may not have been appropriate.

He said the hardware suppliers were in a better position to answer the questions of whether they required the recipients to sign invoices and delivery dockets.

Mr Kunatuba said in the absence of the interview records on these shortfalls from the hardware suppliers, things would remain hanging in the air on who were involved in the fraudulent aspects of the scheme that had been highlighted by the prosecution.

It was the same Manoj Bhika, who is the target of extradition requests by the Interim Government, as reported by a Fiji Times article:

Police want to extradite suspects

Thursday, May 24, 2007

POLICE are seeking the extradition of two people from Australia and New Zealand in connection with a conspiracy to steal more than $3million from the government through the agriculture scam.

Director Economic Crime Ravi Narayan yesterday confirmed efforts to extradite the two who have jointly been charged with two other Suva businessmen.

Mr Narayan said one of the men was known to be in New Zealand under a work permit while the status of the individual was still unclear. Manoj Bhika and Jitendra Pratap are being sought by authorities.

Mr Narayan said the extradition process had already started and was being handled by the office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.

Dhansukhlal Bhika, a former Suva mayor along with fellow Suncourt Hardware director, Gulab Das Bhika have denied conspiring to defraud the government of more than $3million through felony, namely larceny. The men, who have denied the charge were released on $10,000 bail each.

Interim Agriculture Minister Jainendra Kumar says they have increased vetting of documents within the ministry, particularly for handouts in efforts to minimise the risk of another scam. However, Kumar said "in the sense of creating a brick-wall, we can't do anything about it". He said it was more to do with "the people who want to use the system to their advantage".

"Obviously we have to tighten up our system in terms of the use of our resources," he said.

In November last year, former permanent secretary for agriculture, Peniasi Kunatuba was jailed for four years by the High Court on charges related to the agriculture scam. Former civil servant Sakiusa Bole, was the first to be jailed over the same scam.

Scoop publishes an article written by Jone Dakuvula, raising this issue of NLTB's collusion to undermine Fiji's multi-racial fabric:

Press Release: Fiji Peoples Coalition Government
Dakuvula slates NLTB Issue

No: 280 12 December 2000

SVT member and pro-democracy campaigner, Jone Dakuvula has slated the NLTB for trying to install another Girmit in Fiji.

In a column he wrote in today's Fiji Sun, Dakuvula stated that the NLTB, in league with Apisai Tora, was carrying on with a political agenda to depose the elected government. It had no believable arrangement with Fijian landowners for the continuation of cane farming.

Dakuvula writes: "Tens of thousands of cane farms are very likely to revert to bush in the next three years". He says that the NLTB believes that the evicted farmers should be prepared to start again on undeveloped land yet to be identified. "But hardly any of these old farmers are in a position physically or financially to embark on another NLTB inspired GIRMIT". Dakuvula advises the NLTB to "go and see Lauan leaseholders in Lomaivuna who are preparing to return to their villages when the Naitasiri landowners reclaim their land. They do not want to start all over again".

Dakuvula says that the NLTB is led by people who have no business skills; instead they are led by blind nationalism. He says that the "nation will not survive on the basis of indigenous nationalism".

Meanwhile, today's Daily Post has also condemned the NLTB for not heeding the calls for reconciliation by continuing to evict farmers despite the willingness of the landowners to lease their land to the farmers.

END 12 December 2000

Club Em Designs

Saving Grace.

Fiji TV news segment covers the new incumbent of Commissioner to Fiji's Anti-Corruption Commission, announced by the interim Attorney General, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum (Right image).
This new Commissioner was confirmed by a Fiji Times article.


Mah Weng Kwai (Left image), who was offered a five year contract, has extensive legal experience behind him. As well as being a prominent member of Lawasia, a professional organization compromising of law associations, bar councils and law firms from the Asia Pacific region.
Fiji Village article reports that, the work of the Anti-Corruption unit is expected to be speed up; especially with Kwai's vast experience.

Fiji Times Editorial comments on the new Commissioner, the following is an excerpt:

Credibility is key

Friday, May 25, 2007

THE appointment of Mah Weng Kwai as commissioner of the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) is to be commended.

Mr Kwai's appointment, which would undoubtedly have taken many like the Fiji Law Society by surprise, is a significant development.

The man is a respected leader in his own right, one who has amassed more than 30 years experience as a lawyer. He is not only a leading member of the Malaysian bar but has invaluable expertise in prosecuting corruption.

He is also the serving president of Lawasia, a professional body of representatives from bar councils, law associations, law firms and corporations from the Asia Pacific region.

His credibility as a lawyer will certainly add weight to the anti-corruption commission, which has attracted a fair share of opposition.

This scepticism was to be expected particularly after Deputy Military Commander Esala Teleni was appointed as the deputy head of the commission. Thus, the appointment of an independent figure like Mr Kwai will to some extent ease public concerns.

And the public does have every right to be concerned given that this newly-empowered body has special powers to investigate corruption, make arrests and conduct interrogations. Already, more than 600-cases await the expert prosecution body's skills.

Many of the cases are of huge public interest like that against certain high profile figures in the Fiji Sports Council, the Native Lands Trust Board, the Fiji Institute of Technology and Airports Fiji Limited. Interim Attorney General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum says Fiji's President Ratu Josefa Iloilo appointed Mr Kwai under the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption Promulgation 2007.

Again, just like all other senior appointments since the December 5 takeover, this one is bound to face strong scrutiny and will in all likelihood be challenged in court.

The legality arguments are best left to the courts. For now, what is of utmost importance is that we satisfy the pressing list of criteria that has been set by our international friends, particularly the European Union.

Nevertheless, it must be said that Mr Kwai's acceptance is an interesting development given the recent Lawasia observer mission's report which raised its concern about a range of events, including the military takeover and the credibility of the judiciary following the suspension of the Chief Justice.

While the editorial raises the question of credibility of the judiciary; these fundamental issues was reflected in comments by the President and Vice-President of Fiji Law Society was openly challenged by veteran lawyer, described in a Fiji Village article.

This is an excerpt of Fiji Village article:

Dr Sahu Khan Takes Law Society VP to Task
By fijivillage
May 25, 2007, 07:56


(Image right: Shamshud Dean Sahu Khan)


Prominent Ba lawyer Doctor Shamshud Dean Sahu Khan has now taken the Fiji Law Society President and Vice President to task in relation to recent comments made by the top officials of the society.

Doctor Sahu Khan said he is concerned that Law Society Vice President Tupou Draunidalo made general statements that lawyers no longer had confidence in the judiciary.

[Khan] said these statements are totally misleading and unjustified. Doctor Sahu Khan said the President of the Law Society Davinesh Sharma also cannot say that some of the lawyer’s complaints against Draunidalo's statements is an internal matter.

Sharma and Draunidalo are expected to comment later.

Club Em Designs