Global Voices have labelled this as "threat to national security". It is interesting to wade through the multitude of opinions relating to the undemocratic nature of filtering out blogs. It is also reasonable to point out that the U.S Army has also banned bloggers, according to the Times of London. Undoubtedly, blogs have become menace to some and a gift to others.
Whilst some circles have lampooned the Fiji Military in blocking access to certain blogs, it appears that some form of filtering exist in other nations, as the Kuwait Times article reports. This view was confirmed by a CNN article.
Is blogging filtering anyway more egregious than blanket electronic surveillance?
It may be prudent to point out other more dubious acts like the issue raised by USA Today article, regarding electronic surveillance by the US agency- NSA which manages massive databases on American citizens, as well as being collector of information outside their borders, by colluding with other Governments.
Echelon is a system operated by NSA. Deep Black, a book written by William Burrows, covers the enormous use of foreign bases to collect electronic communications which used liaison arrangements with foreign governments.
This is the excerpt of the book:
Despite numerous references to the Agreement in print, officials of some of the participating countries have refused to confirm not only the details of the Agreement but even its existence. Thus, on March 9, 1977, the Australian Opposition Defense Spokesman asked the Prime Minister:
1. Is Australia a signatory to the UKUSA Agreement?
2. Is it a fact that under this agreement NSA operates electronic intercept stations in Australia?
3. Does any other form of station operate in Australia under the Agreement; if so, is it operated by an Australian or overseas authority, or is it operated under some sort of joint authority?
4. Will he [the Prime Minister] identify the participating country or countries in any such Agreement?
The Prime Minister refused to answer and referred to a previous response wherein he said the government would not confirm or deny speculation in that area. And the Australian D Notice, "Ciphering and Monitoring Activities," requests the media to refrain from publishing material on Australian collaboration with other countries concerning monitoring activities.18
This is issue of NSA surveillance, now appears to be a political hot potato; after the testimony of former Assistant Attorney General James Comey, who had testified in a Senate hearing alluding to the fact that, the White House had attempted to get approval from John Ashcroft who was lying in hospital.
Below is the video of Comey's testimony that, has increasingly placed the present US Attorney General's tenure under a serious cloud. An article by Washington Post has also underscored that US Attorney General, Alberto Gonzales was critically "Stuck in the M.U.D" (Monotonous Unsubstantiated Denials).
International Herald Tribune article covers the wake of criticism, derived from the White House actions.
In diplomatic moves that could prove to be a thorn in the sides of ANZUS alliance and their grandstanding foreign policy, a Fiji Sun article reports that, the Venezuela Government has offered assistance in the form of oil that includes an oil refinery project in Fiji, which was corroborated by a Fiji Times article. This is the excerpt of the Fiji Sun article:
Venezuela to boost ties with Fiji
The Government of Venezuela has expressed its willingness to engage with Fiji on the possibility of establishing in Fiji of an oil refinery and the supply of low cost oil says Minister for Public Enterprise and Public Sector Reform Poseci Bune.
In a bilateral meeting with the Deputy Ambassador of Venezuela to the United Nations, Aura Mahuampi De Ortiz in New York yesterday, Mr Bune said the Venezuela official confirmed the willingness of her government to support Fiji and other small island developing states in their energy needs. “They are not only looking at the option of supply of low cost oil to Fiji but are also willing to explore the possibility of setting up an oil refinery plant in Fiji to service the Pacific region,” he said.
Venezuela supplies oil to China, USA, and some Caribbean and African countries. Mr Bune said Venezuela had also extended an invitation to the Minister and the Fiji Government for a visit to their country to discuss amongst other things, these energy initiatives and the strengthening of diplomatic relations. “It is high time to strengthen diplomatic relations with this very important partner, after 24 years of the signing of relations between Fiji and Venezuela. A visit later this year will do well to further pursue what has transpired from this first initial exchange,” said Mr Bune.
Meanwhile, the Fiji Times article confirms that, Cuban Government has also offered assistance to Fiji in the form of Medical and Sports experts. This is the excerpt of the article:
Cuba offers Fiji assistance
1300 FJT Tuesday, May 15, 2007
Update: 1.00pm CUBA has offered direct assistance in the medical and sports sectors, and is willing to explore other forms of assistance and partnerships with Fiji.
At a bilateral discussion with the Minister for Public Service, Public Enterprises and Public Sector Reform, Poseci Bune, Cubas Ambassador and Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Rodrigo Malmeirca Diaz, said his government is more than willing to assist Fiji in these fields and other forms of assistance and partnerships in the areas of agriculture and sugar.
''We are willing to further strengthen our bilateral relations through provision of medical scholarships and provision of expert trainers in boxing and other sports, including special programmes for agriculture and sugar,'' Mr. Rodrigo said.
Cuba currently supplies doctors and other professionals to countries in Africa, the Caribbean and Solomon and Nauru in the Pacific.
Mr Bune in response said that Fiji appreciates Cuba's offer for assistance, which would be considered seriously.
''I will certainly take this up with Cabinet and hopefully a follow up mission to discuss these issues with Cuba can take place soon before the end of this year. This could happen together with a special trade and development mission to Venezuela and other South American countries,'' Mr Bune said.
Fiji established diplomatic relations with Cuba in 2005.
The Pacific Island Leader's summit in Washington, has received some recent attention, as the S.i.F.M post described.
Below is the actual video of the US Secretary State, Condaleeza Rice's address to the invitees.
This particular reference to Fiji's political situation received a jibe by a local personality. The following is a letter to the FT Editor:
Tell us Rice
CONDOLEEZA Rice told the Pacific Islands conference of leaders in Washington that the Pacific must not devolve into an area where strongmen unilaterally decided the fate of their country and destabilise the democratic foundation of their neighbours.
It is a good message.
But would someone kindly tell Ms Rice that many nations of the world are fed-up of a strong superpower unilaterally trying to influence their fate and destabilising their nation in the name of economic globalisation and US-style democracy.
Father Kevin Barr Suva
Several poignant articles appearing in Fiji Times regarding democracy and the issue of culture and modernity, prove that intellectual analysis is in demand. ECREA's official position on the political juncture is published on their website(PDF).
The first article was from Fr. Kevin Barr, a representative of ECREA, a local NGO in Fiji.
This is the excerpt:
Solutions before democracy
FATHER KELVIN BARR Monday, May 14, 2007
There seems to be a great deal of international concern that Fiji should return to democracy as soon as possible.
Calls for democratic elections have come from Australia, New Zealand, the United States, the European Union and the Commonwealth. We have had the report of the Eminent Persons Group. Recently we have been inundated with overseas visitors the UN fact finding mission as well as the Commonwealth Human rights fact finding mission.
Then the Pacific Islands Forum is organising a committee to advise on the holding of elections.
This great flurry of activity is very interesting. It seems the international community thinks that as soon as Fiji holds elections and returns to democracy, all its problems will be over. It will be accepted back into all the organisations from which it has been expelled and all will be right with the world. There can be great rejoicing and everyone can sit back satisfied that democracy has been restored.
All this is well and good. But it has all happened before. After previous coups in 1987 and 2000 Fiji was urged to have elections and return to democracy as quickly as possible. This happened and the international community was overjoyed to welcome Fiji back into the democratic fold.
But elections did not solve Fiji's basic problems and when those problems raised their heads again and caused serious tensions and upsets (as they did during the Qarase regime) the international community seemed quite unconcerned because a democratic government was in place.
No fact finding missions came from the Commonwealth or the UN. No Eminent Persons were selected to look into the problems. Our closest neighbours did little to put pressure on a racist regime to act in the interests of all its citizens. They had seen to it that a democratically elected government was in place and that was all that was required.
Yet, by now we should have learnt that democracy measured by elections is not a panacea. Every coup exposes wounds that need to be healed and the deep underlying problems that need to be attended to. Before Fiji can gain stability and effectively return to some degree of democracy a number of serious issues need to be addressed and resolved.
1. The agenda of the extreme nationalists needs to be addressed Fiji for the Fijians, calls for "Fijian unity" and the demand for a Christian State.
2. The racially explosive mix of fundamentalist religion and extreme nationalism found in the Assembly of Christian Churches in Fiji (ACCF) which seeks to have a strong influence on the political and social scene.
3. The conflicts and tensions within the Fijian chiefly families and confederacies.
4. The culture of corruption, nepotism and cronyism.
5. The economic policies which are creating greater poverty and inequality and giving rise to "two Fijis".
6. The electoral system which encourages racial divisiveness.
Besides all this we need:
A well conducted Census;
The establishment of fair and proper electoral boundaries; and Extensive voter education about the nature and purpose of democracy.
We don't just need a timeframe for a return to democracy, we need strategies that will address the big problems underlying our instability and giving rise to constant coups. We do not have a "coup culture", we have rather a number of serious unaddressed problems which will continue to cause instability until they are effectively acknowledged and addressed. Any attempt to throw a cloak of superficial democracy over them will be counterproductive.
The second of such FT article was from local academic, Ropate Qalo and the following is an excerpt:
There's a time when politics and chiefs cannot mix
ROPATE QALO Monday, May 14, 2007
From left - Ratu Tevita Uluilakeba and the Tui Mavana Ratu Josefa Basulu at a meeting of the GCC.
It is common knowledge that most chiefs of the past 50 to 60 years live with their people in a face to face' socially integrated and structurally integrated society. Most were impressed with and followed Ratu Sukuna's plan for ethnic Fijians as a civil servant.
Today the social and the bureaucratic structures are divided and most chiefs live in towns and cities, if not physically at least mentally.
Many are politically motivated. Their view of the good life is based on urban standards like most people on the planet. Such a dominant view of so-called' modernisation is embedded in most development plans, the Millennium Development Goals (MDG), and the evolving Pacific Plan.
This opinion is part of some of the writer's observations related to chiefs and politics and the loss of their integrity because of the differing context in which they now operate.
Social integration and structural integration just cannot mix if we follow Giddens sociological analysis. Of course there are many theoretical analysis that could be used. But if we use Giddens, therein lies what Nayacakalou "called a monstrous nonsense" or contradiction when chiefs and Fijians believe that they can preserve and change or do both simultaneously. But that is a matter of opinion when we consider monarchies of modern and not so modern states e.g. Britain, Japan, India, Malaysia, Thailand, and so on that are able to separate social traditional and bureaucratic structural institutions.
To those who have been following the news and the suspension of the Great Council of Chiefs (GCC) this perspective may add another dimension to some aspects of chieftaincy from an urban-rural Fijian point of view. Let me go back a decade and flag what appears to be the decline of chiefly integrity because of political and traditional' confusion of roles and conclude why Ratu Sukuna has become a symbol of chieftaincy to a great number of Fijians (Ethnic, Indo and those not included in those categories) because he could separate the roles he needed to play.
Ten years ago, Major General Sitiveni Rabuka was elected ahead of the late Adi Lady Lala Mara for president of the SVT in 1996 or there about. Many remember that election.
It may be called the end of an era'. That was the first public political interaction of Fijians suggesting an institutional shift, illustrating that a paramount chief can be moved from leadership in our now time'.
Although the earlier coup was claimed to place chiefs back as leaders with the late Ratu Mara who became the interim Prime Minister. We have so far had three significant interim prime ministers: Ratu Mara, Laisenia Qarase, and Ratu Voreqe via coups.
It was reported the Great Council of Chiefs had finally decided they should be independent of political parties in January 1997. This decision essentially admits the fact it had been politicised since 1970 and more so in 1987 by the coup leader and his SVT government.
He was made a life member and it might be recalled the SVT claimed to be the chiefs' party. This may also be attributed to the constitutional reform then being finalised.
The late Sakeasi Butadroka applauded the decision together with a great majority of this country (one must add, at the time). This is perhaps why it was called "Chiefs score major coup" two days earlier than the applause from the late nationalist. Perhaps it should be given a more sober title like "FA welcomes chiefs' move". This is a more subtle use of words that conveys culture, sensitivity, and thought relative to the reference to coups.
It was also later reported that "Government yesterday clarified that the Bose Levu Vakaturaga did not discuss a severance of ties between the BLV and the Soqosoqo ni Vakavulewa ni Taukei (SVT)". The same report stated "Assistant Minister for Fijian Affairs said, however, that the discussions during the meeting centred around the establishment of a secretariat and the appointment of a chairman for the BLV."
The above paragraph conveyed to GCC members the BLV was satisfied with the then arrangement of the BLV and SVT partnership. However, the GCC was serious that the members wanted a chief to be in the position of chair in a separate entity such as the one that has now been suspended. It was also put in the statutes that members of parliament were not to be GCC members. This is a far cry from the previous GCC membership that was inclusive of politicians and ministers.
This week and the previous, newspapers and television carried items of news articulating the older order of chiefs against the younger ones it seems. Time has exposed the bureaucratic structure was susceptible to traditional infiltration or social integration.
Those who conducted the latest coup are bent on bureaucratic structural integration. Some GCC members appear not to appreciate the contradiction. The structural integration separated from the social may be encouraged by Parliamentary Paper No. 71 of Fiji, Volume II (2002: 26-7) as well as Volume I besides the Fijian Affairs Act. It is also possible that it is backed by the LLM Thesis of the Interim Attorney General.
We all tend to agree that in the march of time the country must adjust itself to the reality of our now time' with rising sea levels which will definitely have a good number of our chiefly villages submerged. Globalisation, sustainable development, and good governance all become important as we move from a tribal system to a class system in the Pacific Plan.
Theoretically the tribal being the "face-to-face" social integration reciprocity relationship and structure integration reciprocity are one and the same thing. In the class society they are separate where the structure involves reciprocity between groups and collectives i.e. achieved over time and space (cited in Craib's criticism of Giddens Theory of Structuration in modern social theory: from Parsons to Habermas 2nd Edition 1992: 115).
Ratu Sukuna's words written just over ninety (90) years ago "The truth is that the theory of equality in relation to Fijian society is a destructive theory with all the defects of its kind" (23.01.17 in Scarr's Three Legged Stool 1983: 48) appears to be the interpretation embedded in the Fijian Holdings Limited (FHL) with the dividend of more than $2.046 million (Fiji Times May 5th, 2007: 20) to some.
It is straight out of Animal Farm in the words of Squealer "some are more equal than others". Such warped interpretation of tradition is more than interesting and is rumoured to be the focus of the Interim Government's so-called clean up campaign. FHL is legal as an entity but questionable ethically it seems. Herein is the debate of social responsibility or democracy first the egg or chicken first debate. The FHL interpretation also applies to the $60million that runs the GCC in such a view.
It also may be argued to relate to the BLV and SVT coalition. Some might even stretch it to the latest Sports Council audited report now making our so-called news.
These interpretations need to be examined in some detail and depth beside other specifically Fijian ones that we will consider below.
However, back to the words of Ratu Sukuna, these were spoken as he was contemplating the mammoth task of the codification and registration of Fijian traditions, especially on land, and culture in 1917. Demographic trend at the time and belief show that Fijians will be extinct in the near future.
Now we have the wisdom of hindsight. He stood up to protect the indigenes as the knowledge of time allowed. His lone work to his retirement and death was incomplete as noted in Scarr in the above book.
Today some chiefs through birth, great or small, have lost the use of knowledge, wisdom and tact from consultation with members of the clan in the service of their kin or veiwekani. Ratu Sukuna was selfless and stood for integrity rather than heroism given his time and space in our recent history. Chiefs today and coup leaders will be remembered by their fellow citizens in the fullness of time and perhaps judged publicly or privately.
Meanwhile, it seems that the preference for more and more still is all too obvious, unlike Ratu Sukuna. It appears integrity has been overcome by public relations, popularity, and the vote, needless to mention the pursuit for the almighty dollar one way another without scruples by some. In this sense it appears but cannot be confirmed that the latest coup leader has adopted the truism that sometimes you have to be cruel in order to be kind'. Only time will tell.
After 20 years, the coups have created more problems than they have solved. Coups are for those who refuse to see the obvious. The obvious being, one, two, three, four wrong or coups cannot make a right. As we look to the future realistically Ratu Viliame Tagivetaua in the Native Lands and Fisheries Commission has spoken out about the chiefly tradition of the need for consensus to install a chief in each yavusa. We have 1456 yavusa and 221 vanua and 192 tikina or district (PP No. 71 Vol. 1 of 2002: 50) in the whole of Fiji. The GCC is the pinnacle of the yavusa through consensus at district and provincial level.
Strictly speaking, traditions that are Fijian are determined by those yavusa. The independence of Fijians is thereby determined and practised as it is interpreted between the Navatu and Bau people for example, as veitabani within certain limits that are not defined and susceptible to abuse. Is this an interpretation in 1987 that gave courage rather than reason to those who carried it out?
This tribal system raises numerous obvious legal questions and the interpretation of common law that goes back to the Magna Carta between Rome and England over 800 years ago. It is maintained that in Fiji such interpretations and interactions resting on tribal ways and symbolism that needs to be examined for traditional, cultural, and political reasons. This seems to be the untouched area that Fijians are so sensitive about and to which most researchers find too sensitive to cover.
Work on Fijian tradition of thoughts on a topic about Thinking about thinking', Na vakasamataki ni vakasama may be the most unlikely solution to stop what some have referred to as the coup culture. Such a label may be correct in the era building up to the cession in 1874 which was reignited in 1987.
However, with all our present day knowledge, information technology, and mobility it is difficult to understand how Ratu Sukuna's work could remain untouched and incomplete for 49 years or half century with the view of a more realistic interpretation that will maintain the integrity that was central to his work.
After all our past is in the future when our descendants will find new knowledge and impress upon it their own interpretations. Failure to prepare for an institutional interpretation that evolves integrity is a preparation for failure.
This will mean prolonged chaos. We need to get our institutions like schools, church, districts, provinces, towns, cities, GCC and so on to do things like Ratu Sukuna with integrity. Put simply, integrity is what we do honestly, pure, and unselfish when there are no spectators.
As we celebrate Ratu Sukuna's life later in the month, on May 28, we might ask our leaders and ourselves to reflect, ponder, recognise the contradictions and the need for integrity that chiefs and everyone needs to promote our bleeding country.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and not of his employer, the University of the South Pacific.
The Fiji Times (FT)Editorial of Thursday May 10th is a shining example of a conviction, clouded by a certain mania of sorts; the type one usually associates with an acute refraction of the facts, a by-product of truth suppression.
This is an excerpt of the FT Editorial:
Valid figures, not hot air, please
Thursday, May 10, 2007
INTERIM Finance Minister Mahendra Chaudhry has done his best to shock the nation with claims of massive electoral fraud and mismanagement.
There were, he said, more than 650,000 unused ballot papers missing after the May 2006 general election, which meant there had been a direct attempt to "interfere with and manipulate the results ...".
That a large number of ballot papers were printed and never used proves absolutely nothing, and is in no way relevant to the outcome of the election. At worst it may show up some wastage of money and a lack of some proper procedures within the Electoral Office.
It is totally irrelevant how many ballot papers were printed and how many were unused or even if they were destroyed or not. Once the election was over they were nothing more than waste paper.
What is important is how many votes were cast in each seat compared to the number of people on the electoral roll and those essential facts seem to be missing from this so-called'audit'.
An election is nothing more than simple mathematics. There are a certain number of people entitled to vote in each seat. Over the course of polling a number of them will vote and a number of them will not, for various reasons. At the end of polling the votes are counted and obviously the number of votes cast should never exceed the number of people enrolled.
The number of votes cast should also match the number of names crossed off the electoral rolls by the polling booth staff.
In every election far more ballot papers are printed than there are registered voters for the simple reason that, as people are allowed to vote at any of a number of polling stations, each has to have sufficient papers to cater for however many people may turn up.
For instance, how many Rotumans could be expected to vote in Suva and at which polling booths? It is almost impossible to know.
Complicating this even further is the lack of a recent census. Using the Rotuman example again, how could the Elections Office possibly know how many Rotumans lived in Suva and at which polling stations they would vote? Because those facts were not, and could never be fully known beforehand, the Elections Office had to ensure there were enough ballot papers available at every polling station on a "be prepared" basis.
It is difficult to believe a seasoned politician such as Mr Chaudhry does not know all this. Let us also not forget that the election was overseen by a number of independent teams, including the European Union, the Commonwealth, the US and even a local contingent from the University of the South Pacific.
They all gave the thumbs up, acknowledging that while the election was not perfect, the mistakes had no bearing on the outcome. Were these teams incompetent or corrupt? It is difficult impossible, in fact to believe so.
Mr Chaudhry now needs to provide proof that his audit team knew what they were doing. He needs to provide the real figures that are needed the number of electors registered in each seat, compared to the number of votes cast.
If they show significant differences, he may then have some hope of convincing the public the election was rigged. Until then, it is all just more political hot air.
(Above: Video on the conversations by Navitalai Naisoro, a former civil servant and SDL confident, alleging the act of ballot rigging during the 2006 elections)
These allegations pointing to the unforgivable offence of vote rigging, was derived from the Auditor General's report, which some circles have obviously denied outright. Was it not the same AG report who revealed the layer of corruption within Fiji Sports Council or the abuse of the Affirmative action programs? The cruel realities on hand, may have prompted a furious defense by entrenched SDL apologists, who attempted to fight off these inexcusable actions by the Election Office Supervisor, Semesa Karavaki; who just months before the 2006 elections was on study leave in Australia.
FT Editor said
"That a large number of ballot papers were printed and never used proves absolutely nothing, and is in no way relevant to the outcome of the election. At worst it may show up some wastage of money and a lack of some proper procedures within the Electoral Office".
It is quite regrettable for the Fiji Times Editor to downplay such serious and willful breeches of authority that, raise serious clouds of suspicions over the electoral process, giving probable cause to further investigations and convictions by the new Anti-Corruption Commission.
Although, the Editor raised an important detail, albeit portrayed through rose colored glasses:
"It is totally irrelevant how many ballot papers were printed and how many were unused or even if they were destroyed or not. Once the election was over they were nothing more than waste paper".
To print out an excessive amount of ballot papers and then later incinerate them without use; defeats the purpose of having an accurate count of voters in the first place.
It is unfortunate for the FT Editor to categorize the unused, untracked and unaccounted ballot papers as mere 'waste paper' destined for the incinerator; before ascertaining their worth. It is also blatantly reprehensible of the Editorial to trivialize these departures in electoral procedures and other irregularities, by questionably classifying these abuses, as a simple case of public resource wastage.
Fiji Times editorial unapologetically uses slanted language, underscoring the lack of proportionality used by the editor; akin to labeling genocide, as nothing more than serial murders.
The Editor further over simplifies the enormity of these questions that point to the unprecedented malfeasance. One must be appraised of the Latin term: 'Modus vivendi'-Or the acceptance of a continuing and fundamental disagreement, held in abeyance; in order to successfully filter through these iconic misrepresentations.
The FT Editor may have forgotten the existing Public Service Commission regulations forbidding the destruction of official documents. Undoubtedly, voting ballots is an official government document as it gets and their hurried incineration, fitted the uncanny label of hiding evidence. Without verifiable documents underlining the approval of Electoral Commission in this act of capital destruction, perhaps done under the cover of the night, raises further alarming and embarrassing questions on the lack of oversight. Paper trails serve an important function in national elections and this issue has created some controversy in the last U.S elections, regarding electronic voting machines; which was also susceptible to hacking. These machines were manufactured by Diebold Inc, a loyal contributor to Republican Party and the end result forced several American states to abandon those machines; favoring paper trails used by conventional ballot cards.
All paper ballots themselves are not without scrutiny, as the Fiji allegations of vote rigging prove.
The equivocation (WAX) of the British High Commissioner was quoted in Fiji Village article, along with other stove-piping pundits who pointed out that, the E.U observation teams did sign off declaring the 2006 Fiji elections as free and fair.
Regrettably, this echo chamber defense was raised also by the Fiji Times Editor and seemed to have a bizarre similarity to talking points press releases, made by the SDL party members:
"Let us also not forget that the election was overseen by a number of independent teams, including the European Union, the Commonwealth, the US and even a local contingent from the University of the South Pacific. They all gave the thumbs up, acknowledging that while the election was not perfect, the mistakes had no bearing on the outcome. Were these teams incompetent or corrupt? It is difficult impossible, in fact to believe so". (sic)
Of course, those with difficulty in comprehending the possibility of vote rigging; may be divided into to two groups. The first group being highly deficient in thinking 'out of the box' and the second group possessing a superior political bias.
The 2006 election reports, did acknowledge some irregularities in the election process and recommended the remapping of electoral boundaries in Fiji. It might be accurate to factor in, the undeniable reasons of contamination regarding the locations of observer teams.
One should understand that, there are only a finite number of observers and none of them could ever defy the laws of physics, even if they tried their hardest to be omnipresent during the 2006 elections. This astounding fact does have a direct bearing on the election outcome, despite the appeals to ignorance floated by the FT Editor.
The transport of ballot boxes from the voting booths to the counting centers were not observed 100%. Therefore, it is plausible to deduce that, the observers may have scrutinized the voting booths, but the deduction also begs the questions: Did any of the observers physically escort 100% of election boxes in transition?
There were several articles(none published by Fiji Times) pointing to complaints raised by several political parties after the closure of voting centers, pointing to the detour of vehicles(transporting the ballot boxes) to strategic locations, then reappearing at the counting centers without anyone really questioning or scrutinizing this lapse of time or route deviation?
Equally disturbing was the media reported incidents highlighting, last minute changes to the locations of voting centers by the Election Office officials; who took the time to inform the SDL party but not other participants. Other discrepancies regarding the integrity of the Elections Office is seen in this 2001 Fiji Sun webpage.
Police investigating opposition claims against election administration
Posted: 05/11/2006 On Wednesday the Prime Minster downplayed the police investigation of opposition parties' claims against the ongoing parliamentary elections. The opposition alleges, among other things, that around 13,000 some of its supporters were not included on the roll. Historically there have been many tensions between ethnic Indians and indigenous Fijians, who are currently in power. Elections to the country's 71-seat parliament started on Monday, May 8, and will continue through Saturday, May 12. The vote count will begin on May 14 and results are due to be announced four days later.
Source: ElectionGuide
Confident Fiji PM brushes off election complaints
Posted: 05/10/2006 SUVA, Fiji (Reuters) - Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase brushed aside on Wednesday complaints about Fiji's chaotic election, which police are investigating, and said he was confident of returning to office.
Source: Reuters: International
Wansolwara online corroborates the 2001 election rigging complaints.
The ugly fact reported in the Auditor General's report stated that, voting center officials did not have any idea of the number of actual ballot papers, simply because there were no accounting checks and balances nor documents quantifying or accurately tracking the ballot papers. This reflects gross ineptitude by the Supervisor of Elections, who repeatedly showed contempt for the public interest and transparent accountability, demonstrated in a Fiji Times article defending his incompetence. If anyone owes anyone an apology for this debacle, it is the Supervisor of Elections.
Irrefutably, there is an ubiquitous and offensive odor of spoiled meat, now emanating from the bowels of the Election Office with regards to the 2006 elections. The same execrable stench which some personalities have feebly attempted to neutralize. The aftermath of the Kunatuba case and the Agricultural Scam case proves the existence of a multi-agency vote buying scheme which arrogantly abused affirmative action programs. Ostensibly the abuse directed any culpability and public opinion to the SDL Government.
It is not counter intuitive for the public to closely re-examine those realities, without being confused with other Red Herrings and cloudy judgments raised by individuals holding a political bias.
It has been proven by independent media analysts that, the Fiji Times led a repulsive defamation campaign against the 1999 Prime Minister and now Interim Finance Minister; this campaign eventually paved the way for the 2000 putsch. Other observations include some Fiji Time Correspondents, who blurred the line between journalism and subject, by closely associating themselves with the perpetrators of the 2000 coup and maligning their very independence as well as staining their integrity.
A similar type of bias is reflected in the tone of FT Editor who chooses a cynical view :
"There are a certain number of people entitled to vote in each seat. Over the course of polling a number of them will vote and a number of them will not, for various reasons".
and simultaneously the FT editorial diminishes the importance of a non-partisan electoral system, without even raising the issue of unaccountability, let alone mention deterrents to voter fraud.
Whilst, the editor hastily points out a juvenile correlation between voting and mathematics:
"An election is nothing more than simple mathematics"
A fact ignored by the FT editorial is that, numbers require an accurate and verifiable source before one gives credence to its value. A hasty conclusion of the editorial:
[...]At the end of polling the votes are counted and obviously the number of votes cast should never exceed the number of people enrolled[...]
What is quite concerning regarding the question of numbers, is that the amount of printed ballot papers should never exceed the number of registered voters by such great percentage, as seen in the 2006 elections.
This argument by Fiji Times Editor holds true only if, the number of registered voters is derived from an accurate population count known commonly as the national census. It was this census that was avoided like the plague by the SDL Government, blaming an acute shortage of State funds in not exercising this basic role of good governance.
Fiji's national population is certainly not an arbitrary number which the Election Supervisor or the FT Editor can pluck out of thin air. In addition to this myopia, the electoral boundaries were exceedingly antiquated and should have been remapped subsequently to the scheduled census. In fact, Fiji has hardly remapped the current boundaries since its independence.
Arguably, the 2006 elections were far less free and fair, if these basic fundamentals of governance were conveniently sidelined by the SDL Government; which the Fiji Times Editor and International Observer teams unreasonably swept under the rug.
IT is surprising that the ousted PM uses the term "democratically-elected government" in almost all his comments.
May I ask the ousted PM why, if he wants the people to support a democratically-elected government, did he accept the post of interim PM when the Labour government was toppled in 2000?
Ronald Jeet Ba
Ballot papers
YOUR editorial (FT 10/5) on the missing unused ballot papers shows an unfortunate lack of understanding of issues involved, particularly the enormity of the fact that more than 600,000 unused ballot papers cannot be accounted for.
Equally surprising is the fact that an issue which your paper thought was important enough to hit the front page (FT 9/5) should hours later become merely "hot air".
It says a lot about the credibility of your editorial team, than that of the Finance Ministry's audit team.
The issue at stake here is not just one of about 600,000 unused ballot papers, although that is worrying enough. The main concern is 665,256 missing unused ballot papers.
The Electoral Act makes absolutely stringent provisions for the accountability of every printed ballot paper, issued or otherwise.
And rightly so, because the integrity of any general election hinges on such accountability.
Sections 85, 86 and 87 lay down very specific instructions for the handling of and responsibility for all ballot papers used, unused or spoilt.
The ultimate responsibility for the safety and accountability of ballot papers lie with the Supervisor of Elections. He stands accountable under the law.
He must tell the nation what happened to the 600,000-plus ballot papers.
That they were used to stuff ballot boxes cannot be easily discounted.
This is why the matter is with the Fiji Independent Commission against Corruption for further investigation.
The Finance audit team found discrepancies which must be thoroughly investigated.
The fact that the Supervisor of Elections failed in his duty to keep a master record, failed in his duty to ensure every Returning Officer filed returns as required under the law, made it impossible for the audit team to probe further. FICAC will now look into these and other issues that have come to light. Let the Supervisor of Elections and others of his ilk answer to the investigating team.
There are a number of other highly disturbing features of the 2006 and 2001 general elections that need to be fully investigated.
Indeed, there is enough compelling evidence to warrant the setting up of an independent commission of inquiry into the conduct of the 2006 election.
In the past, such complaints were brushed under the carpet. Complaints regarding irregularities and electoral malpractices were lodged after the 2001 election but no action was taken by those in authority people who were part of Laisenia Qarase's gravy train.
When police started their investigations under Commissioner Andrew Hughes, it was found that relevant records could not be found. We must prevent records being destroyed this time.
The accountability and integrity of the electoral system is a must, otherwise the exercise becomes a mockery and a farce.
Needless to say, an alert, impartial and informed media, in its capacity as the public watchdog, has an important role to play in this respect.
Mahendra Chaudhry Interim Minister for Finance National Planning Sugar
Sour grapes
MAHENDRA Chaudhry is again trying to discredit the result of the 2006 election by instigating an audit by his boys to raise queries on its credibility.
Instead of trying to move the country forward and using government resources to get the country back on the road to democracy, he has chosen to create doubts on the result of the election when his party lost.
He must note that no matter what his audit team comes up with, the military coup has happened and nothing that he says or does will reverse the election result. It is a mere waste of time and money. He maintains that surplus ballot papers were printed which were not accounted for. This does not prove anything. It proves nothing.
If there were discrepancies in the number of voters crossed-off in the rolls at polling stations, when reconciled against the ballot papers that were used for voting, there should be ground for further investigation.
It appears to me as a case of sour grapes. He should rise above petty issues and take positive steps to move Fiji forward.
Interim Finance Minister, Mahendra Chaudary in an interview (WAX) with Fiji Village, has castigated the former Fiji Election Supervisor for his alleged role in rigging the 2006 Elections, after the probe into the Election office was released. Chaudary in the same interview (WAX) questioned the need by Fiji Elections office to print 125% extra ballot papers, for the 2006 elections, some of which were later incinerated.
(Left: Former Elections Supervisor, Semesa Karavaki)The former Supervisor of Elections, Semesa Karavaki in an interview(WAX) defended his role and couunter accused Chaudary of making threats and further questioned the integrity of the Anti-Corruption Commission which has now taken charge of the investigations. Karavaki's explanations(WAX) for the incineration of ballot papers, raised more questions than answers.
Fiji Live article corroborates the release of the Audit report on Fiji Elections Office. This is an excerpt:
Probe reveals errors by Elections Office Tuesday May 08, 2007
An investigation of the Elections Office has revealed that an excessive number of ballot papers were printed for the 2006 general elections.
The audit, which was carried out last year by the Office of the Auditor General, also revealed that postal ballot papers had to be reprinted due to errors made by the Office.
The audit found that a total of 2 million 82 thousand 280 ballot papers were printed for the general election compared to 959 thousand 405 registered voters on the provisional rolls. An extra 1 million 122 thousand 875 ballots printed.
The audit revealed that an extra 285 thousand 591 were printed for the Fijian Communal seats and an extra 48 thousand 11 were printed for the General Communal.
For the Indian Communal, 245 thousand 738 extra ballot papers were printed while for the Rotuman Communal, 64 thousand 847 extra ballot papers were printed. For the Open Constituencies, 478 thousand 688 extra ballot papers were printed.
The audit found that 52 thousand 600 postal ballot papers were printed due to errors made by the officer preparing the template of the ballots.
13 thousand 450 ballots was reprinted for the Fijian Communal, 2 thousand 300 for the General Communal, 25 thousand 100 for the Indian Communal and 11 thousand 750 for the Open Constituencies. The audit noted the explanation of the Government Printer who said he wasn't responsible for the reprints and shifted the blame to the Elections Office.
The Washington Summit for Pacific Leaders have penciled themselves in for meeting with Condaleeza Rice, according to the schedule tabled by the State Department. Radio NZ article claims that the issue of Fiji's democracy is on the agenda, despite a contradiction in opinions (WAX) from a Fiji Village article which quoted Fiji's point man, Parmesh Chand, who is also invited to the same meeting along with Interim Minister, Poseci Bune.
Although, Interim Prime Minister, Voreqe Bainimarama was not invited by the US State Department; the US reaction was labelled in a Fiji Village article as "Double Standards" by American Samoan Congressman, Faleomaveaga Eni Hunkin.
The upcoming meeting of Pacific Leaders brokered by the State Department in Washington, has received skeptical reaction from some quarters, as described by an article from Pacific Island Business.
This is an excerpt of the article:
Letter from Suva: GETTING ISLANDS NEEDS ON THE USA AGENDA NOT EASY
Laisa Taga
As Pacific leaders prepare to jet out to Washington for their high powered pow-wow with top American officials, Pacific ambassadors were still battling it out with the US State Department officials. This was over what should be included on the agenda of the May 7-9 meeting.
LETTER FROM SUVA has been told that despite a meeting on April 24 in New York with officials Steve McGann, Dr Gerald Finn and Jason Cutie, Pacific ambassadors were still not satisfied.
One Pacific ambassador who spoke to LETTER FROM SUVA said despite suggestions by Pacific Islands ambassadors to include some development issues like migration, HIV/AIDS, trade, etc, to the draft agenda, the Americans were reluctant.
“Their agenda is more focused on security and other matters of interest only to them,” this Pacific Islands ambassador told LETTER FROM SUVA.
“The ambassadors have been working extremely hard trying to ensure the agenda allows for a meaningful discussion with our leaders and the US and result in some tangible results that can be taken forward".
"We believe that a successful meeting can only be attained by having a good constructive agenda, which covers both the US and Pacific islands countries’ interests.”
Another key issue of concern to Pacific ambassadors is the availability of President George Bush to meet with the islands leaders. This again appeared to be a difficulty for the Americans “despite giving a full audience to New Zealand’s Prime Minister Helen Clark during her recent visit to the US.
“At this point in time (April 28), it is not confirmed,” the Pacific ambassador told LETTER FROM SUVA.
However, a summary of the April 24 meeting, a copy of which was obtained by LETTER FROM SUVA, said the state department was still actively pursuing the appointment with Bush.
However, President Bush’s participation was contingent on the number of Heads of State and Heads of Government attending the meeting. According to the ambassador, at least three Heads of State have confirmed their participation.
A state visit by Britain’s Queen Elizabeth to the United States will also be falling at the same time, which could make it more difficult for Pacific leaders to meet with President Bush.
US Secretary of State, Condoleezza Rice, however, has been scheduled to welcome the Pacific leaders. 2007 has been declared by the Americans as the Year of the Pacific and as part of this they have promised to increase engagement with the Pacific.
As Glyn T. Davies, Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, told LETTER FROM SUVA: “We have revitalised our relationship with the Pacific and we’ve decided to come up with a slogan but behind it is a plan to speed up the pace of contact with Pacific leaders.
“We would like to raise the profile of the Pacific in Washington by bringing Pacific Leaders to Washington and exposing them to American leaders and American leaders to them, and getting them we hope to learn a little bit more about how our system works. But importantly American policy makers can get to know them and about the issues of the Pacific.
“What we’re trying to do is to have more dialogue by creating opportunities to listen and to talk—what some people accuse us of not doing—to try and understand better what is going on.
“What is lacking we think is a sort of high level dialogue. Let’s talk as equals about strategic situations, let’s talk about your global concerns. It is an opportunity to talk about the Pacific’s aspirations for the future and for the US, what is it we hope for in the Pacific,” Davies said.
But some regional observers are skeptical about the United States’ increased engagement.
The Americans literally abandoned the Pacific Islands after the end of the Cold War. In some islands places, offices like USAID and The Asia Foundation were shut down what seemed close to overnight. With the Cold War over, the Americans moved on to other areas they considered more important than small islands nations dotted across a large ocean.
One regional observer said: “Yes, the US has announced 2007 as being Year of the Pacific and whilst we want to believe that this is a serious indication of their intention to return in a big way to the Pacific, nothing substantive seems to be visible nor any new initiatives proposed to be put on the table for our Pacific islands’ taking.
“We are hoping that this is not just a public relations exercise or political maneuvering/posturing to counter China and others’ increasing interest and presence in the Pacific islands countries. “So far, it’s just a ‘bang’ and with just six or so months left, we hope that something will emerge to prove us wrong.”
A key indicator will be how President Bush treats the visit of the island leaders, and whether issues of importance to the islands are treated seriously in Washington.
The latest moves by two members to seek legal redress, regarding their dismissal from the Great Council of Chiefs(GCC) has invariably opened up another chapter of political loggerheads. On one hand, the affidavit filed by the two members sought to ascertain the authority of the Interim Fijian Affairs Minister, particularly in regards to the Minister's role in suspending the GCC members.
The other questionable premise of their affidavit as seen in the Fiji TV news segment, warned of friction between old and new members which could, according to their rationale, result in altercations between the new and old GCC members. This fictionalized antagonism, as so their reasoning goes could propel their people into violent confrontations with the Fiji military.
It appears that the very legal documents filed by the GCC duo, have suggested to a certain degree, an incitement of insurrection, between the Chieftains and the Military. To warn of impedding violence by proxy, is another perilous application of ethnonationalistic fear mongering.
The exceptional opinion article of an local academic published by the Fiji Times, provides volumes of plausible reasons in determining the calibre of democracy that should be applied to Fiji.
Perpetual "kerekere" will only entrench dependency on aid
Dr SURESH PRASAD Saturday, May 05, 2007
Democracy: Which Model?
There seems to be a rather mystifying euphoria amongst the select few vocal pro-democracy individuals within the NGO circles in Fiji in direct proportion to the very blatant international 'arm twisting' and economic aid 'blackmailing' being applied to the Fiji's Interim Government to hold national elections sooner than later as a recognisable step towards return to democracy.
This is as if the next election would be a panacea and a hasty return of the much touted democracy, a remedy to widespread and entrenched corruption and ineffective racist governance.
These individuals, who incidentally were conspicuously silent during the turmoil caused by the 1987 Rabuka coup and the siege and hostage taking of the entire Chaudhry government in 2000 by Speight, have yet to clearly articulate what brand of democracy is being flaunted this time around.
Are we talking about a full and fair parliamentary democracy of ONE PERSON-ONE VOTE or restoration of the biased and divisive model of democracy that has sprouted corruption and racism to the benefit of a handful of individuals with their own disguised, but quite apparent to a multitude of observers, personal egotistical agenda behind the faade of 'Fijian interest'.
Perhaps those individuals and 'friendly' nations that are shouting the loudest for quick pathway to democracy need to pause and examine what is their understanding of democracy in Fiji given that Qarase and others had labelled it a 'foreign bird' quite some time ago.
Is it the same model that has entrenched racial divides and now is being brought back to further c perpetuate politics of race or perhaps this time around we will have a brand of democracy in which the 'big brother' nations have themselves progressed and thrived over the years.
It is ironical that the very vociferous pro- democracy advocates in Fiji, including the 'purists' within the legal fraternity and those shouting over the fence from our neighbouring nations, have yet not spouted their views on which model of democracy are they contemplating imposing on Fiji.
It is equally ironical, that the same self-styled bastions of democracy, Australia, New Zealand and the United States, while on one hand want quick restoration to this rather 'illusive' democracy but on the other hand have adopted an obstructionist positions, under the guise of 'smart sanctions', to block off the very public service and statutory appointments that will propel Fiji towards 'true' democracy in fullness of time.
What ought to be paramount for Fiji to survive and become self-reliant is to guarantee good governance based on fundamental rule of law and popular sovereignty. Any impetuous and ill-considered return to parliamentary democracy will continue to entrench Fiji as a subservient nation despite our gaining independence almost now four decades ago.
We haven't it seems, learnt from other hasty returns to democracy after the previous coups. The apologists of the 'friendly' nations within the NGOs in Fiji are gearing up once again to appease the 'big brother' nations under the guise of getting aid tap on; not realising that this perpetual 'kere-kere' will forever entrench Fiji into the vicious cycle of foreign aid dependency and thus prevent them from becoming a truly self -sufficient sovereign nation.
An effective democracy sits on the platform of grass-root consultations, if need be through the tried and tested process of national referendum. Should this not be the process that we should subscribe to in order to bring back a meaningful model of democracy in Fiji? The gullible 'foreign' media it seems has fallen into the trap of hypocritical cry for freedom from a handful of NGO employees living the high life on the funds of equally gullible overseas donor governments.
Shouldn't there be a referendum to seek the view of the 'silent majority' who are after all going to be ones who once again will be inflicted with the pains of this rather jaundiced democracy that is being shoved down Fiji's rather sore throat as if this so called to 'return to democracy' will resolve and 'clean' all that Bainimarama and his team have set out to do.
Or is there yet another agenda being played out by our 'big brother nations' with the support of their well-paid 'stooges' within the well-endowed NGO ranks of keeping Fiji racially polarised by bringing back the Qarase brand of democracy.
Is there a hidden agenda to perpetually keep this fledgling nation in a kind of economic subservience to be exploited at whim by our rather 'suddenly' concerned neighbours?
Does this agenda include 'creative' and systematic destabilisation of Fiji to warrant foreign military intervention, perhaps by RAMSI, to bring back semblance of hypocritical civil order and to restore the much 'democracy'the Qarase brand!
A good example of this impetuous return to democracy is the hastily drafted and adopted constitution which elevated the Chiefs from their traditional advisory roles to matters pertaining to native welfare. Instead the Reeves Constitution burdened them with an ill-conceived responsibility of a constitutional role within the modern parliamentary apparatus. With all due respect to the traditional collective wisdom the chiefs might have, it was quite an inappropriate constitutional step to have dragged them in a national legislative role.
Was the constitutional agenda then surreptitiously hijacked by a select few racists with corrupt parallel agendas of their own personal wealth 'creation' or was it done to appease the chiefs and further entrench the politics of race, once again, again suit their own egotistical racist- personal agendas?
There seems to be a symbiotic link between individual wealth creations in Fiji albeit by corrupt means, and politics of race.
We can now only speculate and contemplate on the reasoning's behind the hastiness with Fiji is being forced to embrace the previous model of divisive democracy at the insistence of other nations.
The elevation of unrepresentative and unelected group of chiefs to this national constitutional role is quite unique to Fiji, given that this elitist organisation, the Council of Chiefs, do not represent the other half of Fiji's population comprising significantly of Indo-Fijians and other minority races.
It is debatable whether individually or collectively the chiefs, unrepresentative and unelected as they are, have the capacity to even represent effectively the native interests in the context of internationally accepted democratic practices and protocols.
The chiefs have repeatedly found themselves lacking in an array of modern competencies and capacities to grapple with complex issues emanating out of democratic model of governance that was so hastily thrust upon us.
It is farcical to even consider the notion by the architects of this constitution that a 'wide-ranging, full and fair' consultation took place before its adoption by the parliament. It is quite evident that the unscrupulous and corrupt Qarase government effectively utilised the lack of capacities within the chiefly rank to push its own agenda under the guise of traditional consultative protocols.
This dichotomy between the traditional chiefly role, responsibilities and popular political sovereignty needs to be resolved; possibly through a review of the constitution. I am not suggesting an abrogation of the constitution in its entirety but a meaningful and constructive review. Any constitutional document needs to be regularly reviewed, hence in modern democracies the appointment of various parliamentary review committees as a fairly standard process of updating and making it appropriately relevant to the ever changing needs of an evolving society. The constitutional weaknesses and oversights cannot be allowed to be exploited by charlatans to the detriment of the nation.
The so-called road map to democracy, in its final form must delineate not only existing political constraints to good governance but also provide appropriate remedies for their resolution.
Post-1987 coups have corrupted the rule of law in Fiji and previous ill-considered returns to the same divisive brand of democracy haven't assisted Fiji in moving forward.
Fiji's vulnerability and exposure in this context is akin to a wrecked ship that needs to be refitted for it to sail once again the 'treacherous' sea of democracy; particularly treacherous, if we allow our 'big brother nations' to have an unbridled control of the tiller!
That's the good Commander's dilemma. He's to prove his government's collective mettle in the full glare of rather unhelpful 'big brother' scrutiny and amidst equally unhelpful court challenges seeking an examination of the legality or otherwise of his December 5 takeover and subsequent actions by his government.
I am sure the learned judges adjudicating on these matters will be familiar with this Latin saying by Publilius Syrus: "Honesta turpitude est pro causa bona" meaning for a 'good cause, wrongdoing is virtuous'. It also goes without saying that in attempting to tread a path of justice and fairness one must be able to distinguish between the venial and the venal - between 'ordinary' wrong and 'outsized wrongdoings' And here I am contending that laws have very little, if anything, to do with justice.
Bainimarama has an amply qualified, experienced and committed team of eminent persons in his government. This group has decades of experience in effective political governance. Invariably, with such an august team to assist and support him, the Commander, we hope, will exercise sound, objective and mature judgement in all matters pertaining to restoration of democracy in Fiji.
Dr Suresh Prasad is a career academic, a versatile journalist, a talented broadcaster, an Accredited Mediator, Family Therapist, Trauma Counsellor and a keen Community Worker. He is currently engaged in 'community capacity building and regeneration' projects both in Australia and overseas.
Fiji Sun's Wednesday May 2nd issue published details into the alleged misappropriations conducted by the former CEO of Fiji Sports Council.
Sports council funds abused- Audit report reveals shocking practices By CHEERIEANN WILSON
Abuse of funds, properties and employees were the highlights of the Special Investigation report conducted on the Fiji Sports Council. The 68-page report obtained by the Fiji Sun yesterday called on former FSC chief executive officer Alice Tabete to explain, produce receipts and evidence of financial discrepancies during her term as CEO. Failure to do that, the investigation team from the Ministry of Finance has strongly recommended that the matter be reported to police.
The report revealed that;
Mrs Tabete blatantly disregarded Instruction 20.34 of the FSC finance manual, that a credit card reconciliation from sales dockets and receipts shall be submitted with the monthly bank statements to the manager accounts by the credit card holder for verification and expensing to the appropriate account.
She was using the official ANZ Visa card account number 4999-6400-0006-5316 for purchase of goods and services. It could not be established as to what sort of procurements she made. From January 14, 1999 to February 14, 2005 she failed to produce receipts for the amount of $24,798.21 paid on her behalf.
It was noted that the insurance of Mrs Tabete”s two private vehicles; Toyota Camry registration DV732 and DI747 were paid from the Council funds while she received insurance allowance of $1500per annum.
While she was paid the car allowance of $8000 a year from February 26, 2002 to August 26, 2005, Mrs Tabete continued to use Council vehicle for her private use.
The Council workers confirmed in writing that some used and unused items were taken by them to Bau Island for use at the Chief Executive Officer”s parents house during repair and maintenance work just before the Methodist Church annual conference, last year.
Details of items taken to Bau Island on August 6, 2006; used roofing iron, five toilet cisterns, urinal tank, August 9, 2006; new roofing irons and August 17, 2006; Clothing and posts for decoration.
Vehicle registration EV870 was used in the delivery. A 10,000 litre water tank and a flat pump from FSC were taken and installed at the CEO’s house in Delainavesi. Other work such as plumbing, painting and electrical work were carried out by FSC employees.
In 2006, the employees were used to construct a wooden master bedroom in the garage to accommodate Mrs Tabete’s sick husband. Also, repairing of roof, flooring's, painting, plumbing and electrical works was done at Savai Place. A double gate from FSC was repaired and fitted at Savai Place with a 10,000 litre water tank valued at $2200.
Payment of wages for Fiji Sports Council workers who were working at the Mrs Tabete’s private residence. The inspection of records showed that nine employees were engaged by Mrs Tabete at her private residence at Bau Island, Savai Place and Delainavesi on a number of days and their wages were met from the Council’s account. A total payment of $1563.88 was made to the workers.
Irregularities were noted on the salaries paid to Mrs Tabete. In the year 2006 about 16.6per cent of the chief executive officer’s salary or $9147.10 were being paid as non taxable allowance in an effort to evade tax on personnel emoluments.
Salary- $55,093.00per annum. Fortnightly payable- $2118; Fortnightly paid- $1767.15 x 2= $45,945.90pa; $55,093- $45,945.90 = $9147.10. Audit noted that $9147.10 that should be paid as salary and subject to PAYE tax was instead paid separately as allowance to evade tax.
The breakdown of $9147.10 paid, as allowance are as follows:
monthly allowance payable $1291.67 less monthly allowance paid inclusive of part of the salary of $1652.07= $360.40 multiply by 12 months = $4,324.80 salary component paid as allowance.
January payment of allowance, i.e $6474.32= monthly allowance $1652.07 + $4822.25.
Actual salary component paid as allowance in 2006- $4324.80 + $4822.25= $9147.05.
An [unnamed] woman that answered the phone from Mrs Tabete’s home last night wanted to know the reason for our call. When told that we wanted to get her response on the Council findings, she indicated that first she needed to know whether Mrs Tabete was at home. After several calls were made, we were told that Mrs Tabete was in church. Earlier last month, the Fiji Sun team was turned away from her Delainavesi residence several times, as we tried to get her comments on the issue.
Interim Minister for Youth and Sports Lekh Ram Vayeshnoi said the FSC report is now with the Anti- Corruption Unit. “They will expedite the necessary action to take following the result of the report,” [Vayeshnoi] said.
Head of the Anti- Corruption Unit, Nasir Ali said he was [personally] on leave and could not comment on the matter. Acting Commissioner of the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption, Captain Esala Teleni was not available for comment.
It is interesting to point out that, Fiji Live reports a similar call for accountability, this was referring to questions tabled during the November 30th, 2006 sitting of Fiji Parliament. Also the Auditor Generals 2003 report(PDF), does provide other background information on discrepancies in Government accounts.
This is a micro-excerpt of the OAG report:
Capital Grants The Ministry signed an agreement with the Fiji Sports Council on 22/10/1998 outlining the conditions for the utilisation of Capital grants for the infrastructures and facilities for the South Pacific Games 2003. Provision 4.1 of the agreement7 provides that the State through the Ministry pays an annual grant of an amount not exceeding $2 million per annum over a five (5) year period with effect from 1/1/1998 to 31/12/2003, hence totalling $10 million. A Cabinet Decision [CP (98) 348] approved a further allocation of $1.75 million in 1998 over and above the $10 million. Reasons for the increase in grant were as follows:
There were indications of lobbying during the SPG Facilities Development Committees meetings;
The project was running behind schedule in 2000;
Market prices of materials and contractors changed, prompting a review of the annual grant budget for the five years to $16.8 million.
Total Grant given by the Ministry since 1998 was as follows:
Year
Grant($M)
1998
2.0
1999
-
2000
4.0
2001
3.5
2002
5.2
2003
2.2
Total
16.6
Capital grant of $5,114,500 was given to the Fiji Sports Council in May 2002. The breakdown of the grant was as follows:
Laucala Bay Services
$1,135,879.33
Bidesi Park
10,000.00
Multi Purpose Sports Facilities- Construction Contract Supervisors
330,000.00
Multi Purpose Sports Facilities-Contingency for additional requirements by Fiji Govt)
200,000.00
Multi Purpose Sports Facilities-Costs incurred (Tax Exemption/ Customs Duties)
300,000.00
Covered Training Facility- Indian College
200,000.00
Multi Purpose Courts
1,000,000.00
National Stadium- Portion 2
375,000.00
National Stadium Athletics
150,000.00
Albert Park
50,000.00
Baseball Grounds
400,000.00
National Stadium Car park
666,134.67
Victoria Courts
297,486.00
Total
$5,114,500.00
As at 31/12/02, total Capital grant given by the Ministry for the project amounted to $14.6 million. Total payments made as per acquittals as at 31/12/02 was $12,015,207.46. The percentage of work completed for the project as at 31/12/02 was not sighted during audit. The total cost of the project in 2002 amounted to $6,607,013.79. This constitutes the following:
Total payments for projects included in the 2002 work programme $1,976,780.44
Total payments for existing and post 2002 work programme $4,630,233.35
Failing to amend the relevant provisions, the Ministry has breached the agreement. Accountability and transparency in expending public funds cannot be ruled out since the provision of the annual grants was not amended accordingly.
The Fiji Sports Council has not submitted its accounts to this House. In fact, it has not submitted its accounts to this House since 1992, despite a specific requirement in the Act, requiring the Minister responsible to table the accounts and the Annual Report of Fiji Sports Council[...]
It is no use telling us here that we go to the Police or the agencies, when you are holding all the documents and know what happened to the money. I think it is about time that this matter is honestly dealt with in this House, because a lot of money has gone into the wrong hands and we all know that.
Financial Assistance - 2003 South Pacific Games (Question No. 66/06)
HON. M.P. CHAUDHRY asked the Government, upon notice:
Would the honourable Minister for Finance and National Planning inform the House on the following:-
The total amount of financial assistance given by the Government from the consolidated fund for the hosting of the South Pacific Games (SPG) in Suva in July 2003;
Name the organisations which received the financial assistance and state the amount paid to each of them;
Have the accounts of the SPG been audited and if so, by whom;
Why have the accounts not been tabled in this House some three years after the Games were held, and who is responsible for this inordinate delay; and
Will the Government consider instituting independent investigation into the serious allegations of fraud, corruption and misappropriation in the use of SPG funds made by the former Minister of State for Youth and Sports and widely reported in the news media?
HON. RATU J.Y. KUBUABOLA (Minister for Finance and National Planning).- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I rise to respond to the question as follows:-
The total amount of financial assistance given by Government from the consolidated fund for hosting of the South Pacific Games in 2003 was $21,186,998. The breakdown is as follows:-
Total infrastructure grant - $17,800,000
SPG Organising Committee - $1,405,000
SPG Security - $475,000
SPG Equipment/Preparation
and participation - $1,130,000
VAT component - $376,33
SPG Organising Committee:
Administration - $745,500
Additional provision for games
village capacity building USP - $660,000
Sports Council/Fiji Police Force:
SPG Security - $475,665
FASANOC:
Equipment/Team Fiji Preparation and Participation - $1,130,000
The Government grants have been audited through the normal audit by the Auditor-General. The SPG Organising Committee's accounts were audited by KPMG in 2006, while FASANOC was completed in 2004.
The accounts have been tabled in this House some three years after the games were held. I wish to mention that the SPG Organising Committee is a limited liability company and there is no requirement for them to table their accounts here, although it was tabled in this House in the last sitting.
The reason for the inordinate delay was mainly because this was a total project, starting from December 2001 to August 2005 and the need to ensure that proper acquittals were done by the committee in relation to grants provided by Government. Also, some of the disposal assets were acquired duty free and they did not wish to have the accounts finalised carrying a huge amount of redundant assets, otherwise there would be continuing accounts to be done and provided by the committee, hence the reason for the delay.
No, but if the honourable Members or others in this august House have any information in relation to these allegations, I would strongly urge that this be directed to the relevant agency. Mr. Speaker, Sir, I take this opportunity to thank all those who were involved in the preparation and organisation of the SPG, who worked tirelessly in ensuring that the games were successful. Some of them are in this august House today.
Sir, the securing of the games to be held in Fiji was done in 1997. It was not until 2001 that serious work was carried out to ensure that the 2003 SPG was going to be successful. A lot of work was done behind the scenes, especially in securing sponsorship funds and others. As I said, there are those within this House this morning who did a lot of work and I would like to take this opportunity to thank them for that.
HON. M.P. CHAUDHRY.- Mr. Speaker, Sir, the honourable Minister has not answered part (b) of the question, which is very specific; name the organisations, which received the financial assistance and state the amount paid to each of them. The honourable Minister said that $17.8 million was paid out for infrastructure development.
I want to know who did this money go to, $17.8 million is a lot of money and it cannot be passed aside by saying that it was paid for infrastructure development. I believe this money was given to the Fiji Sports Council. The Fiji Sports Council has not submitted its accounts to this House. In fact, it has not submitted its accounts to this House since 1992, despite a specific requirement in the Act, requiring the Minister responsible to table the accounts and the Annual Report of Fiji Sports Council.
HON. I. LEWENIQILA.- You are lying!
HON. M.P. CHAUDHRY.- You are the liar, you were the Minister. Mr. Speaker, Sir, it is specifically provided for in the Fiji Sports Council Act. The nation knows what has happened.
HON. I. LEWENIQILA.- The nation knows about you.
HON. M.P. CHAUDHRY.- Where has the money gone - the $17.8 million? When a Minister who has been dismissed from his Ministerial portfolio, (simply because he wanted to drag the truth of this issue before the public, got wrapped in the knuckle, while the criminals, the people who had abused this money, had corruptly used it and misappropriated it, are now sitting in this House and talking cheeky.
Mr. Speaker, Sir, it is time that these people are exposed and brought before justice because it is time this side of the House report the matter to the Police. They are not going to get away with it.
HON. T. YOUNG.- Mr. Speaker, Sir, a point of order.
HON. M.P. CHAUDHRY.- I have said what I wanted to say, they can raise any point of order.
HON. T. YOUNG.- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I refer to the question that he is asking. He should be asking a supplementary question and not spilling venom in the morning of your Christmas party.
Secondly, imputing improper motive on the former Minister for Youth and Sports. Sir, I think the honourable Member should retract that statement, accusing the honourable Minister of being a liar. The whole of Fiji and the whole world knows who is a liar in this House.
MR. SPEAKER.- I do understand that the honourable Member for Ba Open (M.P. Chaudhry) was asking about the names of the organisations. I do not know whether the honourable Minister for Finance would like to respond to that or not.
HON. RATU J.Y. KUBUABOLA.- Mr. Speaker, Sir, I do not have the names of the organisations, but I do have the breakdown of how the $17.8 million was used and I will be glad to provide the honourable Member with that. As I mentioned, if there are allegations of fraud or corruption, please direct them to the relevant agencies.
HON. M.P. CHAUDHRY.- I find this most extraordinary because this House is accountable to the people of this country and for the honourable Minister for Finance to say that he does not have the names of the organisations, when the question was specifically asked, why did he not bring the name of the organisation to this House? What is he trying to hide? Who is he trying to protect?
It is no use telling us here that we go to the Police or the agencies, when you are holding all the documents and know what happened to the money. I think it is about time that this matter is honestly dealt with in this House, because a lot of money has gone into the wrong hands and we all know that.
Sir, I thank you and since the honourable Minister said that he will provide information on part (b) of the question later on, I would be very happy to receive that from him.
