A Difference In Ideals-A Discussion on Fiji's Democracy.

Ousted Fiji Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase's opinion article on the proposed National Charter compiled by the National Council To Build a Better Fiji was published in the Fiji Times Tuesday April 8th 2008 issue. The excerpt:

The way forward for Qarase

LAISENIA QARASE
Tuesday, April 08, 2008



Laisenia Qarase believes the interim Government has conveniently forgotten that Fiji has a genuine and legal Peoples Charter

Agreat deal of money, effort and resources are being poured into the work of the National Council for Building a Better Fiji (NCBBF) and drafting of the proposed People's Charter.

At a time when the country is in the middle of a constitutional, political and economic crisis, which is causing great suffering among the people, the interim Government is devoting most of its energy to the NCBBF and the charter.

Everything seems to be secondary while conditions in the country continue to deteriorate. Never mind that the NCBBF and the charter concept are being rejected by large sections of the population and will, therefore, lack popular legitimacy, without wide public approval, the charter is doomed.

The interim Government has conveniently forgotten that Fiji has a genuine and legal People's Charter. It is called the Fiji Government's Strategic Development Plan (SDP) which covers the period from 2007 to 2011.

The plan is still in existence.

The charter proposed by the interim Government is, therefore, redundant and a huge waste of public funds. The NCBBF is duplicating work already carried out for the drafting and implementation of the SDP.

The SDP was the product of a democratically elected government.

It represents the combined vision and ideas of many people and organisations that took part in the extensive consultation and drafting which led to the preparation of the final document.

The process was a true and legitimate exercise in democracy built on a partnership between the community and Government.

The plan was endorsed at a national economic summit at the end of September 2006 and was given approval by Cabinet and Parliament.

It has special significance because it expresses the united views of the SDL Party and the Fiji Labour Party, through the multi-party government formed after the May 2006 election.

It draws extensively on the manifesto of both parties and consensus reached with the Labour party on issues of national importance for the achievement of a vision of a peaceful and prosperous Fiji.

The plan includes policies and goals covering the national spectrum, including national unity and identity, constitutional changes, social, cultural and economic reform and good governance.

Its scope is broad enough to include consideration of important issues such as changes to the electoral system.

" In trying to reinvent the wheel, the interim Government is ignoring what already exists and is creating further division in an already polarised community."

A key governance aim is to improve Fiji's ranking in Transparency International's corruption index perception index. We were focussed on moving Fiji upward from its 55th position among a survey that covered 159 countries.

A report by the Commonwealth business council has classified Fiji as one of the best five performers in 2005 for introducing measures to reduce and eliminate corruption.
The assessment was based on a survey of 32 Commonwealth countries.

Fiji was rated number 4 for the level with New Zealand for having balanced and effective business regulation.

Fiji also did well in ratings for government-business relations, free media, effective government, efficient administration and future outlook.

The SDP would have accelerated Fiji's progress in the crucial areas of national life administration. The emergence after the election of 2006 of co-operative multi-ethnic government and the public goodwill it generated, positioned Fiji for an epoch of positive change.

This would have consolidated and built on the considerable progress we had made in rebuilding Fiji after the crisis of 2000. We started the restoration of damaged relationships and achieved significant economic growth.

The workforce was expanding and wages were increasing.

The SDP, as the joint initiative of the SDL and the Fiji Labour Party in Cabinet is the vehicle to help take us further along the road of development and growth which would narrow the social and economic gaps between our communities.

The SDP stresses that achieving peace and security is a long-term commitment that must be vigorously pursued through building understanding among leaders and communities at all levels. It emphasises the Government's responsibility of achieving prosperity for Fiji's poorest, most disadvantaged and vulnerable citizens.

The strategies in the plan for higher and sustainable economic growth will create additional jobs and increasing income urgently needed to help us lift more people out of poverty.

This growth will produce additional revenue for the Government which could be channelled into development and amenities and services such as roads, water, electricity and health centres.

The plan proposes measures to boost investment.

It recognises that without this, Fiji will not be able to provide enough employment for young people and those who are without work.

The plan includes Fiji's first integrated export strategy directed toward increasing foreign earnings which would sustain growth. It has proposals for lifting efficiency, enhancing ethical values and professional standards and cutting costs in the public service and public sector. This would have raised accountability and transparency at all levels and created a cost-effective investor-friendly and service oriented environment.

The SDP is underpinned by the compact chapter of the Constitution that lays out principles for the conduct of government. These principles rate, among other things to individual community and groups rights, equality, politics, free and fair elections, formation of governments, conflict resolution and affirmative action and social justice for all disadvantaged citizens or groups.

It calls for equitable sharing of political, economic and commercial power to ensure that all communities fully benefit from the nation's economic progress.

In trying to reinvent the wheel, the interim Government is ignoring what already exists and is creating further division in an already polarised community. The best way forward is for a process of political dialogue to take place between the main political parties and the interim Government.

The purpose of this would be to find common ground for the country to return to democracy and parliamentary rule. And there has to be solutions for some of the other problems which must be addressed if we are to secure peace, certainty and stability in this nation of ours and for our future generations.

A rebuttal of Qarase's opinion article was also published in the Fiji Times, Thurs. April 10th 2008 issue. The excerpt:

Charters for the people

LORINE TEVI, DESMOND WHITESIDE and JOLAME LEWANAVANUA
Thursday, April 10, 2008



At the centre of the debate ... the people of this country

The article by the former Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase titled "Fiji Already Has A People's Charter" argues there is no need for another "People's Charter" because his Government had already produced one. Qarase refers to the "Strategic Development Plan 2007-2011" as the so-called "Charter". There are a number of points raised in Qarase's article that we must challenge:

- [Qarase] says "a great deal of money is being poured into the work of the NCBBF and it is being wasted".

Mr Qarase has not given a comparative figure on how much it cost to produce his Governments' Strategic Plan. Was it cheaper? The budget of the NCBBF is $2.4 million which is about 0.16% of the interim Government's 2008 budget, an insignificant amount for a national undertaking. It is said that the General Election that Mr Qarase is demanding to have will cost about $35 million;

- We could spend this much on a general election and it will be a waste if the coup cycle does not end after that election. The NCBBF and the People's Charter wants to ensure there is no repeat of December 2006. It has the support of the RFMF for a new way of government under a People's Charter based on national consensus. What is the SDL alternative beyond the Elections?;

-Qarase's so called "Charter" was merely an outcome of the on-going development planning process of Government.

Fiji governments have produced similar documents every five years since independence. SDL produced one in 2000 and another one in 2006. It is nothing new. It is a document that tends to be narrowly economistic and rather "dry". So our PCCPP will be "wet". Very few people from outside government were involved in its consultation process. Qarase's Strategic Plan did not excite many to read it, it being yet another "development plan". For him to call it a "People's Charter" is a joke;

- Contrary to what Qarase says, the NCBBF is not trying to reinvent the wheel.

The State of the Nation and Economy Report, out of which the People's Charter will be drawn, is a very different process from the production of the Qarase Government's Strategic Plan document. The intensity, depth, quality and the participatory process and the sincerity and commitment of the people involve now is no comparison.

"his government's record was disastrous, with public debt cumulatively rising from $1.44 billion in 2000 to $2.9 billion in 2006. Within a period of six years, the Qarase government doubled public debt. Added to this, is his vote buying promise to pay public servants $300 million in 2007 and his $19 million agriculture assistance scam that helped the SDL win the 2001 Election. The Qarase government was taking Fiji towards bankruptcy, had it not been removed"

For example, the involvement of over two hundred participants representing all sections of the community in the nine Working Groups. Some members of the NCBBF and Working Groups had also been involved in the work on the SDL Government's Strategic Plan. That includes us, and we say that the Qarase Government SDP process was narrow in its consultation base and focus of diagnosis and recommendations. It does not remotely compare with the People's Charter process;

- The public consultation process of the NCBBF and PCCPP is broader, and more democratic than that of the Qarase Government.

Hardly anybody knew about the SDL Strategic Plan whereas the NCBBF's work is well publicised and aims to stimulate real discussion and debate so the people of Fiji can contribute to the SNE Report and the People's Charter formulation. It is very open and anybody can participate by attending consultative meetings, sending the Secretariat written submissions or posting their views on the website.

- The consultation on the SNE Report and the People's Charter involves people in communities at the grass roots level.

It is therefore a "People's Plan" not the "Strategic Plan" of government bureaucrats. Most politicians in the SDL would not have read it, leave alone ordinary people. So what good had the two Strategic Plans of Qarase done for the people of Fiji in the time they were in power?;

- Qarase tried to paint a rosy picture of his period in office (2000 2006).

In terms of public debt alone, his government's record was disastrous, with public debt cumulatively rising from $1.44 billion in 2000 to $2.9 billion in 2006. Within a period of six years, the Qarase government doubled public debt. Added to this, is his vote buying promise to pay public servants $300 million in 2007 and his $19 million agriculture assistance scam that helped the SDL win the 2001 Election. The Qarase government was taking Fiji towards bankruptcy, had it not been removed;

- It is also clear from this SDL Plan that there was no commitment at all to find real solutions to the expiring land leases problem that had got steadily worse under his leadership. These are only a few examples of the disastrous policies of the Qarase government. Many of these policies were ethnically divisive;

- In his article Qarase also claims the SDL Strategic Plan had drawn extensively from the Election manifesto of the SDL and FLP, but there is no evidence of this in the document.

He even claims that electoral reforms could have been embraced by his Strategic Plan and that "national unity and identity, constitutional changes, social cultural reforms and good governance" were in his plan. We have again carefully reviewed the document and have not read anything about these issues in the SDL Strategic Plan. It would appear that Qarase in desperation, is "plagiarising" the key elements of the PCCPP work and its contents now underway;

- Qarase's claim that the People's Charter is being "rejected" by large sections of our community has no substance.

Our outreach teams that have been visiting rural and urban settlements for the last six months have mainly reported receptiveness to the idea of a People's Charter. They say it is a different approach from politicians who visit only at Elections time and are never seen again for five years. It is different because people are being asked for their views. The consultative process of the NCBBF informs and empowers people to contribute to the determination of their own destiny. The People's Charter will capture the hopes and aspirations of all of Fiji's people;

- In his "opinion article" at the end Qarase calls for political dialogue to take place between the political parties as the way forward.

The days of politicians meeting and negotiating behind closed doors on the presumption they represent ordinary people's views and interests are now gone. That is what the SDL used to do in its "Talanoa Sessions" with the Fiji Labour Party and they never came to any agreement that could have been implemented;

- Any dialogue between the interim Government and political parties has to take place within the framework of the NCBBF and the work on the People's Charter.

It cannot take place separately at another level. Qarase and his colleagues must listen to the voices and learn from the people of Fiji, change their ways and follow "the New Way" of the People's Charter by listening to the people. Qarase's underlying message is that he really regrets that during his leadership, he had not thought about tackling the range of our deep seated national problems that are now being addressed by the NCBBF. Even though the NCBBF was initiated by the interim Government, it is being run as an autonomous process and we once again urge Qarase to be part of it.

The invitation of his Excellency the President to Qarase and the SDL Party to join the NCBBF remains open.

Together we can draw up a better national development plan based on real national consensus and serious commitment. We hope Qarase will reconsider and not be left behind as we move steadfastly towards the General Election.

- The writers are members of the NCBBF.

Social Bookmarking

Club Em Designs

Labour Calls for Australian Invasion Inquiry.

THE Fiji Labour Party yesterday called for an independent inquiry to look at whether the Australian Government breached international laws and Fiji's sovereignty in the months leading to the December 5, 2006, takeover by the military.

read more | digg story

Barr's Expose On Equity- A Discussion On Fiji's Democracy

An article written by Kevin Barr was published in the Fiji Sun, and the content is illuminating. Fiji Times also published the article. The excerpt of the article:

A legal-illegal paradigm
Last updated 4/10/2008 9:25:29 AM

In the aftermath of the military coup of December 6th 2006 we have witnessed a lot of wrangling among the legal profession about the legality or illegality of legal decisions and legal appointments. Some good judges have not renewed their contracts while other equally good judges have been willing to take up appointments. There have been divisions within the Law Society and its members.

"The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. "

Some NGOs also have entered the fray and have refused to engage with the interim government on the grounds that it is part of an illegal regime. Others, while accepting that there has been an illegal overthrow of an elected government, have looked beyond legality issues and have focused on the issues of social justice which the interim government aims to address (and which were not adequately addressed under the previous “legal” government).

Is the Law our only guide?
In his recent book Living by Bread Alone (2008:78) Tui Rakuita writes:
“The predominant view of what occurred (in December 2006) is informed largely by the ‘legal paradigm’ resulting in the emergence of a legal/illegal dichotomy from which all other issues are analysed.

This widespread adoption of the legal framework also highlights the legalistic bent that is becoming more and more salient in our reasoning. Perhaps this is because the one-dimensional cognitive thrust offered by the legal community is convenient in a time of great transformation; in the face of uncertainty and flux this paradigm is offering certainty and conviction.”

[Rakuita] then goes on to say:

“However this stance is not without its concomitant costs. Our cognitive frameworks are so completely immersed in this duality that a certain lethargy in conceptual thinking has quietly crept in. This has been exemplified by a certain reluctance to see beyond the legal/illegal impasse. This is not in any way to dismiss the importance of the legal dimension pertaining to validity claims, but rather to point at other issues that do not derive their justificatory premises from the legal framework of understanding.”

He suggests that we need a broader, multi-dimensional approach in our thinking and reasoning.

In my booklet Thinking About Democracy Today (2007:36) I quoted the words of the French Minister for Foreign Affairs who said: “It is sometimes necessary to go outside of the Law in order to achieve justice.”

Of course, these are potentially dangerous words but they contain an important truth - especially where the law has been framed to protect those with wealth and power or those who promote an extreme nationalist agenda.

I also quoted the words of Thomas Jefferson - one of the signatories of the American Declaration of Independence from Britain (which was at the time an illegal, treasonous document):

“A strict observance of the written laws is doubtless one of the high duties of a good citizen, but it is not the highest. The laws of necessity, of self-preservation, of saving our country when in danger, are of higher obligation. To lose our country by a scrupulous adherence to written law, would be to lose the law itself, with life, liberty, property … thus absurdly sacrificing the end to the means.”
Thomas Jefferson Correspondence to John Colvin 1810.

Equity
Derek Roebuck (2003:83ff) in his article "Insights Into Equity" points out that no one has yet found a word or phrase to satisfactorily describe “equity” in English. However it is basically about justice and what is right. He traces its origins to Plato and Aristotle through Cicero and Justinian to the role of the Chancellors in medieval English times.

In his Nichomachean Ethics (5.10) Aristotle states:

[...]the ‘just’ and the ‘equitable’ are both good but the ‘equitable’ is superior. The difficulty arises because the ‘equitable’ is just but not ‘just according to law’.

It is a correction of legal justice. The reason is that every law is general and it is not possible to deal generally with some matters.”
[Aristotle] goes on to state that the law takes into account the majority of situations but is not able to account for every situation. So the legislator must make a decision to correct the law for those particular situations.

Justinian’s Corpus Juris and Digest spoke of the need to supplement or correct civil law and stated that “indeed in all matters, but particularly in law, equity must be observed”.
The prevalence of equity could hardly be more strongly stated than in the Emperor’s own instruction: “It is my wish that the leading principle in all matters shall be justice and equity rather than the strict law”.

In the great British legal tradition (influenced no doubt by Roman law) there grew up a body of law known as equity which originally came into existence in order to mitigate the rigid application of legal rules under the common law system.
Equity developed as a result of the injustices caused by a strict application of the common law and was originally based on popular notions of morality and natural justice.

The famous Earl of Oxford’s case in 1615 determined that, whenever there was conflict between common law and equity, equity would prevail. An important distinction that needs to be noted between law and equity is the source of the rules governing the decisions. In law, decisions are made by reference to legal doctrines or statutes. In contrast, equity, with its emphasis on fairness, natural justice and flexibility has only general rules known as the maxims of equity.

The primacy of equity in England was enshrined in the Judicature Acts of the 1870s. Although the courts of equity and the common law were then brought together into one unified court system and so are implemented by the same courts, the two branches of the law are separate. Where there is conflict, equity still prevails.

Roebuck (2003:93) in his article noted above has this to say about the relevance of
equity for lawyers and judges today:

“Those who try to dispense justice have to face the dilemma which Aristotle elaborated so well. The law tries to ensure consistency. Certainty is a value. But no law can be refined enough to meet all the contingencies that life presents. We are not just clever enough to foresee all possible future events and then put into words the rules we want to govern them. So we give our decision-makers discretion. As long as we recognise this inevitability, we can do our best to be fair. Fairness and certainty are both desirable.”

Then comes a statement which, I think, may be particularly relevant to our current situation in Fiji today:

“Some judges feel more comfortable if they work well within the rules. Some like to create more flexibility for themselves and are so uncomfortable with what they see as an unfair outcome that they cannot rely on the rules to relieve them from unease. For most judges, the nature of the dispute and the prevailing wisdom among their colleagues will influence which way they go.”

He concludes with the statement:

“In any legal system which claims to provide justice - and which does not? -
there must be scope for Aristotle’s equity, that which provides for exceptional and unforeseen problems to be dealt with exceptionally.”

Jesus and the Law
Some interesting anecdotes from the life of Jesus are also very illuminating.
He lived in a society which was dominated by a strict observance of the law and a rigid interpretation of the law. [Jesus] obviously felt very uncomfortable in such an atmosphere where observance of the covenant was interpreted in such legalistic terms and God was seen as demanding such strict observance of laws.
This did not reflect the God who described himself as “kind and merciful, slow to anger, full of compassion and love”.
In John’s gospel (John 8:1-11) we are told that a woman who had been caught in the act of committing adultery was brought to Jesus by the Scribes and Pharisees - the strict religious legalists of the time.
They pointed out that, according to the Law, she must be stoned to death but they asked what he thought should be done. It was a trap of course to catch him out.
What Jesus did is very revealing. He refused to dispute the law or give a legal response but simply suggested that those Scribes and Pharisees who were without sin should cast the first stone.

Then he sat and doodled in the sand waiting to see what would happen. One by one the woman’s accusers went away. When only the woman remained, Jesus, while recognizing she had done serious wrong, told her to go and sin no more.

The point is that Jesus did not deny the illegality of the woman’s action and did not dispute what the Law demanded. But he recognized that there was another very important dimension that was being neglected and that needed to be taken account of.
That was the whole dimension of compassion which should inform any legal decision. Jesus thought that compassion for people was of greater value than seeing that the demands of the law were implemented.

Of course this was not the only instance where Jesus showed that he valued compassion and concern for people over legality. In the story of the Good Samaritan (Luke 10:25-37) the Jewish priest and Levite obeyed the Law and refused to touch the unclean body of the Jewish man who had been bashed up and left to die by the roadside.

They certainly obeyed the Law very strictly but they showed no compassion and concern for someone in need. It was the Samaritan - the religious ‘enemy’ of the Jews - who overlooked legality and undertook to take care of the man. Jesus praised him for his compassion and he has become a symbol of care and concern the world over.

Again, when asked by the Pharisees if it was lawful to cure someone on the Sabbath (Matthew 12:9), Jesus made a common sense observation that, if a sheep fell into a pit on the Sabbath there would be no hesitation in letting someone pull it out, so he saw no problem in curing a person of his sickness on the Sabbath.
Elsewhere he observed that “the Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath”. In other words laws surrounding the Sabbath must be interpreted sensibly and with compassion.

It seems that Jesus often bypassed the legal/illegal paradigm and saw it as unhelpful when there were bigger human issues to be dealt with. As he remarked: “I have come not to destroy the law but to bring it to fulfillment”.
He sees himself as not in opposition to the Law but seeing the law in a wider perspective - the perspective of his Father’s compassion and understanding love.

Conclusion
The current legal/illegal paradigm being pursued in Fiji today seems to be getting us nowhere. It simply creates an endless cycle of negativity and stalemates. While the law is extremely important and legal issues need to be pursued, it is extremely important to recognise that other dimensions also need to be taken into account.
There are considerations above and beyond the legal ones. As Tui Rakuita noted above, there are “other issues that do not derive their justificatory premises from the legal framework of understanding.”
A truly democratic society needs the rule of law but it cannot be built solely on the rule of law. It also demands that the law be balanced by principles of social justice, compassion and common sense. It may not always be helpful to fight for the rigid application of the law.


Bibliography
Barr, Kevin (2007) Thinking About Democracy Today (ECREA. Suva)
Radan, Peter, Cameron Stewart and Andrew Lynch (2005) Equity and Trusts (LexisNexis
Butterworths. Sydney)
Rakuita, Tui (2008) Living By Bread Alone (ECREA. Suva)
Roebuck, Derek (2003) “Ínsights into Equity” in Bond Law Review 15 (2) December

Social Bookmarking

Club Em Designs

Fiji Constitution Lacks Credibility

Fiji's constitution has lost some of its credibility over the past 10 years according to the National Council for Building a Better Fiji consultation (NCBBF) document which is now being distributed to the members of the public.

read more | digg story

Kevin Rudd Salute To Bush- Kissing The Signet Ring?

Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd was caught on tape saluting his US president George Bush on NATO Summit in Bucharest on April 4, an incident later he laughed out and said it was "a joke"! But Rudd's friendly salute has been criticized as a conduct unbecoming of an Australian prime minister by the Opposition Leader Brendan Nelson.

read more | digg story

Seeking a more balanced media view of Fiji

The Fiji news media gets a lot of ticking off these days- there are serious problems in the Fiji media about training/professionalism and credibility and they need to be addressed.

read more | digg story

The Rush to Mine The Pacific Seabed- A Fiji Perspective.

In a follow up to an earlier SiFM post titled "Seabed Mania in the South Pacific-Claims & Counter Claims", it appears that the subject of the post has resurfaced with some recent developments.
Solomon Times (ST)article reports that the South West Pacific region is increasingly attracting a lot of attention, from deep pocketed investors.
The excerpt of ST article:

Gold Reports Attracting Attention to Region


Reports of gold in South Pacific waters are attracting prospectors to the region. Meanwhile, a South Korean company has secured mineral exploration rights in Tonga.

A report by Fiji Broadcasting Corporation Limited states that 'big-time gold prospectors are scouring the seas between Fiji, Tonga and New Zealand after reports of gold deposits in South Pacific waters'.
The report quotes New Zealand's Dominion Post newspaper as reporting that the gold rush has become hi-tech with serious players spending big money.

'At stake in the waters of New Zealand, Tonga and Fiji and around the potentially disputed continental shelf boundaries of the three are high-grade gold, copper, zinc, lead and silver'.

The report identifies one problem which is that no continental shelf boundary line between Fiji, Tonga and New Zealand has been defined, which is a requirement by the United Nations Law of the Sea.

'No treaties have been signed but Tonga has historical claims to the Southern Lau group of islands, now part of Fiji. Several years ago Suva officials suggested that Minerva Reef, 400 kilometres southeast of Nuku'alofa, was Fijian'.

Meanwhile, The Korea Times has reported that South Korea has secured exclusive seabed mineral exploration rights in Tonga.

The report states that 'the Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs said the 20,000 square kilometer area the Tongan government granted an exploratory license for has more than 9 million tons of hydrothermal deposits of copper, zinc and gold'.

'This is enough to supply 300,000 tons of minerals annually over the next 30 years, which will save about $100 million in imports, the ministry said, adding that commercial production was targeted for 2010'.

Apparently, with the scarcity of strategic metals, there is a race to secure natural resources, of which the region seems to have especially with the recent confirmation of valuable minerals on the Tongan seabed.

Nautilus Minerals Inc. had done preliminary studies according to their website. Nautilus now appears to be restricting itself to the region off Papua New Guinea called Solwara 1 Development and has recently awarded a $US116 Million dollar contract to Technip USA Inc. to provide engineering procurement and construction management, according to the Nautilus website.


Stuff Magazine publishes a piece by Micheal Field on the Tonga.

The excerpt of Stuff Magazine article:

Hunting for treasure on the ocean floor
The Dominion Post | Monday, 31 March 2008


TREASURE HUNT: New Zealand geologist Cornel de Ronde (inset) predicted there was gold in South Pacific waters, now serious players like Nautilus are using the University of Hawaii exploration ship Kilo Moana to prospect for deposits.

A hi-tech gold rush is building in the South Pacific and, as Michael Field reports, serious players are spending big money.

New Zealand geologist Cornel de Ronde used to look toward the South Pacific and say: "There's gold in them thar waters." His prophecy went unheeded for about 10 years but now serious players with big money are on the hunt.

At stake, in the waters of New Zealand, Tonga and Fiji and around the potentially disputed continental shelf boundaries of the three, are high-grade gold, copper, zinc, lead and silver.

Nautilus Minerals, which is Australian-dominated but listed on the Toronto Stock Exchange, joined an expedition out of Nuku'alofa last week to check out the potentially lucrative Valu Fa Ridge in the Lau Basin near the Fiji-Tonga boundary.

It is also eyeing prospects further south in the Kermadec back-arc off New Zealand. Rival Neptune Minerals, which is also Australian-controlled but listed on London's secondary market, said last week it was preparing to file a mining licence application in New Zealand.

It is seeking "seafloor massive sulphide" (SMS) deposits on the Rumble II Seamount, 300 kilometres north of East Cape. Dr de Ronde of GNS Science in Wellington notes that these "very serious players" are benefiting, to a large degree, from data that New Zealand scientists have been collecting for about a decade.

The scientists were among the first to discover that deep underwater hydro-thermal vents were creating mineral-rich chimneys in vast fields.

"I said then, I envisaged this being a big gold rush," he told BusinessDay. "It's the last frontier for exploration. The oceans are so largely unexplored."

Neptune, in its half-year results last week, said it had found two new SMS zones at Rumble II. It had begun work on an engineering study on how to get at the minerals and launched "Project Trident", a programme of SMS exploration, this year using survey and sampling ships off New Zealand.

Chief executive Simon McDonald said the company would focus on lodging its first mining licence. "The company still aims to conduct trial mining by 2010."

Neptune says it is now undertaking a baseline environmental impact assessment in the area. It has also lodged three new prospecting applications over a total area of 84,880 square kilometre near the undersea Monowai volcano on the Kermadec Arc and along the Colville Ridge.

Neptune acknowledges it is benefiting from the New Zealand government work, calling it "significant academic research".

"We are very excited about the potential to develop this untapped natural resource," Mr McDonald says in a company publication.

"New Zealand is a great place to be, not only for its mineral prospectivity but also because of the supportive government, which has existing appropriate legislation in place to assist development whilst safeguarding the environment."

Nautilus has become the world leader in undersea mining, exploiting SMS data collected by Australian government scientists in Papua New Guinea waters.

It has spent US$310 million to date developing its Solwara 1 mining project over 186,000 square kilometres in the Bismarck Sea.

It says the data on the Valu Fa Ridge, 100 kilometres west of Nuku'alofa, has revealed "high-grade mineralisation might be present" and it wants to use its "strategic first mover advantage" and go after the minerals.

In Tonga last week 10 Nautilus staff joined the University of Hawaii exploration ship Kilo Moana, which Nautilus has chartered to survey the Valu Fa, 2000 metres below the surface.

Nautilus official Paula Taumoepeau told the Matangi Tonga website that the first phase would involve mapping and surveying the seafloor, environmental monitoring, oceanographic work and water quality studies of the exploration areas.

"If we find minerals in commercial quantity during the exploration or prospecting phase, we intend to apply to the government for a mining licence."

One potential problem lurking between Fiji, Tonga and New Zealand is that no continental shelf boundary line has been defined, as required by the United Nations Law of the Sea. No treaties have been signed but Tonga has historical claims to the Southern Lau group of islands, now part of Fiji.

Several years ago Suva officials suggested that Minerva Reef, 400 kilometres southeast of Nuku'alofa, was Fijian.

In 1971 a group of Americans took barges of sand there, built a small tower and raised the flag of the Republic of Minerva. The man who became Tonga's king, George V, sailed there on a government boat and hauled down the flag, raising the Tongan standard.

At the time the dispute was regarded as an amusing South Seas tale, but scientists, and now miners, know that at stake is part of a vast goldfield.

Islands Business online article announces that [South] Korea has won the exclusive exploration license in Tonga.

The excerpt of I.B article:

Korea wins sea mining rights from Tonga

The ministry will check the size of the deposit and its economic value by 2010 and start mining in earnest from 2012.


Chosun.com/ Pacnews
Thu, 3 Apr 2008

SEOUL, KOREA ---- Korea has secured the rights to dig up US$100 million in raw minerals a year from beneath the waters of the South Pacific.

The Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs said that Korea has won exclusive exploration rights from the South Pacific island nation of Tonga to develop mineral resources in a 20,000-sq.km area within Tonga's exclusive economic sea zone.

The ministry said that the underwater area has mineral deposits of more than nine million tons, and Korea should be able to secure 300,000 tons a year if it starts mining the area in earnest. The minerals include gold, silver, copper and zinc.

The government has spent W6.1 billion (US$1=W975) surveying mineral resources in the underwater area with Tonga via the Korea Ocean Research and Development Institute. In the process, Korea won trust of the Tongan government and was able to obtain the exploration rights, the ministry said.

The ministry will check the size of the deposit and its economic value by 2010 and start mining in earnest from 2012.

The source of the I.B story was from Chosun.com, the excerpt of the article:

Korea Wins Sea Mining Rights from Tonga
Korea has secured the rights to dig up US$100 million in raw minerals a year from beneath the waters of the South Pacific.

The Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs said that Korea has won exclusive exploration rights from the South Pacific island nation of Tonga to develop mineral resources in a 20,000-sq.km area within Tonga's exclusive economic sea zone.

The ministry said that the underwater area has mineral deposits of more than nine million tons, and Korea should be able to secure 300,000 tons a year if it starts mining the area in earnest. The minerals include gold, silver, copper and zinc.

The government has spent W6.1 billion (US$1=W975) surveying mineral resources in the underwater area with Tonga via the Korea Ocean Research and Development Institute. In the process, Korea won trust of the Tongan government and was able to obtain the exploration rights, the ministry said.

The ministry will check the size of the deposit and its economic value by 2010 and start mining in earnest from 2012.

(englishnews@chosun.com )

The news of Korea winning exclusive exploration rights in Tonga has opened up the debate of territorial boundaries between Fiji and Tonga, that revolves around an isolated reef formation known as Minerva. Fiji Government website article quotes from former Foreign Minister, Kaliopate Tavola regarding the negotiations on Minerva. The excerpt:

"In the work related to the completion of the determination of our maritime boundaries, some bilateral discussions are essential, for example with Tonga. We need to negotiate where the relative EEZ boundaries of the two countries will lie. That work in itself will lead, hopefully, to resolving the current dispute on the ownership of the Minerva Reefs in Southern Lau. That will have direct benefits, of course, to the country¹s fisheries resources," he said.

"The bigger fish of course, if you will excuse the pun, is the extent to which we can claim the outer limits of the continental shelves originating within our EEZ. This will open up new economic opportunities in increased fisheries resources, unprecedented mining potential of new minerals and natural gases, etc.

Mr Tavola said this will require both bilateral and even sub-regional discussions, especially as regards the area of the Lau Ridges in the waters of Southern Lau.

"For this area in particular, discussions will have to take place with Tonga and New Zealand due to our overlapping and competing claims. These discussions will have to take place initially, and be well advanced, before we can submit our claims for the outer limits of our continental shelves to the International Seabed Authority, established under the UN Convention on the Laws of the Seas," Mr Tavola said.

According to a Wiki for Republic of Minerva, Fiji had launched an official complaint to the International Seabed Authority based in Kingston, Jamaica. The International Seabed Authority's council composition from 2005-2010 is tabulated here. A briefing published by International Boundaries Research Unit titled "Undelimited Maritime Boundaries In Pacific Ocean Excluding Asian Rim" covers some legal maneuvering behind Tonga-Fiji dispute over Minerva.












Social Bookmarking

Club Em Designs

Hemispheric Hypocrisy -An Australian Ideal?

Australian Foreign Minister Stephen Smith rejects the contents of the recent released report by Fiji Human Rights Commission (FHRC) calling them "spurious suggestions". Undoubtedly, the Foreign Minister's reactions were simply obfuscated denials of the gross breach of International Law.
The rejections of Fiji Human Rights Commission(FHRC) released report, is obviously predictable belligerence from the MP representing Perth, Western Australia and also as a matter of curiosity, the Australia SAS is based in Campbell Barracks, Swanbourne, Perth according to Wikipedia.

Fiji Sun article excerpt:

Keep word, State told
Last updated 4/3/2008 8:28:40 AM
The report by the Fiji Human Rights Commission is another attempt to get the interim regime to avoid its commitment for a general election next year, says Australia’s Foreign Affairs minister Stephen Smith.
Speaking to the Fiji Sun yesterday, Mr Smith rejected the allegations made against Australian forces in the report saying it was another potential distraction from holding elections in 2009.

“This is just another device, another potential distraction to put the interim Fiji government, the military government, in the position of sliding out a faithful undertaking that it gave to Pacific nation states at the Pacific Island Forum in Tonga in 2007 that they would have an election by the end of March, next year,” he said.

Mr Smith said the interim regime needed to meet and fulfill its commitment to the Forum that a general election would be held as promised in early 2009.
“The best thing that can happen in Fiji is not spurious suggestions about Australian activity, but having an election, returning Fiji to democracy, respecting human rights and democracy and allowing a potentially very prosperous nation to get on with the job of providing for its citizens,” he said. Mr Smith said the allegations made were not new.

“We’ve seen these spurious allegations before from, effectively the interim regime which took power through military force, not through democratic means. They have been rejected in the past. We reject them again.”

He said the Australian military had previously pointed out that Australian military were effectively on stand-by in Fiji prior to the December, 2006 coup so as to ensure the safety and welfare of Australian nationals should it have become necessary.

Fiji Human Rights Commission director Dr Shaista Shameem said it was prompted to investigate Australia’s breach of international laws after the media’s failure to conduct an investigation into the matter. She pointed out the FHRC was an independent body that could publish investigation reports at any time.

“There is no mention of the takeover in the report, merely an Australian intervention in a sovereign nation before the Biketawa meeting took place.” She denied any military involvement in the compilation and preparation of the report pointing out that most of the information was from media reports in Australia, the region and Fiji.

Fiji Live(FL) article also covers the story.

The excerpt of FL article:

Australia rejects Fiji accusations
03 APR 2008
Australian Foreign Minister Stephen Smith says fresh accusations from Fiji about Australia are just an attempt to distract attention from the military Government, keeping democracy on hold.

His comment follows a report by the Fiji Human Rights Commission alleging that Australia had breached international law through its military activities before the December 5, 2006 coup.

According to the report, the Fiji military claimed at the time that Australia secretly sent SAS soldiers and weapons to Fiji and its navy ships entered Fiji waters in preparation for a potential intervention.

“We've seen these spurious allegations before,” Smith told ABC Radio yesterday.

“They've been rejected in the past, we reject them again.

“The Australian military were effectively on standby so as to ensure the safety and welfare of Australian nationals should that have become necessary,” Smith clarified.

He said the interim Government was using such methods to divert attention from its failure to prepare Fiji for elections next year as promised.

“This is just another device, another potential distraction to put the interim Fiji Government, the military Government, in the position of sliding out of a faithful undertaking that it gave to Pacific nation states.

“The best thing that can happen in Fiji is not spurious suggestions about Australian activity but having an election, returning Fiji to democracy, respecting human rights and democracy and allowing a potentially very prosperous nation to get on with the job of providing for its citizens,” Smith said.

Fijilive

Radio Fiji article also covers the denial by Australian Foreign Minister, Stephen

Allegations against Australia distraction
Thursday, April 03, 2008

Australia Foreign Minister Stephen Smith.
Australia Foreign Minister Stephen Smith says fresh accusations from Fiji about Australia are another attempt to distract attention from the Military Government here keeping democracy on hold.

Smith’s comment follows the Human Rights Commission report, which alleges Australia breached international law through its military activities ahead of the coups in 2006.

The report repeats claims by the Military at the time that Australia secretly sent SAS soldiers and weapons to Fiji and its navy ships entered Fiji waters in preparation for a potential intervention.

However, Smith told ABC Radio the allegations, which have been made before have been rejected.

Smith says the Australian military was on standby to ensure the safety and welfare of Australian nationals should that have become necessary.

He says the Military Government has used such methods to divert attention from its failure to prepare for elections next year as promised.

Smith says the best thing that can happen in Fiji is not spurious suggestions about Australian activity but having an election, returning Fiji to democracy and respecting human rights and democracy.

ABC article covers the initial story.

The transcript of ABC interview with FHRC Chair. Podcast of Pacific Beat.

Australia has been accused of helping spark the December 2006 coup in Fiji by sending military forces to the country. The allegation is made in a report by Fiji's Human Rights Commission. The report looks at events which led up to the December 5th coup, focusing on Australia's deployment of ships to nearby waters and an alleged contingent of Special Air Service soldiers who flew in on a commercial flight.

The Australian Defence Force confirmed at the time that Defence Supplementation staff were sent to assist the High Commission in Suva with communications, as part of what was described as routine precautionary measures. Commission chair, Doctor Shaista Shameem, says the presence of the SAS troops was detected by the Fiji Military Forces, whose commander, Commodore Frank Bainimarama, was at the time threatening to take over the government from the elected prime minister, Laisenia Qarase.

Presenter: Bruce Hill
Speaker: Doctor Shaista Shameem, Chair Fiji Human Rights Commission

SHAMEEM: The mixed messages that were being reported in the press in Brisbane I think it was, but also in Canberra, prior to the vessels being sent out.; In fact, I think Kevin Rudd was the first person who introduced the idea of invoking or activating as he called it, the Biketawa agreement, and he kept saying let's get on with it, let's get on with it. He said that phrase twice in two different interviews. And it was the same evening that one of the ships, I think it was the Newcastle, actually left for Fiji waters and it was joined later on by the Kanimbla and the Success. So there are a lot of things being said which were quite different from the official position that the Australian Government was maintaining throughout, that it was in relation to the evacuation of Australian nationals. But that was in relation just to the sending of the ships.

The other problem was the presence of the SAS forces in Fiji that had arrived quite clandestinely and not having gone through customs procedures and so on and of course the RFMF new about them a little while later, because they were with the police tactical response team.

HILL: How were the SAS soldiers detected? Do you know how many of them there were and what their mission was?

SHAMEEM: Well, the official report is that they denied, the Australians have denied the SAS forces were there, but there were, our Army here obviously has its own intelligence sources. So they found them out and then the Australian defence advisory and the Australian High Commission here denied the presence of those forces and so the RFMF commander said that he would treat them as mercenaries. And it was at that point that the chief of defence in Australia rang him up and said no, they are SAS forces, they're mine and they then withdrew to the Australian embassy.

HILL: What were the SAS soldiers from Australia doing in Fiji?

SHAMEEM: No idea, you need to ask the Australians that. But what we do know is that they had bought with them more than 400 kilograms of something in big, sealed boxes, in silver boxes and which Downer said was communication equipment, but the RFMF said were weapons and ammunition.

HILL: Now the official story from Canberra was that ships were sent and they were outside Fiji waters in case there needed to be an emergency evacuation of Australian citizens. Is that what the report says? That they stayed outside Fiji waters?

SHAMEEM: Yes, that's what they said officially, because they were outside, they were going to stay outside Fiji territory. I think there was a lot of insistence on that point. But in fact when the civilian aircraft were sent to find them, they were found within Fiji waters.

HILL: How far inside Fiji waters?

SHAMEEM: Eh, off one of the islands actually.

HILL: Which one?

SHAMEEM: Vatulele.

HILL: Do you think that Australia was actually seriously planning to invade Fiji with some SAS troops and some ships?

SHAMEEM: Look, I think the evidence is all there and people can put a different light on that. What we're really looking at is the inconsistencies and the statements and exactly the fact situation. So if it was consistent with evacuation, we would have said yes, it looked like they were evacuating. But right from the beginning, in fact from November 3rd, there were a whole lot of inconsistent statements that were given by the Australian forces, politicians, Downer, Brendan Nelson, I think his name is, Mark Vaile, presumably was the acting prime minister at the time I think.

HILL: If this plan which your suggesting the Australians had to somehow intervene militarily in Fiji had gone ahead, what would the consequences of that have been do you think?

SHAMEEM: Well, I think, are we talking about a kind of an Iraq type situation, would we have been like Iraq in the Pacific or would it have been something a little bit low key? I mean really the horror of it is just unimaginable. So first of all of course the Australians would probably tell you that they had no intention of doing etc. etc. etc. but that's not the impression that everyone got, including the RFMF. But that's not the interesting question. Of course the interesting question is if the Australians had not been there, and if this had not been a threat as the RFMF thought, would December 5th happened anyway? Well how did it instigate? What happened on December the 5th, that is really the important question I think.

Fiji TV article.
Sydney Morning Herald article.
Australia Network news article.
Australian news article on Smith's denial.

Smith's furious rejections simply sends a message to other nations that, Australia does not respect the UN Charter and will single out and lecture others of human rights, democracy when they themselves, aside from the U.S, are colossal violators. Case in point the documented reports of Australian violations of Human Rights.

The only deflection of attention is definitely on Australia's part. Despite the newly elected Government led by Kevin Rudd, Australia's foreign policy may resume the trajectory set by John Howard's Government, which according to the Australian Review of Public Affairs(ARPA) article, Howard's Government had shown little interest in the U.N. However, the current Australian P.M Kevin Rudd has indicated the intention of seeking a seat in the U.N Security Council in 2013, according to VOA news article and that bid is probably Australia's way entering the big boys league, after languishing at the Kid's table for years.
A column in the Australian, suggests Rudd's honeymoon is coming to an end. Rudd is currently making the rounds in Washington as covered by Wall Street Journal, in reality, Rudd's Washington stop over was a signet ring kissing ceremony.




Social Bookmarking

Club Em Designs

Aust military presence in Fiji Pre-2006 Coup Raises Concerns

An investigation report by the Fiji Human Rights Commission(FHRC) has raised some very serious concerns about the presence of the Australian SAS forces, warships and Black Hawks in Fiji in 2006.

read more | digg story

The actual report (PDF).

FHRC report

An excerpt of Fiji Sun's coverage of the report release:

FHRC report questions presence of foreign forces
Last updated 4/2/2008 8:53:41 AM

The presence of Australian forces, warships and black hawk helicopters in Fiji in the lead up to the December 2006 coup have been questioned by the Fiji Human Rights Commission.

The Special Investigations Report released by the FHRC yesterday recorded the chronology of events from October 30 to December 5, 2006 mainly highlighting Australia’s presence in Fiji in the lead up to the coup.

Australia’s high commissioner to Fiji, James Batley yesterday had no comment to make on the matter. Questioned in the report was the presence of the Australian Task Force 636 in Fiji between November-December 2006.

The explanation post-Black Hawk-crash that warships were preparing to evacuate Australian nationals was deemed inconsistent with statements made pre-crash and eye-witness accounts. Further, the statements of the Defence Force Command, Alexander Downer, Brendon Nelson and others were said to be ambiguous and downright contradictory.

The report stated no satisfactory explanation was provided for the presence of Australian SAS forces in Fiji from November 3 and there was also no record of when and how they left Fiji. Also criticised were the recent comments by Australian Foreign Minister Stephen Smith when he said Fiji’s bad behaviour would not be rewarded and should be taken seriously.

“This type of comment from Australia’s Foreign Affairs Minister will certainly raise eyebrows given this special investigations report,” the report noted.

Relevant international laws the FHRC believed were breached with the presence of Australian troops in Fiji were cited from articles of the United Nations Charter, the UN Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Cooperation Among States and the UN Declaration of the Non-Use of Force. The need for an independent assessment of whether the Australian Government complied with its international obligations towards Fiji pursuant to the UN Charter was emphasised, given the chronology of events.

“Furthermore there needs to be an assessment of whether any of the provisions of the Biketawa Declaration would have been available at all to Australia as opposition spokesman Kevin Rudd claimed on November 2.”

The report stated the Biketawa Declaration may have been misapplied by Australia to intervene unilaterally in a sovereign Pacific State.

“In any event the substantive provisions of the Biketawa Declaration should be read consistently with its preamble that Forum Leaders would respect the principle of non-interference in the domestic affairs of another member state. This perspective accords with the UN Charter.”

Another question raised was whether western powers intervention and involvement in Fiji’s affairs in 2006 complied with international law was a relevant question.

The report recommended that any inquiry into the Australian presence in Fiji should take into consideration the SAS forces arrival in Fiji that was initially denied by Australia but later confirmed they were SAS forces after being warned by the military they would be treated as mercenaries.

Also recommended for consideration were statements by the Australian Defence that warships were sent to evacuate Australian nationals in the event of a coup.
“But two of the ships depart Fiji waters on November 30, five days before takeover, presumably leaving Australian nationals in Fiji to fend for themselves on December 5.”

The report concluded there was need for meaningful discussions in forthcoming Pacific Island Forum meetings about the obligations of sovereign states to each other and the right and duties of members of the sub-regional body under international law pursuant to the UN Charter and the relevant declarations mentioned in the report.

Fiji Times article covers the release of FHRC report.

The excerpt of FT article:

Human rights report lays blame on Aust

Wednesday, April 02, 2008

THE Fiji Human Rights Commission has released a special investigative report on how Australia intervened in Fiji's situation from October to December 2006 that eventually led to the military coup.

The 13-page report states that former Police Commissioner Andrew Hughes confiscated a consignment of ammunition meant for the Fiji army on October 30.

It also stated that Army Commander Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama got a call from Australia's Air Chief Marshall, Angus Houston, in Sinai threatening and warning him not to do anything that would make him "pit his soldiers against Fijian troops".

The report stated that Commodore Bainimarama said this call was a threat that involved clear intention to send Australian forces to Fiji. "He said in military terms when you threaten someone it involves capability and intention so there was intention to move troops to Fiji," the report said.

This incident happened on October 31.

The report also said on November 6, the Australian Department of Defence admitted sending an "unspecified number of staff' to the Australian High Commission in Suva".

The report stated that on November 28, the former Australian High Commissioner, Jeniffer Rawson, United Kingdom's High Commissioner and the US Ambassador visited high ranking army officers at Queen Elizabeth barracks to request officers to withdraw their support for Commodore Bainimarama.

On November, 29, the report stated that Canberra was taking aggressive steps to protect its interests in Fiji and the region.

"The Elite Australian troops had their leave cancelled and a Sydney- based commando task group was placed on standby," the report said.

The Commission said they collated this information last year from independent eyewitness accounts and media reports from the region.

Ousted Prime Minister, Laisenia Qarase said he would comment after he reads a copy of this report.

Questions sent to interim Attorney-General and National Federation Party president, Pramod Rae were yet to be answered.

Note on the excerpt of the Fiji Times article, there is no reference to International Law nor the breaches of it. FT article describes the scenario of SAS troopers deplaning at Nadi Airport with unchecked cargo and outlines as well as condensing or minimizing the event into 3 lines:

"The report also said on November 6, the Australian Department of Defence admitted sending an "unspecified number of staff' to the Australian High Commission in Suva".

FT article does not even frame the context of the Australian Department of Defence statements and or even mention exactly who were these staff members or the controversy behind their arrival.


SiFM earlier posting titled "Off Fiji Or In Fiji" raised the issue of media coverage of the event. Another post titled:"Location, Location, Location." examines the precise location of the crash and International Law.















With the advent of Youtube, the actual footage of the Black Hawk crash, underwater wreckage, the subsequent board of inquiry is available, posted below.

Video #1-Source: New Zealand TV3.



Video #2-Source: Australian Broadcast Corporation.

Winston Defames Fiji?

What Winston seems unable to get his head around is the fact that Fiji is not 'just like New Zealand' when he comments disparagingly about The Commodore's 'People's Charter' which in itself is the key to positive political change in Fiji.

read more | digg story

Perhaps a look into Winston Peters and the sources of his campaign finances, as outlined in this video (posted below)unravels the integrity of the New Zealand Foreign Minister.