By JIOJI KOTOBALAVU
Saturday, February 28, 2009
www.fijitimes.com
Fiji Television One's news report (on February 17, 2009), showing an intensely irate Police Commissioner Esala Teleni threatening at a meeting with senior Indian police officers to dismiss anyone who was disloyal and insubordinate, has, not surprisingly, generated much heat and vituperative comment.
For the public, it is perfectly understandable for some people to react with outrage to what they felt was the Commissioner's unmerited and unnecessary use of rude and abusive language and his insensitivity to the feelings and rights of police officers who are non-Christians, following his introduction into the Police Force of a regular Christian crusade program.
On the other hand, in fairness to Commissioner Teleni, anyone in his position would most probably have reacted in the same way that he did in being very angry at those who he felt had deliberately and willfully ignored and disregarded established internal complaints and grievances procedures. And this is especially in an organisation which is a disciplined force, where all ranks are bound by a duty to be loyal, faithful and obedient at all times, and in all circumstances.
But then one also has to appreciate the position of those police officers who must have felt compelled to take their concerns to the public media out of sheer frustration at not being given a fair opportunity to be heard or to be treated with respect and equality on their constitutional right to worship the god of their own free choice.
There is a lesson here for the Commissioner of Police and indeed to all those who are in public sector leadership.
It would clearly be an abnegation of one's public duty and responsibility to ignore and not to honour the rights and freedoms of all individuals, communities and groups in society. These are provided for, and protected, under Fiji's highest law, the Constitution.
Section 21 binds all branches of Government and all persons performing the functions of any public office to observe and not to violate the human rights and freedoms enshrined in the Constitution. These include the right to freedom of conscience, religion and belief.
So, rather than continue to berate and castigate Police Commissioner Teleni for what he reportedly said at his meeting with senior Indian police officers, a more useful and more positive engagement would be to reflect on the incident as an opportunity to talk about the kind of leadership and organisational culture that would be most appropriate for the Police Force and other state agencies and public organisations in this era of human rights and given the multi-ethnic and-multi cultural character of our society.
The starting point would be to recognise that of all positions of public administration, the Commissioner of Police's is the most powerful, and his authority comes directly from the Constitution.
Under it (section 153), the Commissioner has full powers to appoint all police officers of the rank of senior inspector or its equivalent, and every other position below that.
The Commissioner can remove any person from the Force or to reduce an officer's rank. In this, he is subject only to the concurrence of the Disciplined Services Commission.
Section 111 vests command of the Force in the Commissioner of Police with full and exclusive authority on matters relating to the Force's organisation and administration, and the deployment and control of its operations.
A Permanent Secretary of a Government Ministry in the Civil Service is subject to the Minister for the management of the Ministry.
The Commander of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces, in his exercise of military executive command of the RFMF, is subject to the control of the Minister.
But the Commissioner of Police is different. In discharging his command responsibilities, he is not subject to any other person or authority.
There is a further point. The Police Force, like the Army and the Prison Service, is a disciplined force, and this is reflected in its organisational and leadership structure and culture. This makes it different from the typical Civil Service ministry or department or statutory body.
As an organisation, the Police Force is one large mass of individuals who are differentiated only by their ranks in the hierarchy. The command structure is hierarchical and authoritarian. In a Cabinet under parliamentary democracy, the Prime Minister is considered a first among equals and decisions are taken collectively by consensus. In a disciplined force like the Police, the top person is the sole authority to make decisions. Decisions and directives are orders to be obeyed without question. This top down command and communication structure is to foster loyalty and obedience, which are considered essential for the unity and stability of the organisation. This then is the organisational and leadership context into which Commissioner Teleni introduced his Christian crusade program.
With the ongoing emphasis in public management on raising performance and consequential outputs, Commissioner Teleni must have acted with the altruistic intention of using the crusade to galvanise everyone in the Force with a redoubled sense of mission and commitment. But in doing this, he has unconsciously and unwittingly introduced a new paradigm or dimension into the traditional culture of the Force as a disciplined entity.
Prior to this, everyone in the Police Force related to one another only by rank and by one's assigned duties and responsibilities.
However, with the introduction of the Christian crusade, non-Christians have invariably felt that they are being treated separately on the basis of their different religious belief.
Perhaps, the Commissioner is at fault here in not fully and clearly explaining the purpose of the Christian crusade and the plans he has for non-Christians in the Force.
But clearly, what seems to have happened is that what was introduced with the good intention of lifting performance levels and outputs in the Force has turned out to be a source of confusion and disaffection amongst those who belong to other faiths.
There is now a disconnection between the Commissioner and non-Christian police officers on his intentions regarding the future direction of the Force.
These officers are naturally concerned about their long term future in the Force.
The Commissioner of Police cannot continue to deny the constitutional right of freedom of worship of non-Christian members of the Force. To do so, would be to violate their rights and to breach his own binding responsibility under the Constitution. It would be worth his while to ponder the wider implications of the enormous responsibility he carries as the Commissioner of Police. Even Spiderman Peter Parker was gently reminded by his loving Uncle Ben that with great power comes great responsibility.
The Commissioner has, therefore, created for himself a challenge. He has to make critical choices about his leadership and direction of the Force.
If he is to maintain the traditional authoritarian leadership and organisational command structure as a disciplined entity, then clearly the observance and pursuit of one's religious faith and belief would have to be regarded as exclusively a private and personal matter for each individual. The Force has to strictly remain a secular institution.
If, on the other hand, Commissioner Teleni sees definite merit in continuing with the Christian crusade program, then he must also allow for similar spiritual reinforcement programs for those who belong to other faiths.
It also means that he himself would have to consciously review his leadership approach in the Force.
The traditional authoritarian culture may now no longer be the most conducive to generate and maintain the loyalty and commitment of all officers. He may have to consciously think of moving towards the kind of transformational and appreciative type of leadership considered to be the most appropriate in Civil Service organisations.
It is the kind of leadership that motivates people by providing a clear sense of mission and common purpose for the organisation, by recognising and respecting their rights, by treating everyone justly and fairly, and by bringing everyone together through an abiding compassion and concern for all. It induces loyalty that is enduring and never ends because people follow out of love for their leader.
In contrast, authoritarian leadership which has been the norm in a disciplined force operates on the general premise that the rank and file members have voluntarily forgone their individual rights to allow an absolute authority to maintain order and stability.
It is leadership that induces a following out of fear. In an organisation where the power to appoint, to promote, and to dismiss those in the rank and file is vested in one person, people obey orders not out of love but out of fear for the security of their own employment. Loyalty out of enforced obedience and fear never lasts.
From across where I live at Samabula, there is a high school where Hindu prayers are audibly recited every morning, reflecting the religious faith of the community organisation that owns the school.
The majority of the students are ethnic Fijians. But there is nothing legally and ethically wrong with this daily religious practice because it is a privately owned institution and the students come to this school out of their own individual volition. Privately owned schools that belong to Christian churches and the Muslim community, I am sure, also do the same. The Police Force and other State agencies, government organisations and statutory authorities are different.
They are public bodies. As such, they are bound by law to observe and to honour the constitutional rights of every individual, community and group. Every person is entitled to be treated with fair and equal consideration. It is thus incumbent on the Commissioner of Police to re-think his vision and strategy for the Force and his own style of leadership.
As a devout Christian, Commissioner Teleni himself knows that the best leader is one who leads not by imposition but by a deep conviction always to do what is just, always to show constant love, and in all this, always to be guided by a humbling consciousness that we are each accountable to the God we believe in, and that there will come a day of Judgement for everyone.
* The views expressed here are exclusively those of the author and are published by this newspaper on that sole understanding.
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Warped logic
www.fijitimes.com - By KAMAL IYER
Saturday, February 28, 2009
On Thursday Fiji was treated to a lecture about religion and principles by a former Fiji citizen now living a few thousand miles away from the motherland he left permanently - mostly for the very reason(s) since the start of the coup culture in May 1987 - that he tried to defend as being tolerable in Voreqe Bainimarama's banana republic after the fourth coup on December 5, 2006.
He was trying to tell Fiji Islanders that racial bigotry and racial intolerance are perfectly legitimate when practised by Bainimarama's regime because the coup leader's vision is to eradicate racism and discrimination against Indians - the unholy traits he accused the deposed government and other leaders of preaching and practising.
Now perched in Auckland, New Zealand, Thakur Ranjit Singh defended Police Commissioner Esala Teleni's racial bigotry through his column Racism and Religion published in the Fiji Times.
Mr Singh, whose credentials state he is an Auckland-based journalist and political commentator, lamented the fact that it took Mr Teleni so long to do what has not happened in the civil service.
Therefore, Mr Singh basically believes Mr Teleni did not belittle or humiliate Indian police officers and the entire Indian community when he called them liumuri, lamu-lamu and lamu-s..a. According to him it was "verbal whipping and privileged and confidential communication between a superior and his subordinates".
Mr Singh went on to berate the media and particularly Fiji Television and accused it of eaves-dropping.
He seems to have forgotten his journalistic ethics and the fact that as a former publisher of Fiji Daily Post he too was privy to exclusive news stories that were explosive.
They were factual stories never intended for dissemination to the public, but in keeping true to his profession as an impartial journalist, he allowed publication of such stories written either by reporters of his newsroom, or columnists like England based Victor Lal who now writes for The Fiji Sun or through weekly Sunday opinions under the title of Aage Peeche - written by Thakur Ranjit Singh himself.
As a former administrative officer of the National Federation Party I can vividly remember Mr Singh coming to the NFP headquarters in Tamavua some time in April 2001 requesting the then NFP general secretary Attar Singh for a tape recording of Jai Ram Reddy's radio programs and copies of his speeches during the 1999 general election campaign to be used for his weekly column.
Mr Singh also ignores the fact that pictures tell a thousand words.
Has he forgotten a Fiji TV Close-Up program where television footage of a march on May 19, 2000 was shown to prove his allegation that his fellow guest on the show SDL MP Simione Kaitani was participating in it?
Or does Mr Singh believe that exposing Mr Kaitani's participation in a racially-oriented march is blasphemous but Mr Teleni's racial diatribe and inflammatory insult against Indians is like music to his ears and should have won the Oscar Award for best music instead of A.R Rahman's scintillating and electrifying score for Slumdog Millionaire?
The rest of Mr Singh's convoluted theory made no sense.
Mr Singh lectured Indian police officers to show loyalty to their superiors saying "loyalty to their employer or maalik has been the heritage passed down the generations by our girmitiya forefathers who delivered for most ungrateful employers to make Fiji a great nation".
This lecture is equally as insulting as Mr Teleni's racist venom.
In a message posted on Indian Newslink to mark the 126th anniversary of the arrival of Indians in Fiji (http://www.indianewslink.co.nz>) Mr Singh while also commenting on the Rajendra Prasad-authored Tears in Paradise book, stated that the atrocities committed against the girmitiyas in Fiji by the colonial masters "was not accidental but criminal acts by the British and Australians".
He accused the British of "abrogating their responsibility of caring for Indians, thus leaving a community wounded, aggrieved and alienated".
If Mr Singh, four years ago, was incensed that our forefathers were not recognised for their contribution to build Fiji into a great nation, why does he now demand Indian police officers be loyal to their maalik (Teleni) despite being wounded, aggrieved and alienated by the Police Commissioner and Bainimarama's regime?
After all what else can he lecture Indians about except ordering them in the name of Hinduism to be loyal and tolerate racial insult?
Not surprising from a man who told the nation through Fiji Television's Close-Up program that human rights violations (which must include beating, torture, detention and the three deaths of Fiji citizens at the hands of soldiers and police) were part of an evolving democracy.
* The views expressed here are exclusively those of the author and are published by this newspaper on that sole understanding.
Racism and religion
By THAKUR RANJIT SINGH
Thursday, February 26, 2009
+ Enlarge this image
In the spotlight ... Commissioner Esala Teleni.
FIJI Police Commissioner Esala Teleni's dressing down of subordinate officers has caused a sensation in the Fiji media. The flowing of metaphorical crocodile tears in defence of the human rights of Indo-Fijians from opportunists, NGOs, politicians, community leaders, blog writers, media commentators and media organisations could fill and overflow the Suva Olympic Pool.
What a load of hypocrisy and what a bunch of aage picche and liu muri hypocrites. They are now jostling and competing to defend Indo-Fijians and their religious freedom which they ignored all this while.
My issue is not what Teleni did but why he took so long in doing it. If all heads in Fiji's civil service took out non-performing and disloyal civil servants and verbally whipped them into reality and performance then Fiji would have more responsive and better-performing civil servants and hence, be a better place. Those who have dealt with them know the nightmares of getting things done because of malua fever and the slackness inculcated by a very protective and blinkered trade union movement.
The frenzy created by the Fiji media was like sharks feeding on juicy blood oozing from the thighs of Yaqara bulls. The main culprit for this was the Fiji media in general and Fiji TV in particular. What has been eaves-dropped and reported on is one thing, but how it has been distorted, sensationalised and misinterpreted is another.
What Teleni said to his subordinates was in normal terms privileged and confidential communication between a superior and his subordinates.
Would Fiji TV dare to eavesdrop, record and publicise morning meetings and communication by its news editor and staff who are dressed down or given feedback for non-performance? Can they catch similar editorial dressing downs at the Daily Post, Fiji Times and Fiji Sun? During my days in the media, I have seen editors who have been ruthless and demanding and heard references such as "s..a levu" and worse ones directed at non-performing and lethargic reporters who miss deadlines and fail to deliver.
Remarkably, they tended to get desired results. Would they ever care to record how the National Farmers Union and Fiji Labour Party leader dresses down slack farmers' leaders and MPs in his caucus meetings? Has anybody heard again of FLP dissenters and those who failed to tow the line? Have they ever recorded how local business bosses abuse their workers in the name of feedback? Have they ever recorded the rich and mighty abusing their house-girls and gardeners?
If they had done that then what Teleni said to his non-performing and disloyal officers was like a Sunday school sermon.
I do not know where the case of religious persecution, forced conversion and racism come into it.
You do not try to convert the police officers who have the best of Ramayan, faag and Kirtan (hymn) mandalis (group) in virtually all police stations and even hold national conventions which have been honoured by more than one police commissioner. I have recorded and sung faag with some of the officers and attended their Ramayan and prayers. You would be wasting your time if you think you can convert them. They are the strongest pillar of Hinduism around Fiji and if anybody feels that such superior-subordinates talk would shake those pillars of belief are insulting the intelligence and beliefs of such loyal officers. No, they could never be coerced to change their faith.
However, if they have been bypassed for promotion or undeserving Christian officers have been promoted on race and religion over Indo-Fijian officers, as has been alleged now and done under past regimes in abundance, then Bainimarama would have to take strong action if he wants to count on Indo-Fijian support and sympathy.
Otherwise, there would be no difference between the regime of Teleni and Savua. As the officers are mostly Hindus, they need to realise that Christianity in the country has been hijacked by politicians and other wolves in sheep's clothing who used the pulpit for racist and fundamental activities by sowing hatred and seeds of discord between the Christians and "Hindu heathens who worshipped idols and images".
For this reason the spirituality function of Christianity has been dominated by these dishonest Bible-bashing hypocrites for their racist agenda. Many criminal activities, sexual offences and other major social problems stem within Christian communities and it is a manifestation that the good values have failed to reach the common grassroots followers. Hence, the intention of Teleni and the police in its crusade is understandable and even acceptable and commendable.
Many Christians in Fiji have failed to walk the talk on their religion and if that can be achieved in this way, it should be supported by Hindu officers. It is voluntary anyway and their support should be forthcoming, in line with the teachings and spirit of Hinduism.
Hindu is an all-inclusive way of life, not necessarily a religion. They say "Ishwar Allah, Christ tere naam..." (Lord thou are Hindu Ram, Christian Christ and Muslim Allah) and Hinduism is one of the few religions which believes this and allows it to be preached in its temples. They do not label any other belief or believers as heathens, infidels worthy of destruction or persecution; they believe we are all children of God, belonging to a huge family. Through diverse streams and rivers, we flow into a big ocean.
Hindu and Indo-Fijian officers need to take a leaf from the teaching of the Ramayan where comparison is made between sandalwood (chandan) tree and a venomous, poisonous snake. The snake would strike at the sandalwood branch, which will not get poisoned by the venom but bestow its sweet fragrance on the ferocious cobra. In the same respect they need to support the crusade which intends to inculcate good values in Christian police officers and Christians they come in contact with, without them feeling pressured to change their faith. If they fail to support it, they are undeserving as Hindus. If they are proved to be disloyal and found to be in breach of their code of conduct, then they deserve to be fired.
There is nothing racial about it. I note that all sorts of people in all shades and colours came out defending Indo-Fijians. What a pleasant surprise!
Fijians have been beating Indo-Fijian fishermen, stealing their fish and livelihood but nobody came to their rescue. Our temples and praying places are destroyed and burnt but all those jumping now were asleep then. In many cases, people have been robbed violently, thrown out of their house and generally persecuted but there was little support, if any at all. The most unusual support for Indo-Fijians came from Ted Young. This gum-chewing former MP was cheering for racist SDL MPs when we were called wild grass and camels in tents but now he seems to be shedding crocodile tears for Indo-Fijians. This is the height of hypocrisy and the worst case of political expediency.
Where were these champions of Indo-Fijians when, under a very blatantly racist regime, deserving Indo-Fijians were bypassed and cleansed from the civil service? Where were they when a deserving person such as Chandra Shekhar was denied the position of CEO of LTA on a trumped-up charge to ensure an Indo-Fijian never got the post? It has been so even to date. Where were they when, it has been common knowledge, that many Cabinet ministers, MPs, diplomats and permanent secretaries have downgraded their first class ticket to use for their family or used the savings which has been considered their entitlement? But only Brian Singh was the sacrificial lamb and his post promptly given to a non Indo-Fijian in a great deal of haste.
Even Fiji's justice system failed to give him the justice he deserves. Where were the champions of Indo-Fijians then? Except for Wadan Narsey, who else spoke about or stood up to fight against racism in denial of Dr Rajesh Chandra the position of Vice Chancellor of USP during the past regime?
I see racism and religious persecution when I see one. As usual, I will be the first one to stand for my oppressed community. In this instance, I do not see any at all.
If Hindu police officers fail to show loyalty to their superiors, then they have failed to understand the meaning of Hinduism. If they fail to follow the directives of their employer, then it is classed as insubordination and summary dismissal will be deserving for such people. They need to appreciate that loyalty for the employer or maalik has been the heritage passed down the generations by our girmitiya (indentured) forefathers who delivered for most ungrateful employers to make Fiji a great nation.
For all those who came out of their shell, bure and belo to support Indo-Fijians, thank you, vinaka vakalevu, dhanya vaad.
I must congratulate the interim Government for achieving the unachievable. The despise and opposition to the regime appears to be so intense that support for Indo-Fijians has come from sources, especially the media and NGOs, that hitherto were unprepared to take on such a crusade. Thanks, it appears Fiji is on the path of becoming a better multiracial country, after all. Mission accomplished, frankly, speaking.
* E-mail: thakurjixtra.co.nz
* Mr Singh is an Auckland-based journalist and political commentator.
* The comments are his own and does not reflect the view of the Fiji Times.
Saturday, February 28, 2009
On Thursday Fiji was treated to a lecture about religion and principles by a former Fiji citizen now living a few thousand miles away from the motherland he left permanently - mostly for the very reason(s) since the start of the coup culture in May 1987 - that he tried to defend as being tolerable in Voreqe Bainimarama's banana republic after the fourth coup on December 5, 2006.
He was trying to tell Fiji Islanders that racial bigotry and racial intolerance are perfectly legitimate when practised by Bainimarama's regime because the coup leader's vision is to eradicate racism and discrimination against Indians - the unholy traits he accused the deposed government and other leaders of preaching and practising.
Now perched in Auckland, New Zealand, Thakur Ranjit Singh defended Police Commissioner Esala Teleni's racial bigotry through his column Racism and Religion published in the Fiji Times.
Mr Singh, whose credentials state he is an Auckland-based journalist and political commentator, lamented the fact that it took Mr Teleni so long to do what has not happened in the civil service.
Therefore, Mr Singh basically believes Mr Teleni did not belittle or humiliate Indian police officers and the entire Indian community when he called them liumuri, lamu-lamu and lamu-s..a. According to him it was "verbal whipping and privileged and confidential communication between a superior and his subordinates".
Mr Singh went on to berate the media and particularly Fiji Television and accused it of eaves-dropping.
He seems to have forgotten his journalistic ethics and the fact that as a former publisher of Fiji Daily Post he too was privy to exclusive news stories that were explosive.
They were factual stories never intended for dissemination to the public, but in keeping true to his profession as an impartial journalist, he allowed publication of such stories written either by reporters of his newsroom, or columnists like England based Victor Lal who now writes for The Fiji Sun or through weekly Sunday opinions under the title of Aage Peeche - written by Thakur Ranjit Singh himself.
As a former administrative officer of the National Federation Party I can vividly remember Mr Singh coming to the NFP headquarters in Tamavua some time in April 2001 requesting the then NFP general secretary Attar Singh for a tape recording of Jai Ram Reddy's radio programs and copies of his speeches during the 1999 general election campaign to be used for his weekly column.
Mr Singh also ignores the fact that pictures tell a thousand words.
Has he forgotten a Fiji TV Close-Up program where television footage of a march on May 19, 2000 was shown to prove his allegation that his fellow guest on the show SDL MP Simione Kaitani was participating in it?
Or does Mr Singh believe that exposing Mr Kaitani's participation in a racially-oriented march is blasphemous but Mr Teleni's racial diatribe and inflammatory insult against Indians is like music to his ears and should have won the Oscar Award for best music instead of A.R Rahman's scintillating and electrifying score for Slumdog Millionaire?
The rest of Mr Singh's convoluted theory made no sense.
Mr Singh lectured Indian police officers to show loyalty to their superiors saying "loyalty to their employer or maalik has been the heritage passed down the generations by our girmitiya forefathers who delivered for most ungrateful employers to make Fiji a great nation".
This lecture is equally as insulting as Mr Teleni's racist venom.
In a message posted on Indian Newslink to mark the 126th anniversary of the arrival of Indians in Fiji (http://www.indianewslink.co.nz>) Mr Singh while also commenting on the Rajendra Prasad-authored Tears in Paradise book, stated that the atrocities committed against the girmitiyas in Fiji by the colonial masters "was not accidental but criminal acts by the British and Australians".
He accused the British of "abrogating their responsibility of caring for Indians, thus leaving a community wounded, aggrieved and alienated".
If Mr Singh, four years ago, was incensed that our forefathers were not recognised for their contribution to build Fiji into a great nation, why does he now demand Indian police officers be loyal to their maalik (Teleni) despite being wounded, aggrieved and alienated by the Police Commissioner and Bainimarama's regime?
After all what else can he lecture Indians about except ordering them in the name of Hinduism to be loyal and tolerate racial insult?
Not surprising from a man who told the nation through Fiji Television's Close-Up program that human rights violations (which must include beating, torture, detention and the three deaths of Fiji citizens at the hands of soldiers and police) were part of an evolving democracy.
* The views expressed here are exclusively those of the author and are published by this newspaper on that sole understanding.
Racism and religion
By THAKUR RANJIT SINGH
Thursday, February 26, 2009
+ Enlarge this image
In the spotlight ... Commissioner Esala Teleni.
FIJI Police Commissioner Esala Teleni's dressing down of subordinate officers has caused a sensation in the Fiji media. The flowing of metaphorical crocodile tears in defence of the human rights of Indo-Fijians from opportunists, NGOs, politicians, community leaders, blog writers, media commentators and media organisations could fill and overflow the Suva Olympic Pool.
What a load of hypocrisy and what a bunch of aage picche and liu muri hypocrites. They are now jostling and competing to defend Indo-Fijians and their religious freedom which they ignored all this while.
My issue is not what Teleni did but why he took so long in doing it. If all heads in Fiji's civil service took out non-performing and disloyal civil servants and verbally whipped them into reality and performance then Fiji would have more responsive and better-performing civil servants and hence, be a better place. Those who have dealt with them know the nightmares of getting things done because of malua fever and the slackness inculcated by a very protective and blinkered trade union movement.
The frenzy created by the Fiji media was like sharks feeding on juicy blood oozing from the thighs of Yaqara bulls. The main culprit for this was the Fiji media in general and Fiji TV in particular. What has been eaves-dropped and reported on is one thing, but how it has been distorted, sensationalised and misinterpreted is another.
What Teleni said to his subordinates was in normal terms privileged and confidential communication between a superior and his subordinates.
Would Fiji TV dare to eavesdrop, record and publicise morning meetings and communication by its news editor and staff who are dressed down or given feedback for non-performance? Can they catch similar editorial dressing downs at the Daily Post, Fiji Times and Fiji Sun? During my days in the media, I have seen editors who have been ruthless and demanding and heard references such as "s..a levu" and worse ones directed at non-performing and lethargic reporters who miss deadlines and fail to deliver.
Remarkably, they tended to get desired results. Would they ever care to record how the National Farmers Union and Fiji Labour Party leader dresses down slack farmers' leaders and MPs in his caucus meetings? Has anybody heard again of FLP dissenters and those who failed to tow the line? Have they ever recorded how local business bosses abuse their workers in the name of feedback? Have they ever recorded the rich and mighty abusing their house-girls and gardeners?
If they had done that then what Teleni said to his non-performing and disloyal officers was like a Sunday school sermon.
I do not know where the case of religious persecution, forced conversion and racism come into it.
You do not try to convert the police officers who have the best of Ramayan, faag and Kirtan (hymn) mandalis (group) in virtually all police stations and even hold national conventions which have been honoured by more than one police commissioner. I have recorded and sung faag with some of the officers and attended their Ramayan and prayers. You would be wasting your time if you think you can convert them. They are the strongest pillar of Hinduism around Fiji and if anybody feels that such superior-subordinates talk would shake those pillars of belief are insulting the intelligence and beliefs of such loyal officers. No, they could never be coerced to change their faith.
However, if they have been bypassed for promotion or undeserving Christian officers have been promoted on race and religion over Indo-Fijian officers, as has been alleged now and done under past regimes in abundance, then Bainimarama would have to take strong action if he wants to count on Indo-Fijian support and sympathy.
Otherwise, there would be no difference between the regime of Teleni and Savua. As the officers are mostly Hindus, they need to realise that Christianity in the country has been hijacked by politicians and other wolves in sheep's clothing who used the pulpit for racist and fundamental activities by sowing hatred and seeds of discord between the Christians and "Hindu heathens who worshipped idols and images".
For this reason the spirituality function of Christianity has been dominated by these dishonest Bible-bashing hypocrites for their racist agenda. Many criminal activities, sexual offences and other major social problems stem within Christian communities and it is a manifestation that the good values have failed to reach the common grassroots followers. Hence, the intention of Teleni and the police in its crusade is understandable and even acceptable and commendable.
Many Christians in Fiji have failed to walk the talk on their religion and if that can be achieved in this way, it should be supported by Hindu officers. It is voluntary anyway and their support should be forthcoming, in line with the teachings and spirit of Hinduism.
Hindu is an all-inclusive way of life, not necessarily a religion. They say "Ishwar Allah, Christ tere naam..." (Lord thou are Hindu Ram, Christian Christ and Muslim Allah) and Hinduism is one of the few religions which believes this and allows it to be preached in its temples. They do not label any other belief or believers as heathens, infidels worthy of destruction or persecution; they believe we are all children of God, belonging to a huge family. Through diverse streams and rivers, we flow into a big ocean.
Hindu and Indo-Fijian officers need to take a leaf from the teaching of the Ramayan where comparison is made between sandalwood (chandan) tree and a venomous, poisonous snake. The snake would strike at the sandalwood branch, which will not get poisoned by the venom but bestow its sweet fragrance on the ferocious cobra. In the same respect they need to support the crusade which intends to inculcate good values in Christian police officers and Christians they come in contact with, without them feeling pressured to change their faith. If they fail to support it, they are undeserving as Hindus. If they are proved to be disloyal and found to be in breach of their code of conduct, then they deserve to be fired.
There is nothing racial about it. I note that all sorts of people in all shades and colours came out defending Indo-Fijians. What a pleasant surprise!
Fijians have been beating Indo-Fijian fishermen, stealing their fish and livelihood but nobody came to their rescue. Our temples and praying places are destroyed and burnt but all those jumping now were asleep then. In many cases, people have been robbed violently, thrown out of their house and generally persecuted but there was little support, if any at all. The most unusual support for Indo-Fijians came from Ted Young. This gum-chewing former MP was cheering for racist SDL MPs when we were called wild grass and camels in tents but now he seems to be shedding crocodile tears for Indo-Fijians. This is the height of hypocrisy and the worst case of political expediency.
Where were these champions of Indo-Fijians when, under a very blatantly racist regime, deserving Indo-Fijians were bypassed and cleansed from the civil service? Where were they when a deserving person such as Chandra Shekhar was denied the position of CEO of LTA on a trumped-up charge to ensure an Indo-Fijian never got the post? It has been so even to date. Where were they when, it has been common knowledge, that many Cabinet ministers, MPs, diplomats and permanent secretaries have downgraded their first class ticket to use for their family or used the savings which has been considered their entitlement? But only Brian Singh was the sacrificial lamb and his post promptly given to a non Indo-Fijian in a great deal of haste.
Even Fiji's justice system failed to give him the justice he deserves. Where were the champions of Indo-Fijians then? Except for Wadan Narsey, who else spoke about or stood up to fight against racism in denial of Dr Rajesh Chandra the position of Vice Chancellor of USP during the past regime?
I see racism and religious persecution when I see one. As usual, I will be the first one to stand for my oppressed community. In this instance, I do not see any at all.
If Hindu police officers fail to show loyalty to their superiors, then they have failed to understand the meaning of Hinduism. If they fail to follow the directives of their employer, then it is classed as insubordination and summary dismissal will be deserving for such people. They need to appreciate that loyalty for the employer or maalik has been the heritage passed down the generations by our girmitiya (indentured) forefathers who delivered for most ungrateful employers to make Fiji a great nation.
For all those who came out of their shell, bure and belo to support Indo-Fijians, thank you, vinaka vakalevu, dhanya vaad.
I must congratulate the interim Government for achieving the unachievable. The despise and opposition to the regime appears to be so intense that support for Indo-Fijians has come from sources, especially the media and NGOs, that hitherto were unprepared to take on such a crusade. Thanks, it appears Fiji is on the path of becoming a better multiracial country, after all. Mission accomplished, frankly, speaking.
* E-mail: thakurjixtra.co.nz
* Mr Singh is an Auckland-based journalist and political commentator.
* The comments are his own and does not reflect the view of the Fiji Times.
Call to form government of national unity
www.fijitimes.com - Friday, February 27, 2009
Update: 3:25PM THE interim government and political leaders have been urged to consider forming a government of national unity if an agreement timetable to parliamentary democracy is not reached within 12 months.
Ousted opposition leader Mick Beddoes says Fiji state of economy cannot possibly endure the looming worldwide financial crisis, another 12 months of political uncertainty and the issues they bring to bear on people.
"While the recommencement of the dialogue process on March 13 is most welcomed, there is a need for leaders, especially the interim Prime Minister (Commodore Frank Bainimarama) to consider alternative options," he said.
Mr Beddoes says a government of national unity to oversee the transition from military to civilian rule and the holding of general election would among other things; establish a level of political stability necessary to help improve the level of confidence required to re-start the wheels of economic recovery.
Update: 3:25PM THE interim government and political leaders have been urged to consider forming a government of national unity if an agreement timetable to parliamentary democracy is not reached within 12 months.
Ousted opposition leader Mick Beddoes says Fiji state of economy cannot possibly endure the looming worldwide financial crisis, another 12 months of political uncertainty and the issues they bring to bear on people.
"While the recommencement of the dialogue process on March 13 is most welcomed, there is a need for leaders, especially the interim Prime Minister (Commodore Frank Bainimarama) to consider alternative options," he said.
Mr Beddoes says a government of national unity to oversee the transition from military to civilian rule and the holding of general election would among other things; establish a level of political stability necessary to help improve the level of confidence required to re-start the wheels of economic recovery.
Friday, February 27, 2009
Military is subservient to elected Government
www.fijitimes - Relook at military's role pleases SDL
Friday, February 27, 2009
THE Soqosoqo Duavata ni Lewenivanua Party is pleased the military's role is a proposed item on the Leaders Political meeting agenda.
Acting national director Ted Young says party leader and ousted prime minister Laisenia Qarase in the last meeting brought up the need to relook at the role of the military.
"We firmly believe in the Constitution that the military like any other government department must be subservient to the people of Fiji through the elected government of the day," he said.
Friday, February 27, 2009
THE Soqosoqo Duavata ni Lewenivanua Party is pleased the military's role is a proposed item on the Leaders Political meeting agenda.
Acting national director Ted Young says party leader and ousted prime minister Laisenia Qarase in the last meeting brought up the need to relook at the role of the military.
"We firmly believe in the Constitution that the military like any other government department must be subservient to the people of Fiji through the elected government of the day," he said.
Fury of the 'righteous'
www.fijitimes.com - By Tui Rakuita
Friday, February 27, 2009
I recently came across the infamous clip that showed Esala Teleni berating a segment of his officer-corps for derailing the Police Force's Christian Crusade.
Contrary to the organisational slant that is being given as sole justification for this 'dressing down', it becomes quite apparent that there is more at play.
Indeed, if one was to carefully consider Teleni's polemic, one would not fail to realise that the implications arising from his outburst cannot be explained exclusively in terms of bureaucratic protocols.
Apart from the oft-stated organisational dimension, the ethnic and religious overtones in his tirade are quite distinct. It is along these lines that I wish to interrogate his utterances further.
Organisational dimension:
Teleni has in the past voiced his aim of 'professionalising' the police force.
So, for him, this outburst could be classified as part of his program of enhancing the efficiency of the organisation.
Indeed Teleni and his superiors are of the view that what he did was appropriate given the specific nature of the institution that he leads.
Even the vocabulary that was used that day is in no way 'out of character'.
The 'discipline forces', it is tacitly suggested, is where one must expect and accept those 'expressions'.
By alluding to the specific nature of the 'discipline force', Teleni and his supporters may have inadvertently collapsed the gulf that separates the army and the police.
The frequency of his self referral as 'Commodore' is highly suggestive of this. Hence, the lay person may be led to believe that what was witnessed that day is a common occurrence within the police force when it may have been true only for the army.
Teleni was in fact talking as if those facing him were military recruits instead of senior police officers.
The implications are worth our while to consider. Let me spell out a few.
Firstly, this will confirm, for many, the suspicion that the Police is being militarised once again.
More troubling than this is the awareness that these supposedly well trained and highly qualified army officers may not have what it takes to lead civilian or para-civilian institutions.
They are too 'one-dimensional' as opposed to the multi-pronged approach needed in institutions outside military parametres.
Secondly, the fact that Teleni is a high ranking army officer whose actions were deemed acceptable by both his line minister and the interim PM, who at the very least would know the appropriate conduct befitting an army officer berating 'wayward recruits', casts a parochial imprint on the army itself.
Is the army as an institution not supposed to be getting better each year due to the increasing quality of its new recruits?
That this would necessitate a change of approach given the nature (qualification, psychoanalytical make up, etc) of the new intakes?
If the answer to both questions is no, then we as a society are nearer to the brink than we realise.
However, if the answer is yes on both counts, why then would Teleni and his superiors view the lexicons taken out of dated army manuals to be still applicable today within the army itself let alone the upper echelon of the police force?
In short, Teleni's outbursts run against the grain of contemporary organisational principles, disciplinary institutions included.
Ethnic dimension:
Whichever way one wishes to look at it, the fact of the matter is that all present that day were of a particular ethnic origin.
If one was to look closely at the Fijian words used by Teleni, one would realise that they are part of a greater repository of derogatory terms that Fijians stereotypically hurl at Indo-Fijians.
What does this suggest in light of the interim regime's stated objective of eliminating racism?
Religious dimension:
To his credit, Teleni openly admits that he respects the religions of his officers which must, one assumes, be different from the Commissioner's who, as we all witnessed, is a self-professed Christian.
Yet one cannot help but call to mind those great Christian Crusades led by Knights in armour against the 'heathens' who dared to desecrate the holy land.
History tells us that defiance against those crusades was paid for in blood.
Of course, no police officer would need to forfeit his or her life today if she or he were 'deemed' to oppose Teleni's crusade.
If the commissioner's words are anything to go by, they will instead lose their jobs as well as their sense of dignity and respect.
In a land where a premium is still attached to humane values and where existence for most borders increasingly on a daily struggle, this loss amounts to almost everything.
In light of this even the commissioner's assertion about respecting other religions looks suspect.
George Bernard Shaw warned us to be cautious of the person whose God resides only in the skies.
He was lamenting the all too common human foible of not seeing the affinities between our relationship with God and our ties to our fellow human beings.
Put simply, a love of God without respect for the other person is a sham.
Given the overall tenor of his tirade, the commissioner is found wanting on all fronts when measured against his own yardsticks.
* Tui Rakuita is a lecturer at the School of Social Sciences, University of the South Pacific.
* The views expressed in this article may not necessarily reflect those of this newspaper.
Friday, February 27, 2009
I recently came across the infamous clip that showed Esala Teleni berating a segment of his officer-corps for derailing the Police Force's Christian Crusade.
Contrary to the organisational slant that is being given as sole justification for this 'dressing down', it becomes quite apparent that there is more at play.
Indeed, if one was to carefully consider Teleni's polemic, one would not fail to realise that the implications arising from his outburst cannot be explained exclusively in terms of bureaucratic protocols.
Apart from the oft-stated organisational dimension, the ethnic and religious overtones in his tirade are quite distinct. It is along these lines that I wish to interrogate his utterances further.
Organisational dimension:
Teleni has in the past voiced his aim of 'professionalising' the police force.
So, for him, this outburst could be classified as part of his program of enhancing the efficiency of the organisation.
Indeed Teleni and his superiors are of the view that what he did was appropriate given the specific nature of the institution that he leads.
Even the vocabulary that was used that day is in no way 'out of character'.
The 'discipline forces', it is tacitly suggested, is where one must expect and accept those 'expressions'.
By alluding to the specific nature of the 'discipline force', Teleni and his supporters may have inadvertently collapsed the gulf that separates the army and the police.
The frequency of his self referral as 'Commodore' is highly suggestive of this. Hence, the lay person may be led to believe that what was witnessed that day is a common occurrence within the police force when it may have been true only for the army.
Teleni was in fact talking as if those facing him were military recruits instead of senior police officers.
The implications are worth our while to consider. Let me spell out a few.
Firstly, this will confirm, for many, the suspicion that the Police is being militarised once again.
More troubling than this is the awareness that these supposedly well trained and highly qualified army officers may not have what it takes to lead civilian or para-civilian institutions.
They are too 'one-dimensional' as opposed to the multi-pronged approach needed in institutions outside military parametres.
Secondly, the fact that Teleni is a high ranking army officer whose actions were deemed acceptable by both his line minister and the interim PM, who at the very least would know the appropriate conduct befitting an army officer berating 'wayward recruits', casts a parochial imprint on the army itself.
Is the army as an institution not supposed to be getting better each year due to the increasing quality of its new recruits?
That this would necessitate a change of approach given the nature (qualification, psychoanalytical make up, etc) of the new intakes?
If the answer to both questions is no, then we as a society are nearer to the brink than we realise.
However, if the answer is yes on both counts, why then would Teleni and his superiors view the lexicons taken out of dated army manuals to be still applicable today within the army itself let alone the upper echelon of the police force?
In short, Teleni's outbursts run against the grain of contemporary organisational principles, disciplinary institutions included.
Ethnic dimension:
Whichever way one wishes to look at it, the fact of the matter is that all present that day were of a particular ethnic origin.
If one was to look closely at the Fijian words used by Teleni, one would realise that they are part of a greater repository of derogatory terms that Fijians stereotypically hurl at Indo-Fijians.
What does this suggest in light of the interim regime's stated objective of eliminating racism?
Religious dimension:
To his credit, Teleni openly admits that he respects the religions of his officers which must, one assumes, be different from the Commissioner's who, as we all witnessed, is a self-professed Christian.
Yet one cannot help but call to mind those great Christian Crusades led by Knights in armour against the 'heathens' who dared to desecrate the holy land.
History tells us that defiance against those crusades was paid for in blood.
Of course, no police officer would need to forfeit his or her life today if she or he were 'deemed' to oppose Teleni's crusade.
If the commissioner's words are anything to go by, they will instead lose their jobs as well as their sense of dignity and respect.
In a land where a premium is still attached to humane values and where existence for most borders increasingly on a daily struggle, this loss amounts to almost everything.
In light of this even the commissioner's assertion about respecting other religions looks suspect.
George Bernard Shaw warned us to be cautious of the person whose God resides only in the skies.
He was lamenting the all too common human foible of not seeing the affinities between our relationship with God and our ties to our fellow human beings.
Put simply, a love of God without respect for the other person is a sham.
Given the overall tenor of his tirade, the commissioner is found wanting on all fronts when measured against his own yardsticks.
* Tui Rakuita is a lecturer at the School of Social Sciences, University of the South Pacific.
* The views expressed in this article may not necessarily reflect those of this newspaper.
Lawyers' involvement could send wrong signal: Leung
www.fijitimes.com - Friday, February 27, 2009
Update: 4:51PM REPUTABLE lawyers would tend to refuse to take up judicial appointments in Fiji because it could send the wrong signals, Suva lawyer Graham Leung said yesterday.
"While overseas lawyers who take up judicial appointments in Fiji may be well intentioned, it could also end up sending a signal to the military-backed junta that judges from respectable countries have no difficulty in serving in a coup-infested country," said Mr Leung, a former president of the Fiji Law Society.
"This could end up emboldening the regime and its apologists."
Mr Leung was reacting to statements by current Law Society president Dor Sami Naidu, who had said that travel bans by Australia and New Zealand made it difficult to attract the calibre of people needed to ensure the independence of the judiciary was maintained.
Mr Leung said the travel bans were meant to pressure the coup makers into doing the right thing and returning the country to democracy.
"Once you start making exceptions to the rule, it is difficult for the policy to stand."
Mr Leung said very few people would dispute the idea that any judiciary should get the best quality legal minds.
"The million dollar question is how do you achieve that in a transparent way in a country which is being governed by a group of unelected people," he said.
Update: 4:51PM REPUTABLE lawyers would tend to refuse to take up judicial appointments in Fiji because it could send the wrong signals, Suva lawyer Graham Leung said yesterday.
"While overseas lawyers who take up judicial appointments in Fiji may be well intentioned, it could also end up sending a signal to the military-backed junta that judges from respectable countries have no difficulty in serving in a coup-infested country," said Mr Leung, a former president of the Fiji Law Society.
"This could end up emboldening the regime and its apologists."
Mr Leung was reacting to statements by current Law Society president Dor Sami Naidu, who had said that travel bans by Australia and New Zealand made it difficult to attract the calibre of people needed to ensure the independence of the judiciary was maintained.
Mr Leung said the travel bans were meant to pressure the coup makers into doing the right thing and returning the country to democracy.
"Once you start making exceptions to the rule, it is difficult for the policy to stand."
Mr Leung said very few people would dispute the idea that any judiciary should get the best quality legal minds.
"The million dollar question is how do you achieve that in a transparent way in a country which is being governed by a group of unelected people," he said.
Aust maintains stand on Fiji coup
www.fijilive.com - 27/02/2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Australian government’s perspective on the December 2006 coup has not changed despite continuous flow of aid to the country, said Australian High Commissioner James Batley.
He made the comment as he handed a cheque of FJ$756,000 to the interim Education Minister Filipe Bole for the rehabilitation of schools ravaged by recent floods.
“…………this assistance does not mark a change in Australia’s policy towards Fiji. As I said in January, Australians expect their government to lend a hand to a neighbour when it suffers a natural disaster.”
He said it is important to underline that Australia’s commitment to Fiji’s development remains, and it remains substantial.
“That does not in any way change Australia’s position on the events of December 2006, and on Fiji’s return to democracy. That position is well known and it has not changed.
“But this handover today serves as a reminder of the indissoluble ties of geography and of history that bind us together,” Batley said.
“This assistance comes out of the A$3 million that was committed by Australia after the January floods.”
Batley added, “out of the total, around FJ$390,000 is being provided to assist with repairs, and with equipment such as water tanks, furniture, library resources and stationery for 25 schools which suffered damage or served as evacuation centres during the floods”.
Fourteen of these schools are located in the West, seven in the North and four are in the Central Division.
Twenty one are primary schools and four are secondary schools.
“The remaining funds of approximately FJ$370,000 will be used to cover annual school levies for students from the same 25 schools. Based on the 2008 school rolls, there are approximately 6000 students at these 25 schools.
“Our aim is to directly help families who suffered financial hardship in the floods, by ensuring that their children can continue to attend school.”
Bole while accepting the cheque said he hoped that relations between the two nations would continue due to our historic and geographic significance.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Australian government’s perspective on the December 2006 coup has not changed despite continuous flow of aid to the country, said Australian High Commissioner James Batley.
He made the comment as he handed a cheque of FJ$756,000 to the interim Education Minister Filipe Bole for the rehabilitation of schools ravaged by recent floods.
“…………this assistance does not mark a change in Australia’s policy towards Fiji. As I said in January, Australians expect their government to lend a hand to a neighbour when it suffers a natural disaster.”
He said it is important to underline that Australia’s commitment to Fiji’s development remains, and it remains substantial.
“That does not in any way change Australia’s position on the events of December 2006, and on Fiji’s return to democracy. That position is well known and it has not changed.
“But this handover today serves as a reminder of the indissoluble ties of geography and of history that bind us together,” Batley said.
“This assistance comes out of the A$3 million that was committed by Australia after the January floods.”
Batley added, “out of the total, around FJ$390,000 is being provided to assist with repairs, and with equipment such as water tanks, furniture, library resources and stationery for 25 schools which suffered damage or served as evacuation centres during the floods”.
Fourteen of these schools are located in the West, seven in the North and four are in the Central Division.
Twenty one are primary schools and four are secondary schools.
“The remaining funds of approximately FJ$370,000 will be used to cover annual school levies for students from the same 25 schools. Based on the 2008 school rolls, there are approximately 6000 students at these 25 schools.
“Our aim is to directly help families who suffered financial hardship in the floods, by ensuring that their children can continue to attend school.”
Bole while accepting the cheque said he hoped that relations between the two nations would continue due to our historic and geographic significance.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Bainimarama detached from reality: Young
Bainimarama detached from reality: Young
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Update: 7:42PM STATEMENTS by interim Prime Minister Commodore Frank Bainimarama that he would never go as far as his Samoan counterpart to criticise other sovereignties are "bizarre".
Soqosoqo Duavata ni Lewenivanua Party acting director, Ted Young said: "He had been almost fanatical in his denunciation of former New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark.
"He had said in a recent radio interview that the governments of Australia and New Zealand had bad hearts because of the sanction they had imposed against Fiji.
"Commodore Bainimarama had described Kiribati and Tuvalu as enemies of Fiji because they were part of the Forum decision urging the interim government to hold elections this year."
Mr Young said Mr Bainimarama insulted Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi by alleging the Samoan Government was influenced by New Zealand, implying it could not act independently on Fiji.
"In view of his record of lashing out at regional neighbours like this, it is almost unbelievable that he can now say that Fiji would never comment on any other government and leadership," he said. "This is how far he is detached from reality."
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Update: 7:42PM STATEMENTS by interim Prime Minister Commodore Frank Bainimarama that he would never go as far as his Samoan counterpart to criticise other sovereignties are "bizarre".
Soqosoqo Duavata ni Lewenivanua Party acting director, Ted Young said: "He had been almost fanatical in his denunciation of former New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark.
"He had said in a recent radio interview that the governments of Australia and New Zealand had bad hearts because of the sanction they had imposed against Fiji.
"Commodore Bainimarama had described Kiribati and Tuvalu as enemies of Fiji because they were part of the Forum decision urging the interim government to hold elections this year."
Mr Young said Mr Bainimarama insulted Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi by alleging the Samoan Government was influenced by New Zealand, implying it could not act independently on Fiji.
"In view of his record of lashing out at regional neighbours like this, it is almost unbelievable that he can now say that Fiji would never comment on any other government and leadership," he said. "This is how far he is detached from reality."
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Seek justice in Bill of Rights: CCF
www.fijitimes.com - Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Sai Comment:
- Rev Yabaki must be naive to think that the citizens of Fiji still have confidence in the justice system there to deliver fair and impartial results to their grievances. The general perception of the public is one of suspicion of collusion by the current regime and the courts. No amount of justification by the likes of Rev Yabaki and supporters of the regime will hide the disdain people now have of the credibility and integrity of the courts in Fiji. Its standing has been eroded by the ill treatment of the former CJ and the verdict to legitimise an act of treason by Voreqe and his cronies. We all look forward to when Fiji can regain the standing and integrity of its courts to safeguard the rights and legal entitlements of its citizens.
Fiji citizens do not need to go overseas to seek justice for political crimes because we have the Bill of Rights, says Citizens' Constitutional Forum chief executive Reverend Akuila Yabaki.
He made the comment while lamenting the reality that many citizens had migrated and were still doing so as a result of the coups.
On the recent political asylum granted by USA to Rajeshwar Singh, a former Fiji resident, and his family, Mr Yabaki said it was a sad day in Fiji's history.
"It appears that this particular (Indo-Fijian) family had been victimised since the 1987 coup, till 1998," he said.
Singh, his wife Mohini Lata Singh and their two children were given political asylum by the US Supreme Court who believed they were in danger of being persecuted again if they returned to Fiji.
Sai Comment:
- Rev Yabaki must be naive to think that the citizens of Fiji still have confidence in the justice system there to deliver fair and impartial results to their grievances. The general perception of the public is one of suspicion of collusion by the current regime and the courts. No amount of justification by the likes of Rev Yabaki and supporters of the regime will hide the disdain people now have of the credibility and integrity of the courts in Fiji. Its standing has been eroded by the ill treatment of the former CJ and the verdict to legitimise an act of treason by Voreqe and his cronies. We all look forward to when Fiji can regain the standing and integrity of its courts to safeguard the rights and legal entitlements of its citizens.
Fiji citizens do not need to go overseas to seek justice for political crimes because we have the Bill of Rights, says Citizens' Constitutional Forum chief executive Reverend Akuila Yabaki.
He made the comment while lamenting the reality that many citizens had migrated and were still doing so as a result of the coups.
On the recent political asylum granted by USA to Rajeshwar Singh, a former Fiji resident, and his family, Mr Yabaki said it was a sad day in Fiji's history.
"It appears that this particular (Indo-Fijian) family had been victimised since the 1987 coup, till 1998," he said.
Singh, his wife Mohini Lata Singh and their two children were given political asylum by the US Supreme Court who believed they were in danger of being persecuted again if they returned to Fiji.
FLP ‘scared of polls'
By REIJELI KIKAU
www.fijtimes.com - Wednesday, February 25, 2009
THE Soqosoqo ni Duavata ni Lewenivanua is not surprised at calls by the Fiji Labour Party leader Mahendra Chaudhry that it was impossible to have elections this year.
Party acting national director Ted Young said Mr Chaudhry and his party are election shy because of their consecutive defeats in the 2001 and 2006 polls at the hands of their political nemesis, the SDL.
"Chaudhry knows that the same fate or even worse awaits FLP if elections were held this year. He and his cronies will always prefer the indefinite deferment of elections until the hovering issue of aiding, abetting and benefiting from an act of treason is sorted out first." He said Mr Chaudhry and the interim regime would continue to manufacture excuses for delaying the elections.
"The SDL knows that we only need six-month notice to conduct national elections in Fiji.
"The people of Fiji must be returned their God-given right to elect their leaders, the right which was forcibly taken away from them by the barrel of a gun in December 2006," he said.
Ousted opposition leader Mick Beddoes said Mr Chaudhry's comments were an attempt by the FLP to get back into favour with the military regime.
"Regrettably, all we have seen so far is a continuous dragging of their feet with regards to the political dialogue process after the first leaders political meeting on October 28 last year."
www.fijtimes.com - Wednesday, February 25, 2009
THE Soqosoqo ni Duavata ni Lewenivanua is not surprised at calls by the Fiji Labour Party leader Mahendra Chaudhry that it was impossible to have elections this year.
Party acting national director Ted Young said Mr Chaudhry and his party are election shy because of their consecutive defeats in the 2001 and 2006 polls at the hands of their political nemesis, the SDL.
"Chaudhry knows that the same fate or even worse awaits FLP if elections were held this year. He and his cronies will always prefer the indefinite deferment of elections until the hovering issue of aiding, abetting and benefiting from an act of treason is sorted out first." He said Mr Chaudhry and the interim regime would continue to manufacture excuses for delaying the elections.
"The SDL knows that we only need six-month notice to conduct national elections in Fiji.
"The people of Fiji must be returned their God-given right to elect their leaders, the right which was forcibly taken away from them by the barrel of a gun in December 2006," he said.
Ousted opposition leader Mick Beddoes said Mr Chaudhry's comments were an attempt by the FLP to get back into favour with the military regime.
"Regrettably, all we have seen so far is a continuous dragging of their feet with regards to the political dialogue process after the first leaders political meeting on October 28 last year."
Singh questions Bainimarama on "real motives"
Singh questions Bainimarama on "real motives"
MARY RAUTO
www.fijitimes.com - Wednesday, February 25, 2009
INTERIM Prime Minister Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama is disingenuous about returning Fiji to parliamentary democracy, said Movement for Democracy chairman Attar Singh who questioned his motives.
"The electoral reforms and implementation of the Peoples Charter are all being used as an excuse," he said.
Mr Singh made the remarks when asked to comment on the Samoa's PM Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi condemnation of Mr Bainimarama and his military junta.
"The time has now come to pose to Bainimarama the real question what does he really want in return to let the country back to elections and return the country to the people?" Mr Singh posed rhetorically.
"In my view the issue of electoral reform and discussion and acceptance of the Peoples Charter cannot be the real issue.
"If they were real issues then it is within Bainimarama's current powers to bring about those issues and the fact that he is not doing so and continues to use them as reasons to delay election indicates that there are other issues, which really need discussions before can get to elections."
When contacted yesterday, Mr Bainimarama referred questions to his Permanent Secretary Parmesh Chand. Chand was in meetings all afternoon and could not be reached.
Mr Malielegaoi, in an interview with the Samoan newspaper Savali, last week, said he was convinced that Bainimarama had no intention of relinquishing power and returning Fiji to democratic government.
"On the eve of the summit in Port Moresby, the leaders were told that Bainimarama made a statement to his troops that he needs five years in government," said Mr Malielegaoi.
"After the meeting, the leaders were told by sources in Fiji that Bainimarama has this time told his army generals in a meeting that he'll need up to ten years of military rule in Fiji.
"Therefore, that's a clear indication that Bainimarama has no intention whatsoever of holding general elections and returning his country to democratic rule."
Military spokesperson Major Neumi Leweni said he would comment today. Major Leweni had earlier criticised Mr Malielegaoi for his attacks on the interim regime.
He had said Mr Malielegaoi's criticism was indicative of his allegiance to New Zealand,
Meanwhile, Mr Malielegaoi has drawn opposition from his countrymen for his comments, which were labeled as stupid interference.
Asiata Sale'imoa Va'ai, leader of the Samoa Democratic Party, said Samoa should mind its own business and that it was wrongful interference in the affairs of a sovereign state.
MARY RAUTO
www.fijitimes.com - Wednesday, February 25, 2009
INTERIM Prime Minister Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama is disingenuous about returning Fiji to parliamentary democracy, said Movement for Democracy chairman Attar Singh who questioned his motives.
"The electoral reforms and implementation of the Peoples Charter are all being used as an excuse," he said.
Mr Singh made the remarks when asked to comment on the Samoa's PM Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi condemnation of Mr Bainimarama and his military junta.
"The time has now come to pose to Bainimarama the real question what does he really want in return to let the country back to elections and return the country to the people?" Mr Singh posed rhetorically.
"In my view the issue of electoral reform and discussion and acceptance of the Peoples Charter cannot be the real issue.
"If they were real issues then it is within Bainimarama's current powers to bring about those issues and the fact that he is not doing so and continues to use them as reasons to delay election indicates that there are other issues, which really need discussions before can get to elections."
When contacted yesterday, Mr Bainimarama referred questions to his Permanent Secretary Parmesh Chand. Chand was in meetings all afternoon and could not be reached.
Mr Malielegaoi, in an interview with the Samoan newspaper Savali, last week, said he was convinced that Bainimarama had no intention of relinquishing power and returning Fiji to democratic government.
"On the eve of the summit in Port Moresby, the leaders were told that Bainimarama made a statement to his troops that he needs five years in government," said Mr Malielegaoi.
"After the meeting, the leaders were told by sources in Fiji that Bainimarama has this time told his army generals in a meeting that he'll need up to ten years of military rule in Fiji.
"Therefore, that's a clear indication that Bainimarama has no intention whatsoever of holding general elections and returning his country to democratic rule."
Military spokesperson Major Neumi Leweni said he would comment today. Major Leweni had earlier criticised Mr Malielegaoi for his attacks on the interim regime.
He had said Mr Malielegaoi's criticism was indicative of his allegiance to New Zealand,
Meanwhile, Mr Malielegaoi has drawn opposition from his countrymen for his comments, which were labeled as stupid interference.
Asiata Sale'imoa Va'ai, leader of the Samoa Democratic Party, said Samoa should mind its own business and that it was wrongful interference in the affairs of a sovereign state.
Bainimarama labels Samoa PM's criticisms un-Pacific
Bainimarama labels Samoa PM's criticisms un-Pacific
www.fijitimes.com - Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Sai Comment:
- Voreqe's rebuttal of the Samoan PM's statement against his illegitimate regime rings shallow, hollow, and unconvincing because Voreqe knows in his heart of heart he has no mandate nor right to be punishing the people of Fiji with his missrule. The sooner he aplogises to the people of Fiji and let them have the leaders they want to run their Government the better it will be for Fiji. Go now Voreqe and be done with you and your cronies.
UNPROFESSIONAL, un-Pacific and unwarranted was how interim Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama described his Samoan counterpart's unflattering criticisms of him.
Commenting for the first time on the incident, Mr Bainimarama said in a government statement that Mr Malielegaoi had "gone too far" in his public statements regarding Fiji and its current Government and leadership.
"It is most unprofessional and unbecoming of a Head of Government of a fellow Forum member country to make public statements about another Forum member country and its leader," he said.
Samoa's Prime Minister Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi had accused him of lying to the Pacific Island Forum leaders, and implied that he had an ulterior motive other than the welfare of the people of Fiji.
Commodore Bainimarama said it was "most unprofessional and unbecoming of a Head of Government of a fellow Forum member country to make public statements about another Forum member country and its leader".
www.fijitimes.com - Wednesday, February 25, 2009
Sai Comment:
- Voreqe's rebuttal of the Samoan PM's statement against his illegitimate regime rings shallow, hollow, and unconvincing because Voreqe knows in his heart of heart he has no mandate nor right to be punishing the people of Fiji with his missrule. The sooner he aplogises to the people of Fiji and let them have the leaders they want to run their Government the better it will be for Fiji. Go now Voreqe and be done with you and your cronies.
UNPROFESSIONAL, un-Pacific and unwarranted was how interim Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama described his Samoan counterpart's unflattering criticisms of him.
Commenting for the first time on the incident, Mr Bainimarama said in a government statement that Mr Malielegaoi had "gone too far" in his public statements regarding Fiji and its current Government and leadership.
"It is most unprofessional and unbecoming of a Head of Government of a fellow Forum member country to make public statements about another Forum member country and its leader," he said.
Samoa's Prime Minister Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi had accused him of lying to the Pacific Island Forum leaders, and implied that he had an ulterior motive other than the welfare of the people of Fiji.
Commodore Bainimarama said it was "most unprofessional and unbecoming of a Head of Government of a fellow Forum member country to make public statements about another Forum member country and its leader".
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Fiji leader a thief, says Samoa PM
Fiji leader a thief, says Samoa PM
www.fijilive.com - 24/02/2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Samoan Prime Minister has launched an attack on Fiji’s leader as tension mounts over Fiji’s failure to deliver on its promise to the Pacific Leaders Forum and return the country to democratic rule.
According to New Zealand Television, Tuilaepa Sailele said Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama was stealing public money by appointing himself as interim Finance Minister and paying himself F$200,000 in unclaimed leave.
The Samoan leader mocked Bainimarama's full military garb and the need for an army, saying "perhaps Bainimarama fears a combined canoe attack from Tuvalu and Kiribati," its closest neighbours.
Sailele also claims that the military man has no plans to relinquish the leadership.
“I strongly believe that Bainimarama has no intention of relinquishing power and returning Fiji to democratic government,” Tuilaepa said.
He also told Fijians to wake up.
“Stand up and reclaim your government. It is your God-given right,” Tuilaepa said.
The strong criticism comes as the May 1 deadline for announcing a 2009 election draws nearer.
Fiji will be removed from the Pacific Islands Forum if it fails to fulfil the ultimatum, set by the group's 16-nation members at a meeting in Papua New Guinea last month.
Bainimarama has claimed that the islands were coerced into agreeing to the hard line approach by Australia and New Zealand, but several small pacific island leaders have hit back, saying it was a consensus decision.
He has also indicated that electoral changes, no matter how long it takes, will have to be done first before Fiji holds elections.
Bainimarama is expected to respond to Tuilaepa’s comments in a statement tomorrow.
www.fijilive.com - 24/02/2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Samoan Prime Minister has launched an attack on Fiji’s leader as tension mounts over Fiji’s failure to deliver on its promise to the Pacific Leaders Forum and return the country to democratic rule.
According to New Zealand Television, Tuilaepa Sailele said Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama was stealing public money by appointing himself as interim Finance Minister and paying himself F$200,000 in unclaimed leave.
The Samoan leader mocked Bainimarama's full military garb and the need for an army, saying "perhaps Bainimarama fears a combined canoe attack from Tuvalu and Kiribati," its closest neighbours.
Sailele also claims that the military man has no plans to relinquish the leadership.
“I strongly believe that Bainimarama has no intention of relinquishing power and returning Fiji to democratic government,” Tuilaepa said.
He also told Fijians to wake up.
“Stand up and reclaim your government. It is your God-given right,” Tuilaepa said.
The strong criticism comes as the May 1 deadline for announcing a 2009 election draws nearer.
Fiji will be removed from the Pacific Islands Forum if it fails to fulfil the ultimatum, set by the group's 16-nation members at a meeting in Papua New Guinea last month.
Bainimarama has claimed that the islands were coerced into agreeing to the hard line approach by Australia and New Zealand, but several small pacific island leaders have hit back, saying it was a consensus decision.
He has also indicated that electoral changes, no matter how long it takes, will have to be done first before Fiji holds elections.
Bainimarama is expected to respond to Tuilaepa’s comments in a statement tomorrow.
Monday, February 23, 2009
Tonga denies claims Forum driven by NZ and Australia
Tonga denies claims Forum driven by NZ and Australia
Monday, February 23, 2009
THE Pacific Islands Forum decision to partially suspend Fiji if it does not confirm dates for a general election was consensus-driven and was not imposed by Australia and New Zealand, reiterates Tongas Prime Minister Feleti Sevele.
He made the comment to Radio New Zealand in response to the interim Governments claims that the decision was driven by Canberra and Wellington.
The interim government was given until May 1 to submit a date for an election this year.
Since the forum meeting late last month, the interim government has declared there will be no election this year. It is instead focusing on electoral reforms and the impending Presidents Political Dialogue Forum.
At the end of the day its up to the Fiji interim government and the people of Fiji to work out what their future is and what they really want, Mr Sevele said.
As a Forum, and this is where I said before the meeting in PNG, that we should not be talking about expulsion or suspension of Fiji, we should be talking of finding a way to move forward.
Monday, February 23, 2009
THE Pacific Islands Forum decision to partially suspend Fiji if it does not confirm dates for a general election was consensus-driven and was not imposed by Australia and New Zealand, reiterates Tongas Prime Minister Feleti Sevele.
He made the comment to Radio New Zealand in response to the interim Governments claims that the decision was driven by Canberra and Wellington.
The interim government was given until May 1 to submit a date for an election this year.
Since the forum meeting late last month, the interim government has declared there will be no election this year. It is instead focusing on electoral reforms and the impending Presidents Political Dialogue Forum.
At the end of the day its up to the Fiji interim government and the people of Fiji to work out what their future is and what they really want, Mr Sevele said.
As a Forum, and this is where I said before the meeting in PNG, that we should not be talking about expulsion or suspension of Fiji, we should be talking of finding a way to move forward.
NGOs say Samoa PMs remarks on Fiji situation fair
NGOs say Samoa PMs remarks on Fiji situation fair
www.fijitimes.com - Monday, February 23, 2009
TWO non-government organisations have hailed Samoan Prime Minister Tuilaepe Sailele Malielegaoi recent comments on the interim government as fair and accurate.
Among several issues, Mr Malielegaoi accused military commander and interim Prime Minister of intending to stay in power for another decade.
"I strongly believe that Bainimarama has no intention of relinquishing power and returning Fiji to democratic government," Mr Malielegaoi told the Samoan Government newspaper Savali. He had also called on the people of Fiji to reclaim their government.
Fiji Womens Crisis Centre co-ordinator Shamima Ali said Mr Malielegaois comments were accurate and should be heeded by all.
Fiji Womens Rights Movement said the development reflects the deep concern of our Pacific island neighbours.
Our right to choose our own leaders and to voice our opinions, as protected under Fiji's Constitution and international human rights law, have been denied or severely limited," she said.
Mr Malielegaoi issued the comments on Fiji after individuals and NGOs in Fiji sought his help, according to Radio Australias Pacific Beat.
I am having a lot of communications from NGOs and from individuals in Fiji, also asking me to help out, by speaking out on issues that I have addressed in the statements that I have released, Mr Malielegaoi reportedly told Radio Australia.
www.fijitimes.com - Monday, February 23, 2009
TWO non-government organisations have hailed Samoan Prime Minister Tuilaepe Sailele Malielegaoi recent comments on the interim government as fair and accurate.
Among several issues, Mr Malielegaoi accused military commander and interim Prime Minister of intending to stay in power for another decade.
"I strongly believe that Bainimarama has no intention of relinquishing power and returning Fiji to democratic government," Mr Malielegaoi told the Samoan Government newspaper Savali. He had also called on the people of Fiji to reclaim their government.
Fiji Womens Crisis Centre co-ordinator Shamima Ali said Mr Malielegaois comments were accurate and should be heeded by all.
Fiji Womens Rights Movement said the development reflects the deep concern of our Pacific island neighbours.
Our right to choose our own leaders and to voice our opinions, as protected under Fiji's Constitution and international human rights law, have been denied or severely limited," she said.
Mr Malielegaoi issued the comments on Fiji after individuals and NGOs in Fiji sought his help, according to Radio Australias Pacific Beat.
I am having a lot of communications from NGOs and from individuals in Fiji, also asking me to help out, by speaking out on issues that I have addressed in the statements that I have released, Mr Malielegaoi reportedly told Radio Australia.
Samoan PM berates Voreqe
Sai Comment
- The Samaon PM is right on the mark on what he has to say about Voreqe and his illegitimate regime. They are a bunch of power hungry and unelectable lot whose only hope of holding on to power is through force and with guns and not by the power of their popular appeal to the citizens of Fiji. Freedom will only return when each one of them are returned to their former positions. Otherwise, all they have to do, is to have the courage to seek a propoer mandate from the people of Fiji to see if ever they command an ounce of support. They know the naked truth and that is why they will try to hang on to power as long as it takes to enrich themselves at the expense of the beloved people in Fiji.
Samoan PM berates Voreqe
By TUPUOLA TERRY TAVITA, Editor of Samoan newspaper, Savali
www.fijitimes.com - Monday, February 23, 2009
Samoan Prime Minister Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi in his office in Apia, Samoa
Prime Minister Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi is unsure of what state of mind Fiji dictator Frank Baini-marama was in when he made comments about Samoa, Samoa's relationship with New Zealand and the Pacific Islands Forum.
"I'm curious if he was sober or perhaps there was a full moon out that night," Tuilaepa speculates.
Asked what he thinks of Bainimarama's claims that Samoa, Australia and New Zealand are ganging up on Fiji at the Pacific Forum, Tuilaepa giggles: "No, no, no, I think the good commander was misquoted by the media. What he may actually have meant was that the maturity of Samoa's leadership is on par with that of New Zealand and Australia. That's obviously what he meant. Therefore, given that seniority, he should be keen to absorb my tit-for-tat."
But the situation in Fiji, the Prime Minister admits, is no laughing matter. Bainimarama (last week) railed against the Forum and the international community that no country would force Fiji to do what it didn't want.
"No one's going to force us what to do here," says Bainimarama. "We've al-ready decided what's going to happen."
Well, no one is forcing Fiji to do anything, says Prime Minister Tuilaepa.
"The Forum is simply asking what his (Baini-marama's) plans for Fiji‘s road back to democracy are, in accordance with the principles of democratic governance the Forum was established upon.
"May I remind the interim Prime Minister that Fiji is a founding member of the Pacific Islands Forum.
"One of the Forum's founding fathers was none other than Fiji‘s Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara, a distinguished and respected leader whose principles of democratic government the Forum stood for in its formative years."
The Forum, the Prime Minister adds, continues to be misled by Fiji's representatives.
"During the Forum meeting in Nukualofa in 2007, Bainimarama told the Forum that general elections in Fiji will be held in March, 2009.
"Again, during the recent Leaders Summit in Port Moresby, his hand-picked Attorney-General, during his presentation to the leaders, provided a roadmap for elections, which led the Forum to set out in its communiqué the 1st of May timetable and elections in Fiji by the end of the year.
"That is the basis for the communiqué that was issued following the meeting. It was based on the Fiji Attorney-General's presentation to the Forum. Now Bainimarama and his Attorney-General are singing a different tune.
"I strongly believe that Bainimarama has no intention of relinquishing power and returning Fiji to democratic government.
"On the eve of the summit in Port Moresby, the leaders were told that Bainimarama made a statement to his troops that he needs five years in government.
"After the meeting, the leaders were told by sources in Fiji that Bainimarama has this time told his army generals in a meeting that he'll need up to ten years of military rule in Fiji.
"Therefore, that's a clear indication that Baini-marama has no intention whatsoever of holding general elections and returning his country to democratic rule."
The continuing travel bans imposed by New Zealand and Australia on those associated with the military regime, Baini-marama claims, "are counter-productive to a return to democracy".
Not so, says Prime Minister Tuilaepa.
"Only Bainimarama and his guns control the road to democracy in Fiji.
"Only Bainimarama controls Fiji's return to democratic rule, not the travel bans."
Tuilaepa believes Bainimarama has a problem comprehending the issues involved.
"Therefore I'll speak to him frankly from one Pacific islander to another Pacific islander in a very clear and direct language that I'm sure he will understand."
In a report by Radio Australia this week, Bainimarama claims that the Forum decision after Port Moresby is owed to an alliance of Australia, New Zealand and Samoa.
"I must also tell you that unfortunately for the Forum, maybe only three countries endorsed what came out and decided that outcome, and that was Australia, New Zealand and Samoa," Bainimarama is quoted as saying. "And Samoa for good reason – Samoa and New Zealand are one and the same."
Prime Minister Tuilaepa smiles: "Samoa is an independent country. If Baini-marama has something to say, say it to me. He has an awful lot to say for someone who surrounds himself with armed soldiers."
It has been reported by Islands Business magazine (February 2009 issue) that in the few months Mr Bainimarama appointed himself as Fiji ‘s Finance Minister, he quietly claimed for himself a "backpay" of FJ$200,000.
"That's public money", says Tuilaepa.
"And yet he has been telling everybody that he needs to clean up Fiji.
"I think it's a classic case of do as I say and not as I do."
As long as the military is in power, the Prime Minister says, the people of Fiji will be denied crucial assistance from donor countries, international institutions and lending agencies.
"The last time I looked," Prime Minister Tuilaepa said, "neither the United Nations nor the Common-wealth have a fund to prop up unelected dictators and coup-installed military regimes.
"Because that's exactly where any aid money will go in Fiji – to propping up Bainimarama and his cronies' military junta, not to the common people who need it the most.
"It's a clear indication of how green Bainimarama is. He doesn't understand these things."
Since Bainimarama wrested power from Fiji's elected government back in December 2006, the com-mander has put military personnel in top civilian government positions.
"That's what madmen who appoint themselves to office do. They appoint other madmen to positions of power."
On the reported gagging of the media and widespread suppression of "dissenting voices" against the military regime, the Prime Minister grimaces.
"It's a sign of inexperience. A sign of weakness. Every good government needs alternative views to discern its policies.
"You cannot surround yourself with yes-men and expect a yes-public to everything you do.
"You can't forcibly take over the reigns of government and expect people to just shut up. That's stupid.
"Those actions are reminiscent of Stalin, Musso-lini and Hitler. Well where are they now? And how are they remembered?"
But there is still hope for Bainimarama, the Prime Minister believes.
"He could be remembered as the greatest Prime Minister Fiji ever had if he dismantles the military today and holds fresh elections tomorrow. It's the greatest gift he could give the people of Fiji."
And what does Fiji need an army for anyway, the Prime Minister quizzes.
"Perhaps Bainimarama fears a combined canoe attack from Tuvalu and Kiribati, its closest neighbours. That must be it."
And adds: "This is a region known for friendly people and its pristine environment – a paradise on earth.
"Having a Prime Minister dressed up in army beret and full military garb is ridiculous."
The Prime Minister says that he has been told that Mr Bainimarama is part Samoan; that Mr Baini-marama has a Samoan grandmother.
"I'm tempted to go down to the Lands and Titles courts and look up his family genealogy in Samoa. Then I'll send for his family matai (chief) in Samoa and tell him to reprimand his long lost descendant in Fiji. To give him severe censure for being cheeky, being ill-disciplined and having no manners."
And what of Bainimara-ma's People's Charter?
"It's utter rubbish. He's trying to replace Fiji's Constitution with that People's claptrap, or whatever it is.
"The Constitution is the cornerstone of democratic government and democratic governance.
"You only get democratic government by holding free and fair elections and having citizens elect their leaders in Parliament. That's how the system of democratic government works."
Four military coups in 20 years sets a very bad precedent for the future of Fiji, the Prime Minister believes.
"It makes people think a military takeover is the most natural transition of power in Fiji. Since Rabuka's coup, coups have become very tempting, very enticing for those in (military) uniform.
"I'm sure there's a general in the Fiji army today just waiting on the wings, biding his time to grab power and establish his own military government."
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Bainimarama causing crisis, says Qarase
Bainimarama causing crisis, says Qarase
22/02/2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiji’s ousted Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase has told the Fijian community in Sydney that interim Prime Minister Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama’s behaviour is causing a crisis in the region.
According to Australia Network News, Qarase made the comment before a crowd of more than 300 Fijians who attended a fundraising dinner at the Marrickville Town Hall last night.
It reports that Qarase told the Sydney crowd the Pacific Island Forum had made a unanimous stand in favour of an election in Fiji this year and that as a result Bainimarama’s Government was now portraying Fiji's traditional friends in the Pacific, especially Australia and New Zealand, as enemies.
“They are not our enemies. They are bound to us by history and culture and they want to do all they can to encourage Fiji to return to parliamentary democracy and respectability."
Qarase said he was not surprised Commodore Bainimarama had said he would not meet the May 1 deadline as he had a record of reneging on commitments to the Forum.
He added that he was placing his hopes on the President's political dialogue process which is to be mediated by the United Nations and the Commonwealth.
Qarase has told Fijilive that although he is on a private visit to Australia, his party supporters there have insisted on inviting him to dinner so he could inform them of the situation on the ground back home.
He has defended his recent statements in Australia saying he only told the truth to supporters there.
Qarase said the money he collected will be used to finance many of his party’s legal challenges.
Qarase is expected to return to Fiji before March 5, 2009.
22/02/2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Fiji’s ousted Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase has told the Fijian community in Sydney that interim Prime Minister Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama’s behaviour is causing a crisis in the region.
According to Australia Network News, Qarase made the comment before a crowd of more than 300 Fijians who attended a fundraising dinner at the Marrickville Town Hall last night.
It reports that Qarase told the Sydney crowd the Pacific Island Forum had made a unanimous stand in favour of an election in Fiji this year and that as a result Bainimarama’s Government was now portraying Fiji's traditional friends in the Pacific, especially Australia and New Zealand, as enemies.
“They are not our enemies. They are bound to us by history and culture and they want to do all they can to encourage Fiji to return to parliamentary democracy and respectability."
Qarase said he was not surprised Commodore Bainimarama had said he would not meet the May 1 deadline as he had a record of reneging on commitments to the Forum.
He added that he was placing his hopes on the President's political dialogue process which is to be mediated by the United Nations and the Commonwealth.
Qarase has told Fijilive that although he is on a private visit to Australia, his party supporters there have insisted on inviting him to dinner so he could inform them of the situation on the ground back home.
He has defended his recent statements in Australia saying he only told the truth to supporters there.
Qarase said the money he collected will be used to finance many of his party’s legal challenges.
Qarase is expected to return to Fiji before March 5, 2009.
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Elections impossible this year: Chaudhry
Elections impossible this year: Chaudhry
21/02/2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sai's Comment
-Mahen is always at his best when he is speaking with a forked tounge as he always does as is the case here. We all know he is a firm supporter of the regime even if he has left it in order to salvage his standing among the cane farmers who are being denied millions of dollars in Euro dollars as a result of Voreqe refusing to rerun Fiji to a democratic government. All this rubbish about the Charter and wanting to fix the electoral law is just an excuse to hold on power. Voreqe just don't have the intestinal fortitude to go all the way and abrogate the constitution in order to achieve his dark schemes for Fiji. While the people of Fiji suffer, Voreqe pockets around $200 thousand in unclaimed leave, and raises the pay and cost of having an unneeded military. Mahen has been part of all this and no doubt will jump at another chance of reconnecting with Voreqe to continue the exploitation of the people of Fiji. Take heart people of Fiji, as the end of this regime is coming, and we all shall rejoice when they and their supporters are returned to where they came from in the first place.
Fiji Labour Party leader Mahendra Chaudhry says there is no way the general elections can be held this year.
He said given the time needed to prepare and addressing issues in the electoral reform, elections was impossible.
And Chaudhry said this has been made known to the international communities.
He said it was therefore, vital to get on with the President’s Political Dialogue Forum (PPDF) so it could tackle issues revolving around holding elections to guarantee the country’s return to democratic rule.
He said talks to decide on the terms of reference (ToR) and the agenda of the political forum would begin mid next month.
“We have received invitation from the Prime Minister Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama and the meeting to discuss the terms of reference and agendas to be held mid next month,” Chaudhry said.
“This meet of political leaders is very important to the PPDF and the way Fiji’s democratic future is decided,” he said.
Chaudhry said the FLP had been given a name of the mediator for the political dialogue.
“The person is not a local person and he is very quite capable of holding the talks. We will not be disclosing his name,” he said.
He said the United Nations and the Commonwealth were talking with political parties, which showed that Fiji was working progressively towards democracy.
Asked if the FLP would support changes in the Constitution, Chaudhry said this was where the PPDF was necessary as all parties concerned needed to reach an amicable agreement on what changes, if any, was to be done to the Constitution.
With regards to fears of having Fiji suspended from the Pacific Islands Forum, Chaudhry said all parties, locally and abroad, needed to hold more dialogues and be understanding of each other.
He said this situation could very well be avoided given that there be more understanding on both sides, reasoning this was why it was important that the PPDF convened as soon as possible.
21/02/2009
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Sai's Comment
-Mahen is always at his best when he is speaking with a forked tounge as he always does as is the case here. We all know he is a firm supporter of the regime even if he has left it in order to salvage his standing among the cane farmers who are being denied millions of dollars in Euro dollars as a result of Voreqe refusing to rerun Fiji to a democratic government. All this rubbish about the Charter and wanting to fix the electoral law is just an excuse to hold on power. Voreqe just don't have the intestinal fortitude to go all the way and abrogate the constitution in order to achieve his dark schemes for Fiji. While the people of Fiji suffer, Voreqe pockets around $200 thousand in unclaimed leave, and raises the pay and cost of having an unneeded military. Mahen has been part of all this and no doubt will jump at another chance of reconnecting with Voreqe to continue the exploitation of the people of Fiji. Take heart people of Fiji, as the end of this regime is coming, and we all shall rejoice when they and their supporters are returned to where they came from in the first place.
Fiji Labour Party leader Mahendra Chaudhry says there is no way the general elections can be held this year.
He said given the time needed to prepare and addressing issues in the electoral reform, elections was impossible.
And Chaudhry said this has been made known to the international communities.
He said it was therefore, vital to get on with the President’s Political Dialogue Forum (PPDF) so it could tackle issues revolving around holding elections to guarantee the country’s return to democratic rule.
He said talks to decide on the terms of reference (ToR) and the agenda of the political forum would begin mid next month.
“We have received invitation from the Prime Minister Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama and the meeting to discuss the terms of reference and agendas to be held mid next month,” Chaudhry said.
“This meet of political leaders is very important to the PPDF and the way Fiji’s democratic future is decided,” he said.
Chaudhry said the FLP had been given a name of the mediator for the political dialogue.
“The person is not a local person and he is very quite capable of holding the talks. We will not be disclosing his name,” he said.
He said the United Nations and the Commonwealth were talking with political parties, which showed that Fiji was working progressively towards democracy.
Asked if the FLP would support changes in the Constitution, Chaudhry said this was where the PPDF was necessary as all parties concerned needed to reach an amicable agreement on what changes, if any, was to be done to the Constitution.
With regards to fears of having Fiji suspended from the Pacific Islands Forum, Chaudhry said all parties, locally and abroad, needed to hold more dialogues and be understanding of each other.
He said this situation could very well be avoided given that there be more understanding on both sides, reasoning this was why it was important that the PPDF convened as soon as possible.
Teleni - A new dawn?
by Kamal Iyer
www.fijitimes.com - Saturday, February 21, 2009
"I always remind the police officers and I want to remind you again, strong police officers are police officers who make the right decision, doing the right thing at the right time when no-one is watching. I'm talking about honesty, I'm talking about loyalty, I'm talking about integrity. Doing the right thing at the right time when no-one is watching. And I think a lot of people here in Fiji fail because when they do the wrong thing at the wrong time at the wrong place. I challenge you my fellow officers that when you go out today my expectation (is) that you will continue to do the right thing at the right time when the Commissioner is not watching." - Police Commissioner Esala Teleni addressing police officers at the closing of a workshop on Border Control (Fiji Television One National News - Wednesday, February 18, 2009)
This message about integrity, loyalty and doing the right thing as emphasised by Mr Teleni to his officers pales into insignificance when compared to his racial bigotry hurled exclusively at Indian police officers 24 hours earlier on Tuesday February 17, 2009. Mr Teleni definitely did not get out on the wrong side of the bed on Tuesday morning for him to breathe fire and brimstone on Indian police officers. Nor did his blood pressure rise uncontrollably because if it did, he would not have been standing and yelling at the top of his voice - he would have blacked out and rushed to hospital.
The Fiji Television footage shown on the 6pm news on Tuesday - which undoubtedly would have been seen by Mr Teleni himself after police obtained the entire raw footage by executing a search warrant a day later - portrayed the image of a person who knew what he was saying and doing. Here was a man who had a pre-determined agenda to ride roughshod over the unsuspecting Indian police officers. His racial venom was not a mistake or slip of the tongue because racism and the need for the Indian officers to become subservient to him were the central theme of his diatribe.
"Liumuri, lamu-lamu and lamu-s..a" - backstabbers, betrayers and cowards of the highest order - were derogatory and inflammatory insults hurled at the Indian officers by Mr Teleni. The warning to terminate them if they did not become subservient to him, the warning that they hadn't seen his other side are reminiscent of utterances by tyrants, despots and dictators like Mussolini and Hitler before and during World War II, Idi Amin of Uganda in the 1970's and lately Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe. All brought death, destruction, chaos and misery on their people.
In Fiji, Mr Teleni and his boss Voreqe Bainimarama are no exceptions given their rhetoric and the nonchalance with which they have brushed aside the racial bigotry and the outpouring of concern and anger against the racial venom this week. To add insult to injury, police spokeswoman Ema Mua described it as a speech of encouragement and part of disciplinary training.
She thinks the people of Fiji have flown over the cuckoo's nest and are therefore fools. Ema Mua's description of her boss's racial outburst is similar to her theory to justify the brutal and fatal bashing of prison escapee Josefa Baleiloa.
And not surprisingly Commodore Bainimarama, interim Defence Minister Ratu Epeli Ganilau and Fiji Human Rights Commission Chairperson Dr Shaista Shameem have also shrugged off the racist and inflammatory outburst by Mr Teleni describing it as a non-issue.
Dr Shameem's lack of concern, care and even sympathy is understandable given that her views about human rights violations, media freedom and other basic human rights of individuals as enshrined in the 1997 Constitution have taken a one-way street after the coup of December 5, 2006.
But the Indian community, that had predominantly supported the overthrow of the SDL/Labour Multi-Party Government and until December 2008 had shifted their support in large percentages towards Commodore Bainimarama from Mahendra Chaudhry (if the Times-Tebbutt Poll published yesterday is anything to go by) would be surprised and bitter their saviour (Bainimarama) thinks his former deputy army commander (Teleni) was within his rights to have threatened and hurled racial abuse at Indian police officers.
The interim Prime Minister even stated that if he were in Mr Teleni's shoes he would have sacked those officers questioning the police crusade - which a senior and trusted officer of Mr Teleni like Irami Raibe admitted on Fiji TV news a few weeks ago was a failure in terms of acting as a deterrent against committal of crimes like rape and sexual assaults of women and children.
Commodore Bainimarama's defence of Mr Teleni means that when the police boss told his officers on Wednesday to make the right decision, do the right thing at the right time, be honest even when no one is watching - Mr Teleni in Bainimarama's view made the right decision, did the right thing at the right time and was honest when he called the Indian officers liumuri, lamu lamu and lamu s..a - betrayers, backstabbers and cowards of the highest order.
Fiji Labour Party Leader Mahendra Chaudhry was only disturbed by the television report and in a statement talked about separation of religion from the State.
He also asked aggrieved officers to resolve the matter internally with Mr Teleni.
This reaction from a man who throughout his political career has proclaimed himself as the sole crusader and champion of Indian rights and dignity, illustrates his morality, character and credibility.
How can Mr Chaudhry and Commodore Bainimarama now justify their so called vision of building a better Fiji, completely free of any racial prejudices, racial intolerance and racial bigotry as stated in their holy book the People's Charter, when a police commissioner of a State, who is the ultimate guarantor of peace, security, stability and a person vested with the responsibility of ensuring ordinary citizens are not subjected to any limitations that may hinder their constitutionally protected rights and freedoms, is able to breach the same basic human rights in broad daylight by hurling racial insult at his own officers?
The preamble of the People's Charter, hailed by the regime and its supporters as the document to end the coup culture, eradicate all forms of racial prejudices and bring genuine democracy to Fiji, starts with the people of Fiji awaking and arising to a new dawn, a new day and a new way. What happened on Tuesday and the decision of the regime's leadership to endorse Mr Teleni's racial bigotry against Indians means that Indians and all ordinary and unsuspecting citizens of Fiji should start preparing themselves for awaking, arising to a new dawn, a new day and new way - being called liumuri, lamulamu and lamu s..a in the land of their birth.
- The views expressed here are those of the writer and may not necessarily reflect those of this newspaper (Fiji Times).
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Teleni’s speech sparks anger
Teleni’s speech sparks anger
www.sun.com - 2/18/2009
The outburst by Police Commissioner Esala Teleni as broadcast on television last night has been branded as racist and hypocritical by a Hindu organisation.
And interim Defence Minister Ratu Epeli Ganilau said last night he would meet Mr Teleni today to discuss the matter.
Mr Teleni was shown on Fiji One last night threatening senior Indian police officers to terminate their employment if they did not cooperate with his leadership. At one stage he mentioned what is regarded as a swear word in Fijian. The transcript of his speech was posted on the Fiji Television website last night.
Then India Sanmarga Ikya Sangam president Dorsami Naidu said Mr Teleni’s comments on television exposed him as a “total racist and an ill-suited person for the Police Commissioner’s post”.
“You don’t just tell people you can get rid of them and replace them in a minute,’’ he said.
“This latest outburst by Mr Teleni just shows the banana republic we have turned out to be. God help the people of this country if we’re going to have people like him in leadership roles.”
Efforts to obtain a comment from Mr Teleni last night were unsuccessful. But Ratu Epeli said he had been made aware of the news item which he would discuss with Mr Teleni today.
On Sunday, an Indian policeman told the Fiji SUN of their discomfort as Hindus with the religious crusade initiated by Mr Teleni and other Fijian senior officers.
After the publication of the policeman’s comment on Monday, police spokesperson Ema Mua enquired with this newspaper about the source of that story. She said she was asked to “write up something” in regards to that article.
Yesterday, Mr Teleni called a meeting of senior Indian police officers at the Nasova police academy.
According to the television report he told the officers to leave the force if they could not be loyal to him. He told them if they were going to speak to the press then there was no place for them in the force.
The transcript of his statement on the TV website read: “If I’m going to move people, I’ll move people. You can go to the press, you can go to the TV. It will not deter Commodore Teleni...come and see me, the press will not solve your problem. Today I’m going to (trust) you. If you are with me, you stay, if not you get out. If you get through that door, get out of the organisation. Kemudou tamata liu muri. I don’t know what’s wrong with you people.”
He said he had not forced Indian police officers to come to the crusade but only encouraged them. He then issued an ultimatum to them.
The transcript showed that he said: “Either you come with me and take this organisation forward or you get out,’’ he said.
“It’s as simple as that. Only if you happen to be lamulamu, lamu-sona people will go to the press. That will not solve the problem. I have a list of people; I’m going to start terminating their services. I am not hesitant to do that.
“I can sack everyone here sitting here today and I can recruit another 200 Indian officers today. I have no problems to do that. Fiji TV, Fiji Sun, Fiji Times will not help you. Let me remind you that any other Indian officers will not help you. Commissioner will help you.”
He warned the officers not to treat him the way they did previous commissioners.
The transcript further stated: “What has happened in the last few days made me much stronger. Kemudou dou cakava, what you always have been doing to the last commissioners and senior police officers, don’t do it to Commodore Teleni. I’m a different person,” he said.
Mr Teleni then spoke about his religious beliefs.
According to the transcript he further said: “No one is going to deter me and my Jesus. I never talk about your religions. I never discuss your religions because I respect it. But at the same time you must respect my religion. You do not go to the press,” he said.
A religious organisation has stated that their members’ participation in a Christian crusade initiated by the police was a personal choice.
Eralier yesterday, Arya Pratinidhi Sabha acting president Sushila Pathik said Indian officers who were of the Hindu faith had the choice to either attend the crusades or just stay away.
She refused to comment further on the matter but added the crusade was about goodwill.
“It’s an individual issue. At these crusades they just preach goodwill and they are not converting anyone,” said Ms Pathik.
www.sun.com - 2/18/2009
The outburst by Police Commissioner Esala Teleni as broadcast on television last night has been branded as racist and hypocritical by a Hindu organisation.
And interim Defence Minister Ratu Epeli Ganilau said last night he would meet Mr Teleni today to discuss the matter.
Mr Teleni was shown on Fiji One last night threatening senior Indian police officers to terminate their employment if they did not cooperate with his leadership. At one stage he mentioned what is regarded as a swear word in Fijian. The transcript of his speech was posted on the Fiji Television website last night.
Then India Sanmarga Ikya Sangam president Dorsami Naidu said Mr Teleni’s comments on television exposed him as a “total racist and an ill-suited person for the Police Commissioner’s post”.
“You don’t just tell people you can get rid of them and replace them in a minute,’’ he said.
“This latest outburst by Mr Teleni just shows the banana republic we have turned out to be. God help the people of this country if we’re going to have people like him in leadership roles.”
Efforts to obtain a comment from Mr Teleni last night were unsuccessful. But Ratu Epeli said he had been made aware of the news item which he would discuss with Mr Teleni today.
On Sunday, an Indian policeman told the Fiji SUN of their discomfort as Hindus with the religious crusade initiated by Mr Teleni and other Fijian senior officers.
After the publication of the policeman’s comment on Monday, police spokesperson Ema Mua enquired with this newspaper about the source of that story. She said she was asked to “write up something” in regards to that article.
Yesterday, Mr Teleni called a meeting of senior Indian police officers at the Nasova police academy.
According to the television report he told the officers to leave the force if they could not be loyal to him. He told them if they were going to speak to the press then there was no place for them in the force.
The transcript of his statement on the TV website read: “If I’m going to move people, I’ll move people. You can go to the press, you can go to the TV. It will not deter Commodore Teleni...come and see me, the press will not solve your problem. Today I’m going to (trust) you. If you are with me, you stay, if not you get out. If you get through that door, get out of the organisation. Kemudou tamata liu muri. I don’t know what’s wrong with you people.”
He said he had not forced Indian police officers to come to the crusade but only encouraged them. He then issued an ultimatum to them.
The transcript showed that he said: “Either you come with me and take this organisation forward or you get out,’’ he said.
“It’s as simple as that. Only if you happen to be lamulamu, lamu-sona people will go to the press. That will not solve the problem. I have a list of people; I’m going to start terminating their services. I am not hesitant to do that.
“I can sack everyone here sitting here today and I can recruit another 200 Indian officers today. I have no problems to do that. Fiji TV, Fiji Sun, Fiji Times will not help you. Let me remind you that any other Indian officers will not help you. Commissioner will help you.”
He warned the officers not to treat him the way they did previous commissioners.
The transcript further stated: “What has happened in the last few days made me much stronger. Kemudou dou cakava, what you always have been doing to the last commissioners and senior police officers, don’t do it to Commodore Teleni. I’m a different person,” he said.
Mr Teleni then spoke about his religious beliefs.
According to the transcript he further said: “No one is going to deter me and my Jesus. I never talk about your religions. I never discuss your religions because I respect it. But at the same time you must respect my religion. You do not go to the press,” he said.
A religious organisation has stated that their members’ participation in a Christian crusade initiated by the police was a personal choice.
Eralier yesterday, Arya Pratinidhi Sabha acting president Sushila Pathik said Indian officers who were of the Hindu faith had the choice to either attend the crusades or just stay away.
She refused to comment further on the matter but added the crusade was about goodwill.
“It’s an individual issue. At these crusades they just preach goodwill and they are not converting anyone,” said Ms Pathik.
Fiji judiciary is a fragile institution because of coup culture - (Part Four)
Fiji judiciary is a fragile institution because of coup culture - (Part Four)
www.sun.com.fj - 2/18/2009
www.sun.com.fj - 2/18/2009
In the course of legal arguments the Supreme Court heard that Justice Michael Scott’s alleged hostility towards Justice Nazhat Shameem resulted in his refusing to attend a judges’ retreat in 2003.
In his opinion the “three judges, Byrne, Shameem and Gates JJ were guilty of grave misconduct’” which resulted in the judiciary in general, and himself in particular, having been brought into disrepute. He had canvassed that perhaps on retirement he might launch legal action seeking declaratory relief and damages from them.
In the previous column I recalled the judgment of Justice Kenneth Handley who had ruled against the summons on behalf of Justice Shameem that the Supreme Court had been inappropriately and improperly constituted in that case, because one of the judges, Justice Scott, was disqualified from sitting because of his actual or ostensible bias.
Justice Shameem being dissatisfied with Justice Handley’s direction, then filed an application to the Supreme Court to review that decision.
What follows next is contained in the Supreme Court judgment of Justices Mark Weinberg, Keith Mason and John von Doussa in Vakalalabure v State [2006] FJSC 3; CAV0003U.2004S (1 May 2006). The application to review was supported by affidavit sworn by Justice Shameem on 28 October 2005. To that affidavit, she exhibited the correspondence that had passed between the Chief Justice Daniel Fatiaki and herself after she discovered that Justice Scott had sat on the appeal.
She went on to state that on 19 October 2005, she had instructed Chen Bunn Young of Young & Associates, solicitors of Lautoka, to file an application to intervene in the proceedings. She said that she had been informed by Mr Young that the summons and her earlier affidavit had been lodged with the Supreme Court Registry by Young’s Suva agents on that same day.
The affidavit then concluded: “I am further informed by my counsel and verily believe that on Friday 21 October 2005 (at the request of Shiu Sami, Clerk on behalf of the Registrar of the Supreme Court), my counsel thinking that he was attending an informal meeting with the Honourable Chief Justice and Justice Handley found himself in the chambers of Justice Handley alone who thereafter informed counsel that he would deliver a ruling. On the same day my counsel wrote a letter to Justice Handley and copied to the Chief Justice which letter was exchanged simultaneously with a receipt of ruling titled ‘Direction’ by Justice Handley.”
Justice Shameem annexed to this affidavit a copy of her counsel’s letter dated 21 October 2005. That letter purported to record the circumstances of Young’s meeting with Justice Handley in his Lordship’s chambers earlier that morning.
In substance, Young claimed that he had been told that the meeting would be “informal”, and that he need not bring with him any legal materials. He said that he had been taken by surprise when Justice Handley had referred to “making a ruling”. He claimed that he had not regarded the meeting as a “hearing”, and that he had only attended as a courtesy, in response to a request from the Chief Justice and Justice Handley. In effect, the tenor of his letter was to challenge the validity of Justice Handley’s “direction” on the basis that Justice Shameem had been denied natural justice.
Her case was heard before Justices Weinberg, Mason and von Doussa. She was represented by Young, P. Joseph and Gerard McCoy - later the State’s QC in the Qarase-Bainimarama case. It was submitted on her behalf that the direction given by Justice Handley to the Registrar was, relevantly, an “order” within the meaning of that expression in s.122(5) of the Supreme Court Act. Her application was for leave to intervene, which Justice Handley had summarily rejected. It was not an appeal from Justice Handley’s decision.
On behalf of Justice Shameem, it was submitted that Justice Scott was automatically disqualified from sitting on the appeal from Justice Shameem because of his “past and ongoing implacable hostility and animosity” towards her.
That submission was supported by reference to one matter, in particular, that emerged from the affidavit sworn by Justice Shameem on 19 October 2005. It concerned a letter dated 29 January 2003 written by Justice Scott to the Chief Justice in which he advised that he would not be attending a judges’ retreat scheduled for February 2003. He explained that the events of May 2000, and subsequent months, had resulted in a very serious split in the judiciary. He said that in his opinion three judges, Byrne, Shameem and Gates “were guilty of grave misconduct” which resulted in the judiciary in general, and himself in particular, having been brought into disrepute.
He said that as a result he had had no social dealings for the past two years with the three judges. He canvassed various options. One of these options was to commence legal proceedings seeking declaratory relief and damages. He said that given his position as a judge of the High Court, he did not think it would be appropriate to initiate legal proceedings at that stage. He added that he would not find himself so constrained if he were to exercise his option to retire in April 2004.
But, as Justices Weinberg, Mason and von Doussa noted, “Scott JA did not spell out in his letter precisely the cause of action that he might rely upon if he initiated any legal proceedings. It may reasonably be inferred that he had in mind a claim for defamation. The fact remains, however, that Scott JA did not retire in April 2004, and has not instituted any legal proceedings against Shameem J or either of the other two named judges”. Counsel for Justice Shameem submitted that it was of fundamental importance to the rule of law that public confidence in the independence and impartiality of the courts be maintained. It was essential to that end that members of the judiciary act, at all times, without bias, for or against any party. Not only must they be impartial, they must be seen to be impartial.
It was submitted that it was impossible for Justice Scott, having threatened to sue Justice Shameem, and having never withdrawn that threat, to be regarded as unbiased in relation to any appeal from one of her judgments.
Her counsel submitted that Justice Handley had erred in summarily directing that her application for leave to intervene be rejected on the basis that she lacked standing in this matter. They submitted that Justice Handley took an unduly stringent view of what an applicant for leave to intervene had to show in order to be granted intervener status.
Justice Shameem’s legal counsel submitted that in Fiji the rules governing standing were broader, and more flexible, than Justice Handley had appreciated. They submitted that she had standing, in the matter, under an orthodox application of those rules, by reason of several important factors.
The first of these factors was the unique position in which Justice Shameem found herself. She alone (apart from Justice Scott) was in a position to appreciate the full extent of his hostility towards her. Others may have had an inkling of the difficulties between them, but not the full extent of the problem. In addition, she alone had access to the correspondence addressed to her, and other material necessary to establish the malice that she claimed he bore towards her.
The second factor was the specific duty that she had, by virtue of her judicial oath, to uphold the Constitution. It was noted that judicial officers alone, among those whose oaths are prescribed in the Constitution, are required, in terms, to swear or affirm to uphold the Constitution. In other words, she had a duty, under the Constitution, to bring to the attention of the Supreme Court any matter that would undermine public confidence in the judiciary if it were not properly addressed.
The third factor was the lack of any alternative means by which Justice Scott’s unwillingness to recuse himself could be formally addressed by the Court. It was plain, from the fact that Justice Shameem’s initial letter to the Chief Justice had not resulted in Justice Scott disqualifying himself, that he had no intention of doing so. Although the matter might have been dealt with in other ways, such as by being drawn to the attention of the Attorney-General, and by providing him with whatever evidence there was to support the claim of actual bias, it was submitted that the course adopted by Justice Shameem, of seeking leave to intervene in this proceeding, had been entirely appropriate.
In the end, the three Supreme Court judges ruled: “In our view, irrespective of whether Handley J applied too narrow a test of standing when he directed the Registrar to reject Shameem J’s application, as we think he did, Shameem J does not have standing, under the common law, as we understand it to be, to intervene in this appeal. If we were wrong about that, we would nonetheless refuse leave to intervene as a matter of discretion.”
In the final analysis, there was always the residual power, as exercised by the House of Lords in Pinochet No.2, to overturn a decision of a Court that included a judge who sat in a matter, when he ought not to have done so, said the three judges.
The hostility that existed between Justices Scott and Shameem, the three judges noted, appeared to be reciprocal, and “is now a matter of public record. It is known that their difficulties go back at least as far as the tumultuous events of May 2000. Their differences are obviously both real and personal. It is a matter of regret that there appears to be little that can be done to persuade them to reconcile”.
While accepting Justice Shameem’s contention that she was better placed than either Ratu Rakuita Vakalalabure or the Director of Public Prosecutions, to appreciate the level of hostility that she regarded Justice Scott as manifesting towards her, and that she was in a better position to place evidence before the Court that might support her claim of actual bias on his part, “neither of these facts, if true, gives her ‘a special interest’ in the proceeding of a kind that would warrant granting leave to intervene”.
According to the three judges: “She is no more bound, by virtue of that position, to uphold the Constitution, than is any other citizen of this country, irrespective of whether that person has taken an oath to do so.”
The very fact that Justice Shameem had herself expressed hostility towards Justice Scott meant that a cloud hovered over her own objectivity in this unfortunate matter, said Justices Weinberg, Mason and von Doussa. “Courts of final appeal that permit intervention generally look to satisfy themselves that the prospective intervener can contribute information or submissions beyond the ken of the parties. In the present case information has been drawn fully to the attention of the Supreme Court, as presently constituted. Suffice it to say, it does not present an overwhelming case. “The material emanating from Scott JA is hardly current, and it requires a leap to proceed from a finding that Scott JA does not get on with Shameem J (whether with, or without, good cause) to a finding that his Lordship would be false to his judicial oath,” said the three judges.
The ruling effectively deprived us of any further disclosures of the hostility that was generated by the 2000 coup.
TO BE CONTINUED
The views expressed are those of Victor Lal and not of the Fiji Sun.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
FIJI: South Pacific's Burma?
FIJI: South Pacific's Burma? By Stephen de Tarczynski
MELBOURNE, Feb 12 2009 (IPS) -
MELBOURNE, Feb 12 2009 (IPS) -
There are concerns that the behaviour of Fiji’s interim government indicates the possibility of a Burma-style dictatorship emerging in the Pacific nation. "Are we seeing the development of a militarised democracy [in Fiji]?" asks Prof. Brij Lal, a Fijian of Indian descent and expert on Fijian affairs at the Australian National University.
"I honestly fear that we may be seeing, in an embryonic form, the ‘Burma of the Pacific,’" says Lal, who was part of the three-member Fiji Constitution Review Commission - the report of which formed the basis of Fiji’s 1997 constitution - appointed by then-president Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara in 1995.
Lal’s fear is embodied in the form of Fiji’s current ruler, Commodore Josaia Voreqe (Frank) Bainimarama, who as head of the nation’s military staged a coup in December 2006 - the fourth since 1987 - to oust then-prime minister Laisenia Qarase.
In 2000, Qarase had actually been appointed to the post by Bainimarama, who headed the interim military government organised to counter the coup led by Fijian nationalist George Speight earlier in the year.
Despite remaining prime minister after the 2001 general election and 2006 parliamentary election, Qarase’s policy of reconciliation towards those involved in the 2000 coup angered Bainimarama and was a major factor in the latter’s overthrow of the elected government.
Sandra Tarte from the University of the South Pacific in Suva, Fiji’s capital, told IPS that the political role arrogated by the military to itself has been a common element in Fiji in recent decades.
"The army, especially its current commander, sees itself as the saviour of the nation," she says.
But it is not necessarily the policies of Bainimarama that alarm the experts.
Among these are plans to overcome the racial divide that separates the two main ethnic groups, indigenous Fijians and Indo-Fijians, most of whom are descendents of indentured labourers brought from India by the British to work in Fiji’s sugar plantations a century ago.
The cornerstone of Bainimarama’s vision of a multi-ethnic yet unified Fiji is the recently-released People’s Charter for Change, Peace and Progress.
"The People’s Charter process, as a national level inclusive and participatory undertaking, represents Fiji’s own way of addressing its deep-rooted, complex and fundamental problems," write Bainimarama and Archbishop Petero Mataca.
The two are co-chairs of the National Council for Building a Better Fiji (NCBBF) - the purportedly broad-based organisation behind drafting the charter - in the charter’s foreword.
"The overarching objective of the People’s Charter is to rebuild Fiji into a non-racial, culturally vibrant and united, well-governed, truly democratic nation; a nations that seeks progress and prosperity through merit-based equality of opportunity and peace," they write.
Also in the foreword, the interim government commits to "restore and sustain parliamentary democratic governance, stability, and peace in Fiji."
Tarte argues that major changes in Fijian society need to be accompanied by an acceptance and an understanding of the need for such reform. "The charter process has so far not succeeded in building that necessary consensus," she says.
While Lal supports the position taken by Bainimarama, he opposes the way in which changes are being implemented.
"His vision is one which I applaud…but not the way he is proceeding," he says.
Fiji’s neighbours, particularly Australia and New Zealand, have been highly critical of Bainimarama since the coup in 2006 and continue to call on the interim leader to hold elections.
At the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) leaders’ retreat in Papua New Guinea in January - the PIF is the region’s leading political and economic policy organisation consisting of 16 full members - forum members unanimously called on Fiji to conduct a general election by the end of the year and to nominate the date for elections by no later then the end of April.
Failure to do so, warned the PIF leaders, will result in "targeted measures" being imposed upon Fiji, in addition to sanctions already in place.
Potential measures include the barring of members of the interim government from all PIF events and meetings as well as Fiji becoming ineligible for any PIF regional cooperation initiatives or further financial and technical assistance.
But with Bainimarama remaining obstinate in the face of international criticism - the PIF’s January meeting was arranged to discuss the failure of Fiji to fulfill its 2007 commitment to hold elections by March this year, yet with the nation’s worst-ever floods occurring just prior to the gathering, Bainimarama sent his attorney-general rather than attending himself - it appears unlikely that such an election will be convened this year.
Besides a lack of election infrastructure, including the need to register voters and demarcate constituency boundaries, a major factor likely to delay elections in Fiji well beyond the 2009 deadline is Bainimarama’s desire to change the electoral system.
The present system, stemming from the 1997 constitution, reflects racial divisions in the country. While the 71 constituencies which make up Fiji elect the 71 members of the House of Representatives, 46 of these seats are allocated along ethnic lines - 23 for indigenous Fijians, 19 for Indo-Fijians, one for Rotuman Islanders and three for minority groups - meaning that only voters from the allocated ethnicities can vote for their preferred representative.
The other 25 are open seats, for which candidates from any ethnic group can vie for votes.
Additionally, the interim government wants to introduce a less proportional voting system.
Lal remains critical of the "the interim administration’s claim that unless we have a new electoral system then Fiji will continue to have political instability."
"My view is that whatever electoral system you have in place, unless there is a willingness to abide by the rule of law, nothing is going to happen," he says.
For him, the more decisive factor in Fiji’s stability is the role of the roughly 3,000-strong standing army.
"You may have a new government in power tomorrow in Fiji as a result of this new electoral system. What if they propose a course of action that the military opposes? What happens then?" he asks.
"I honestly fear that we may be seeing, in an embryonic form, the ‘Burma of the Pacific,’" says Lal, who was part of the three-member Fiji Constitution Review Commission - the report of which formed the basis of Fiji’s 1997 constitution - appointed by then-president Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara in 1995.
Lal’s fear is embodied in the form of Fiji’s current ruler, Commodore Josaia Voreqe (Frank) Bainimarama, who as head of the nation’s military staged a coup in December 2006 - the fourth since 1987 - to oust then-prime minister Laisenia Qarase.
In 2000, Qarase had actually been appointed to the post by Bainimarama, who headed the interim military government organised to counter the coup led by Fijian nationalist George Speight earlier in the year.
Despite remaining prime minister after the 2001 general election and 2006 parliamentary election, Qarase’s policy of reconciliation towards those involved in the 2000 coup angered Bainimarama and was a major factor in the latter’s overthrow of the elected government.
Sandra Tarte from the University of the South Pacific in Suva, Fiji’s capital, told IPS that the political role arrogated by the military to itself has been a common element in Fiji in recent decades.
"The army, especially its current commander, sees itself as the saviour of the nation," she says.
But it is not necessarily the policies of Bainimarama that alarm the experts.
Among these are plans to overcome the racial divide that separates the two main ethnic groups, indigenous Fijians and Indo-Fijians, most of whom are descendents of indentured labourers brought from India by the British to work in Fiji’s sugar plantations a century ago.
The cornerstone of Bainimarama’s vision of a multi-ethnic yet unified Fiji is the recently-released People’s Charter for Change, Peace and Progress.
"The People’s Charter process, as a national level inclusive and participatory undertaking, represents Fiji’s own way of addressing its deep-rooted, complex and fundamental problems," write Bainimarama and Archbishop Petero Mataca.
The two are co-chairs of the National Council for Building a Better Fiji (NCBBF) - the purportedly broad-based organisation behind drafting the charter - in the charter’s foreword.
"The overarching objective of the People’s Charter is to rebuild Fiji into a non-racial, culturally vibrant and united, well-governed, truly democratic nation; a nations that seeks progress and prosperity through merit-based equality of opportunity and peace," they write.
Also in the foreword, the interim government commits to "restore and sustain parliamentary democratic governance, stability, and peace in Fiji."
Tarte argues that major changes in Fijian society need to be accompanied by an acceptance and an understanding of the need for such reform. "The charter process has so far not succeeded in building that necessary consensus," she says.
While Lal supports the position taken by Bainimarama, he opposes the way in which changes are being implemented.
"His vision is one which I applaud…but not the way he is proceeding," he says.
Fiji’s neighbours, particularly Australia and New Zealand, have been highly critical of Bainimarama since the coup in 2006 and continue to call on the interim leader to hold elections.
At the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) leaders’ retreat in Papua New Guinea in January - the PIF is the region’s leading political and economic policy organisation consisting of 16 full members - forum members unanimously called on Fiji to conduct a general election by the end of the year and to nominate the date for elections by no later then the end of April.
Failure to do so, warned the PIF leaders, will result in "targeted measures" being imposed upon Fiji, in addition to sanctions already in place.
Potential measures include the barring of members of the interim government from all PIF events and meetings as well as Fiji becoming ineligible for any PIF regional cooperation initiatives or further financial and technical assistance.
But with Bainimarama remaining obstinate in the face of international criticism - the PIF’s January meeting was arranged to discuss the failure of Fiji to fulfill its 2007 commitment to hold elections by March this year, yet with the nation’s worst-ever floods occurring just prior to the gathering, Bainimarama sent his attorney-general rather than attending himself - it appears unlikely that such an election will be convened this year.
Besides a lack of election infrastructure, including the need to register voters and demarcate constituency boundaries, a major factor likely to delay elections in Fiji well beyond the 2009 deadline is Bainimarama’s desire to change the electoral system.
The present system, stemming from the 1997 constitution, reflects racial divisions in the country. While the 71 constituencies which make up Fiji elect the 71 members of the House of Representatives, 46 of these seats are allocated along ethnic lines - 23 for indigenous Fijians, 19 for Indo-Fijians, one for Rotuman Islanders and three for minority groups - meaning that only voters from the allocated ethnicities can vote for their preferred representative.
The other 25 are open seats, for which candidates from any ethnic group can vie for votes.
Additionally, the interim government wants to introduce a less proportional voting system.
Lal remains critical of the "the interim administration’s claim that unless we have a new electoral system then Fiji will continue to have political instability."
"My view is that whatever electoral system you have in place, unless there is a willingness to abide by the rule of law, nothing is going to happen," he says.
For him, the more decisive factor in Fiji’s stability is the role of the roughly 3,000-strong standing army.
"You may have a new government in power tomorrow in Fiji as a result of this new electoral system. What if they propose a course of action that the military opposes? What happens then?" he asks.
Fiji military here to stay: axed officer
Fiji military here to stay: axed officer
12/02/2009
The former commander of the Fiji military land force says the military will remain part of Fiji’s political landscape even after they return to the barracks. “It seems the model they are trying to use is to have permanent influence on politics,” Lieutenant Colonel Jone Baledrokadroka said in an exclusive interview with Fijilive.
Baledrokadroka should know since he was second-in-command to Fiji military leader Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama only months before the military overthrew the Laisenia Qarase-led Government.Bainimarama announced on January 13, 2006 that he had dismissed Baledrokadroka for insubordination.
Baledrokadroka later said he had confronted Bainimarama about his continued standoff with the Qarase government and had tried to persuade him not to stage a coup. Today, the former army strongman maintains the military’s place is in the barracks. “I think that option is a very idealistic one,” he said when asked whether the military should return to barracks.But he said looking at the way things are set up at the moment, “the military exit strategy is based on the implementation of the Charter”.“It seems they’ve set themselves out as some sort of guardian for the Charter. What happens if the Charter is not implemented or not implemented fully according to their wishes? “So it seems that the military will be part of our political landscape for some time.”
He added that Government had been militarized at all levels, from ministerial down to the permanent secretaries and even in all departments.“They’ve put people all over Government. Now they’re talking about municipal councils. So it seems they have a plan to be in power,” he said.Meanwhile, earlier this week Bainimarama told the Vice President of the Republic of China Xi Jinping, during their meeting in Nadi, that he did not overthrow the Qarase government two years ago to seize power and remain in control.
Instead, he said, that the military will only stay in power until all its objectives are achieved.“The military, essentially assumed control of the Government with clear objectives to eliminate corruption, racial discrimination policies and practices, and to bring about necessary reforms in the area of public service, governance as well as the electoral system in an effort to build a better and more progressive Fiji," he said.“
The military did not intervene for the purpose of remaining in control and power beyond a reasonable time than what would be required to achieve the above objectives.”
Tuesday, February 03, 2009
Supreme Court To Give Ruling on SDL’s Case Against NCBBF
Supreme Court To Give Ruling on SDL’s Case Against NCBBF
www.fijivillage.com - 03/02/2009
www.fijivillage.com - 03/02/2009
The Supreme Court will deliver its ruling on notice on the SDL party's application for special leave to petition the court.The SDL is seeking special leave to appeal to the Supreme Court the decision of the single Judge of Appeal, Justice John Byrne, who had granted a stay on the High Court order of Justice Filimoni Jitoko.Justice Jitoko had initially granted an injunction against the promotion of the People's Charter and all work of the National Council for Building a Better Fiji.The President of the Supreme Court, Chief Justice Anthony Gates says he would deliver the judgment on notice.The state is represented by Solicitor General, Christopher Pryde and state solicitor, Luke Daunivalu while the SDL party was represented by Niko Nawaikula.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)