Tuesday, March 31, 2009

No Immunity for Soldier

Judge rules on soldiers immunity

http://www.fijisun.com.fj/ - 3/31/2009


Private Maika Vuniwawa is not immune to prosecution for a charge of murder.
Justice Daniel Gounder made the decision yesterday after Vuniwawa’s lawyer, Haroon Ali Shah brought up the issue in court last week.
“For the reasons outlined in my ruling, I find that the accused is not immune to prosecution of criminal charges brought against him by the State,” Justice Gounder said.
Vuniwawa is charged with murder for allegedly causing the death of Nimilote Verebasaga following the military coup in 2006.
In his ruling, he said after looking through the promulgation enacted by President Ratu Josefa Iloilo after the events of December 5, 2006, he found scope of the immunity was limited.
“The immunity only extends to those acts that led to the ousting or removal of the officials of the legislative and executive organs of Government from their offices and also of other persons holding public office. It surely does not immune anyone from prosecution for an offence of murder allegedly committed in the process of removing the officials. In this respect, there is no ambiguity about the ambit of the immunity.”
In the promulgation, Ratu Josefa states immunity is to be granted to Commodore Frank Bainimarama and all officers and members of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces and also members of the Reserves.
All those who acted under directions or orders from them were also immune from prosecution.
Shah had stated in his application because of the ambiguity of the promulgation, his client was immune from prosecution too.
State lawyer Wilisoni Kuruisaqila had rebutted and said immunity covers only those acts which led to the removal of the legislative and executive organs of the State by the Fiji Military Forces, and not acts on civilians by military officers.
Human Rights Commissioner and Fiji Women’s Crisis Center coordinator Shamima Ali yesterday said the ruling was a reflection that the judiciary was still independent.
“It was a good call made by Justice Gounder and it shows we can still turn to the judiciary for justice. It’s his interpretation of the decree and it is a fair one,” she said.
However, she said there needs to be further consultation on the issue of immunity when a constitutionally elected government is in place in order to prevent misinterpretation of its meaning.

Monday, March 30, 2009

Soldier not covered by immunity

Soldier not covered by immunity
www.fiivillage.com - 30/03/2009
Immunity is not covered for the soldier who is charged with the murder of Tailevu villager Nimilote Verebasaga.High Court Judge Justice Daniel Gounder delivered the ruling this afternoon saying that soldier Maika Vuniwawa will face trial as the ambit of the immunity is limited and not every conduct of those persons who have been granted immunity under the promulgation is immune from prosecution.He stressed that the immunity only extends to those acts that led to the ousting or removal of the officials of the legislative and executive organs of government from their offices and persons holding public office.Vuniwawa's lawyer Haroon Ali Shah earlier made a submission that no matter how serious the case or even if soldiers had taken part in genocide (or mass killings), immunity is there to cover them because they were there to maintain law and order.Following the ruling, the trial proper commenced this afternoon with five witnesses taking the stand.Verebasaga's older brother Vatimio Liganisulu recalled that on the 5th of January, 2007 at 5.30am, two soldiers holding guns and wearing green uniforms, knocked on his door in search of his brother. He told the court that soon after, Verebasaga was driven away by the soldiers in a rental car.Another witness Karalaini Toalevu said on the 28th of December, 2006, she saw Verebasaga drinking with a group of men where a dispute developed over land issues.The case is adjourned to 10am tomorrow. Verebasaga was allegedly murdered in military custody at QEB in December 2006.

Cane Farmers are the Sacrificial lambs

Sacrificial lambs
By Kamal Iyer
www.fijitimes.com - Saturday, March 28, 2009
On May 31, 2008, Fiji Labour Party leader and National Farmers Union general secretary Mahendra Chaudhry addressed a gathering of cane farmers at the Labasa Civic Centre on the occasion to mark 30 years of existence of the NFU.
Mr Chaudhry who was then the interim Minister for Finance and Sugar told the farmers that the interim Government was doing a lot for them and they should have no reason to complain about being neglected by governments.
"We (regime) have given a $2.5 million subsidy for fertiliser because we do not want to burden you and that is why the price of fertiliser has not been increased for four to five years. We have allocated $5 million in the 2008 Budget to help you and will do more if you increase your production but you have to show results by producing more cane so that Fiji is once again able to produce 4 million tonnes of cane and produce 400,000 tonnes of sugar. And only an increase in crop production will ensure the success of the $86 million mill upgrade program," Mr Chaudhry told the farmers.
The solitary clap as he announced assistance measures was perhaps an indication of the nightmare farmers would face as a direct result of Mr Chaudhry's action.
The question that arises is this: Why didn't Mr Chaudhry tell farmers on May 31, 2008, many of who were founding members of NFU and have paid $30 annually since 1978 to ensure the financial viability and strength of NFU and even the establishment of its head office in Suva (at least since 2001), that he would get an agreement from sugar industry stakeholders and then issue a written directive to the Fiji Sugar Corporation in a few weeks (June 2008) for $6.56 million to be lent by the Sugar Cane Growers Fund to South Pacific Fertilisers Ltd and for it to be deducted from industry proceeds?
Mr Chaudhry did not suffer from amnesia or memory loss when he addressed that meeting of May 31.
Fiji Television raw footage of the meeting that I purchased showed exactly the opposite. Mr Chaudhry kept referring to points he had written on a piece of paper.
Why was a dot point about his directive missing? The fact that it happened after the meeting (June 2008) is meaningless because Mr Chaudhry was making predictions about the future including promise of more financial assistance in the 2009 budget.
And now NFU national executives are saying they had no knowledge whatsoever of what was to befall farmers. This is after their repeated statements through the media this week.
Mr Chaudhry's directive now means that the FSC will pay only $1.968 million while cane farmers will pay $4.592 million or 70% of the $6.56 million because of the 70/30 formula in use in the industry. Because of this directive, farmers will receive a meagre $4.02 per tonne instead of $6 from the $8 total per tonne total payout.
This is well and truly scandalous and a fraud on the poor cane farmers. Sugar Cane Growers Council chairman Jain Kumar admitted on Radio Fiji Two news last Thursday night that Mr Chaudhry issued the directive in June 2008, so did Sugar Commission and SCGF board chairman John May over Radio Fiji Two news to veteran journalist Rajendra James only two days ago when he said, "Absolutely, Mr Chaudhry was there" (at the stakeholders meeting).
So why are NFU president Sanjeet Maharaj and others crying foul now when the scheme is being unveiled?
On April 19, 2008, Mr Maharaj took over the NFU presidency from Jain Kumar.
Mr Chaudhry issued the directive to SCGC and FSC in June 2008. So how is it possible that Mr Maharaj is now claiming he was unaware of the directive?
And if Mr Maharaj didn't then he was sleeping on the job because Mr Chaudhry is the NFU general secretary and Jain Kumar is a NFU appointed chairman of SCGC.
* Next Saturday: Role of SCGC and its CEO.
* The views expressed in this article are exclusively those of the author and are published in this newspaper on that sole understanding.

Sunday, March 29, 2009

Our 29 questions to the FNPF- You judge the quality!

Our 29 questions to the FNPF
By SOPHIE FOSTER
www.fijitimes.com - Saturday, March 28, 2009

Every local worker in the country is legally obliged to put part of their wages into FNPF's hands for their superannuation
LAST week the Fiji Times ran an opinion piece based on figures provided in the Fiji National Provident Fund's 2007 Annual Report. In the article, FNPF was asked to consider its operating costs first before charging members a $20 processing fee for all applications. FNPF responded by taking out a full-page advertisement criticising the article and calling for any clarifications to be first sought from the Fund. So on Tuesday evening, SOPHIE FOSTER of the Fiji Times sent a list of 29 questions (with several sub-questions) to FNPF chief executive Aisake Taito, grouped into five areas: Processing fee, Operating Expenses, Staff salaries and wages, Staff benefits, and Other matters.
FNPF's response on Wednesday was "After evaluating the questions today, I would like to inform you that the Fund has addressed most of the issues that you have raised in our response to your opinion. We would not be elaborating any further. Vinaka."
As a result, we informed FNPF that we would "run a series of articles based on these questions. In this series we will include all the questions sent to you and your exact response" (which was no response at the time).
Yesterday morning, FNPF had a change of heart and decided to answer the questions posed.
So the Fiji Times decided that in the interest of greater discussion, we would run all the questions asked and the answers FNPF provided in full.


Dear Mr Taito,
Further to your call for any clarifications to be sought from the Fiji National Provident Fund first, I wish to seek further information and your comments with regard to the following:
Processing fee:
TIMES: You have publicly stated that the processing cost for applications is $43. How long has it been $43?
TIMES: What was the processing fee in 2006, 2005, and 2004?
FNPF: The processing fbeen (sic) the same for the years stated; exasperated.
TIMES: Are you able to offer a comparison with FNPF's processing fee in previous decades - 1990s, 1980s, 1970s?
FNPF: $43 is charged for direct housing transfers and $30 for transfers to approved lenders; $50 for small business applications and $200 for legal costs for housing transfers.
The charges have varied a little over the years.
The $200 legal fees are minimal compared to the fee charged by law firms; following member complaints the Fund extended this service to members. This was usually outsourced at a minimum of $500 per transaction.
TIMES: Do you believe that a $43 processing cost for each application is high?
FNPF: We reiterate that members need to share the cost of processing pre-retirement assistance.
TIMES: You have mentioned that FNPF is "committed to driving the actual processing cost down by improving workflows and streamlining its processes and systems via Business Process Re-Engineering". When did this process begin?
FNPF: In 2008 the Fund initiated moves towards changing the organisation structure, processes, systems etc.
Several initiatives have been pursued in light of this; including the formation of a Change Management Team; who have reviewed all our internal processes esp. in regards to Operation matters (members and employer processes).
This has been further strengthened by review to the Fund's Strategic Plan for FY09 - FY11.
TIMES: Was this an internally-driven exercise or were consultants hired to design and oversee the process?
FNPF: Of course, this is internally driven and is under the CEO's direct supervision.
Consultants have been hired on a needs basis for short term to review internal recommendations and to assess effectiveness and workability.
TIMES: If a consultant was hired for the process, how much did that cost?
FNPF: Cost is confidential between the Fund and service provider.
TIMES: Do you believe that FNPF must address any internal inefficiency first before charging members a $20 processing fee?
FNPF: We reiterate that members need to share the cost of processing pre-retirement assistance.
TIMES: Has a processing cost goal been set for FNPF employees, and if so, what is it and what is the deadline to achieve it? If not, why has this not been set as yet?
FNPF: All FNPF staff members have individual targets (measures & timelines) in which they need to deliver their sections and division's Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) under the Fund's Key Responsibility Areas (KRA); they are assessed against this. These are clearly set out in the newly introduced Balanced Score Card.
Operating Expenses:
TIMES: Regarding the operating costs, do you believe that quoting this as a proportion of total portfolio is selective and misleading in FNPF's case?
FNPF: The Fund's point exactly. You were selective in just quoting the total operating expense, without quantifying it against another variable.
You cannot take the operating expense figure and judge an organisation's performance on it. It has to be analysed and critiqued against other variables.
Fees charged for Fund's under management can be used as a comparison.
TIMES: Wouldn't a more pertinent indicator be the cost of collections, which is the operational cost as a proportion of annual collections?
FNPF: The Fund's TOER (Total Operating Expenditures Ratio) is calculated against the total collection.
This is one of the benchmarks used by the Board and executive management to measure efficiency of the Fund's operations.
TIMES: How does FNPF compare on that scale (cost of collections) with other international benchmarks, such as that set by the Singapore Provident Fund?
FNPF: The Fund fairs quite well in this regard. In fact, recent studies by the World Bank and IMF have pointed out that FNPF a low TOER when compared to other retirement Funds.
Staff salaries & wages:
TIMES: The Fiji Bank Employees Union has publicly stated that the salary adjustment exercise only accounted for around $500,000 of the total $1.3million increase in salaries and wages cost for FNPF in 2007's report. Do you dispute the union's statement?
FNPF: Staff members also got share in performances (SIP) and merit payment. This was approved and paid out by the former Board and Management.
TIMES: How much of the increased salary and wages bill was spent on the salary adjustment exercise?
FNPF: N/A
TIMES: What is your comment with regard to the union's claim that the other $800,000 was spent elsewhere, such as on middle to upper management and consultancies?
FNPF: Middle to upper management also received SIP and merit payout in late 2006.
The previous Board's approved organization structure came into effect in 2006. This resulted in about ten new management positions being filled.
Fund also expanded its Corporate Governance structure; likewise employed new staff in the Operations division (see Page 56 of the annual report).
Temporary employees were also engaged to man various FNPF services to assist special assistance withdrawals such as the Pay Reduction Assistance and Low Wage Income. Interestingly, partial withdrawal applications for 2007 increased by 87% to 134,678 from the 2006 figure.
TIMES: FNPF is a monopoly and receives members' contributions by statutory power. As such, do you agree that FNPF does not have the same cost challenges that other superannuation agencies overseas do trying to gain customers in a competitive environment?
FNPF: No - regardless of the statutes; the cost challenges are the same, FYI ... most super funds in the region (Pacific Island countries; except for PNG) are all monopolies. The same is true for Malaysia and Singapore.
TIMES: In which department are the majority of FNPF staff concentrated?
FNPF: (Did not answer this question)
TIMES: How many staff work on investments?
FNPF: (Did not answer this question)
TIMES: How many staff work on customer/member service?
FNPF: (Did not answer this question)
TIMES: What is the ratio of managers to other staff in FNPF?
FNPF: (Did not answer this question)
TIMES: How do salary levels of equivalent local positions in FNPF compare with commercial banks which operate in a real competitive environment?
FNPF: Current rates are based on the 2007 market rates of the financial sector.
TIMES: Do you believe that the board and management of FNPF are doing enough to be accountable for their actions to members of the Fund?
FNPF: All FNPF board members take very seriously their fiduciary duties to ensure that members' interests remain paramount.
The Board takes pride and maintains a high level of professionalism in conducting their responsibility as trustees and custodians of members' funds.
The Board has and will always exercise due diligence and care in ensuring that decisions made are in the best interest of members
The Board will continue to champion best practices through accountable and transparent dealings in all facets of the Fund's operations and investment.
Staff benefits:
TIMES: Why does FNPF offer staff loans when it clearly states that it is not a bank?
FNPF: Loans are not restricted to banks only. The Fund is part of the financial sector. And it's not unusual for employers in this sector to provide benefits to staff.
Again, you need to understand that the Fund offers these benefits to retain and attract qualified persons; it's nothing new, it has been in place since the Fund was established.
TIMES: What measures have been taken to curb staff withdrawals and loans?
FNPF: There are stringent guidelines for staff withdrawals and loans.
TIMES: How many staff members exactly make up the total loans to staff in the 2007 report?
FNPF: (Did not answer this question)
TIMES: Why are FNPF staff members allowed to take out loans for cars when the members themselves are restricted from doing so?
FNPF: Refer to Q1.
TIMES: Regarding your statement that withdrawals by members are a leakage from the system while staff loans are revenue generation:
What rate of interest does FNPF earn from staff loans?
FNPF: It is in par with the market rate for employees of the Finance Sector.
TIMES: Do you believe it is fair to label FNPF interest earned from staff loans as expenses recovered?
FNPF: It's not an expense in the first place.
Other matters:
TIMES: A segment of the 2007 annual report was not endorsed by auditors because of problems with a major FNPF investment in Natadola. Does this not concern you?
FNPF: The non-inclusion of the 2007 subsidiary accounts was due to the withholding of the financial documents by the former project managers of the Natadola hotel development, Asia Pacific Resorts International Limited (APRIL).
FNPF had taken all necessary actions in an effort to retrieving the accounts of the companies, including NBRL, to comply with the Fiji Accounting Standards. These include filing a High Court action against APRIL in September, 2007, seeking the Court's intervention in retrieving all documents in relation to these companies."
Some of these documents have been received and are before our auditors for verifications and qualifications.
TIMES: By how much has the Natadola project broken initial cost estimates?
FNPF: The accounts are currently with our auditors and we will be disclosing this in FY08 accounts
TIMES: When do you expect the 2008 annual report to be made public?
FNPF: This should be finalised soon; as financials need to comply with International Financial Reporting Standards which the Board adopted in June 2008. FNPF Accounts audit will now need to meet the International reporting standards, which is a new concept of standards world over
TIMES: Does it not concern you that the FNPF has delivered a net inflation return on investments of just 0.36 per cent between 2006 and 2007?
FNPF: Investment revenue actually realized by the Fund had increased from $159m to $200m, an increase of 25%. We reverse the impact of unrealized losses on investments (actually ATH shares - this reversed the next year when their share price recovered). Therefore, Net inflation return of the Real Return for 2007 is 2.10% and not just 0.36% as stated. Unrealized loss/gain has no cash impact.
The investment increased by 3%. Cash forms part of an investment portfolio and this is included in 'Other Assets' and increased from $23.8m to $124.6m. Thus including this, the investment portfolio increased from $3.172bln in 2006 to $3.266bln in 2007. (Large cash balance due to repatriation of offshore funds ordered by the Reserve Bank)
TIMES: What measures are being taken to rein in spending by FNPF Investments, given that some projects under it are not providing significant returns as yet?
FNPF: The Fund needs to spend money to make money
TIMES: Do you believe that FNPF members have a right to be consulted over major policy changes which affect them directly?
FNPF: Under the FNPF Act, the Board is empowered to implement and improve policies that are in the best interest of its members. We have made several changes since 2007 to the Withdrawal policies; where we have continually revised policies and minimised excessive pre-retirement withdrawals. Board took into consideration external factors, the surrounding circumstances, economic and financial climate and most importantly, the purpose for which the Fund has been established for; before approving these changes.
TIMES: Would you classify FNPF members as virtual shareholders?
FNPF: N/A
* Sophie Foster is the Associate Editor of the Fiji Times. These questions were posed as part of her normal day-to-day duty as a journalist.

Saturday, March 28, 2009

The need for speedy resolution

The need for speedy resolution
By Jioji Kotobalavu
www.fijitimes.com - Saturday, March 28, 2009

The writer believes the military can be proud and satisfied that their contribution through the electoral reforms, good governance initiatives like FICAC, and the charter as a whole, will be their lasting legacy.
The meeting of political parties convened by the interim Prime Minister on March 9, 2009, seemed to have been a very good start in the preparations for the President's National Dialogue Forum.
They agreed on the Forum's agenda. The Forum is to review Fiji's political experience and parliamentary reforms and, then, discuss the interim Government's proposed electoral reforms and Charter for building a better Fiji. They also agreed to expand the membership of the Forum to include civil society organisations. And they received the recommendations from the United Nations and the Commonwealth on international leaders they would be willing to sponsor to assist with the Forum.
Within a week, however, there were discordant voices from some of the parties. Two criticised the dominance of the bigger parties. Another suggested that the next general elections should be deferred to 2011. Most disturbing of all, disparaging local comment has led to the withdrawal of the distinguished PNG leader who had reportedly agreed to serve as the Forum's moderator.
Whilst these parties have every right to freely articulate their concerns, we should be concerned because the Forum can easily be derailed by those who are interested mainly in pursuing their individual partisan self-interests.
They are fully aware of the dire consequences of prolonging the present state of political uncertainty. Our economy is continuing to decline. We cannot survive on our own. We need all possible assistance, including the aid package of circa $350million which the European Union is reportedly holding for our sugar industry. We have to restore normal relations with all countries.
The people themselves are yearning for a quick return to a democratic order where they would feel more secure and be more confident of their freedom and the fair and just application of the rule of law.
But these parties also know that the interim Government's proposed new system of national elections will give them considerably better prospects of winning seats in the House of Representatives. With the use of the proportional representational method, any candidate that receives a minimum of about 7000 votes would successfully win election. So, naturally, those smaller parties which failed to secure seats in the 2001 and 2006 elections would see it as being in their political interest to bide for more time and to delay the next elections in order to increase their voter support.
It is crucially important, therefore, to ensure that the national dialogue to resolve Fiji's political future and to facilitate its economic recovery is undertaken with urgency and with a clear focus and common purpose. What will be helpful in this is to identify specific issues for the Forum to consider following its plenary discussions on its broad agenda.
Specific issues
For the President's Forum to be successful, I believe it has to come to a clear understanding on the following issues.
The Qarase and Others versus Bainimarama and Others constitutional challenge appeal case.
The High Court had ruled on October 9, 2008, that in the exceptional circumstances, not provided for by the Constitution, and in the interest of peace, order and good government, the President lawfully exercised prerogative powers under the common law to assume direct presidential rule "until suitable elections could be conducted." With these ultimate reserve powers, the President ratified the dismissal of PM Qarase and his Cabinet and the dissolution of Parliament by the Commander of the RFMF, and appointed Commodore Bainimarama as PM together with a Cabinet of ministers to advise him. This judgement is being appealed before the Court of Appeal.
Allowing this appeal process to its final conclusion would clearly be in the public interest of clarifying the legal question pertaining to the continuing possession by our Head of State of inherent reserve or prerogative powers additional to his expressly prescribed powers under the 1997 Constitution. It would, however, be very helpful to the President's Forum if the two principal parties in this constitutional challenge appeal case, ousted PM Qarase and interim PM Bainimarama, were to decide now whether to await the final judgement in the full appeal process, or whether they are prepared to agree as part of a comprehensive political agreement that notwithstanding the appeal outcome, the holding of national elections without further delay, using the interim Government's proposed new system of elections, is the best pragmatic way to return Fiji to democratic and constitutional rule.
Obviously, what is required is for the President to bring them together. If they are agreed on the early election option, the Forum can then assist by working out the finer details of the new election system, e.g., the configuration of the constituencies and whether an open list or closed list voting is to be adopted.
General elections
The Forum needs to unanimously agree that it is in Fiji's direct interest to hold elections as soon as possible. Taking into account the stipulations of our electoral laws, once a decision is taken to proceed with elections, a minimum preparatory period of at least 10 months is required.
Elections are necessary and urgent for two reasons. In a parliamentary democracy, the authority to govern can only legitimately come from the people through free elections. They are the ultimate source of the sovereignty of the State. Direct rule by command order from above can be legitimised on the ground of imperative necessity only in extreme national emergency situations and only as a temporary expedient to ensure peace, order and stability. The present regime of direct rule by the President cannot be for an indefinite or indeterminate period.
We have to return to a democratically elected government under Fiji's Constitution. The second reason is self-evident from the outstanding examples of economically successful countries. People feel confident about their future when they are free from oppression and enjoy liberty and the assurance of equal rights and the equal protection of the law. It is in this kind of democratic environment that people's entrepreneurial spirit and creative instincts flourish.
The direct result is economic growth and dynamism. This is what is lacking in Fiji today and why our economy is stagnant. We need to restore democracy to regain the confidence of citizens, investors and overseas development donors and trading partners alike.
As to the new system of elections, I strongly commend the interim Government's proposals for the abolition of racially based communal seats, and the adoption of a common roll, the equal weighting and value of every vote, and the proportional method of determining vote outcomes. The combined result of all these is an electoral system that is relatively easy for the people to understand, simple for the electoral officials to administer, and one that is in full compliance with the standards in our Bill of Rights and the Universal Declaration on Human Rights.
But the most persuasive reason for recommending this new system is that when compared to the electoral systems in the 1970, 1990 and 1997 Constitutions, it provides the best framework to realise the national goals that are set out under Section 6 of the 1997 Constitution. These are the equitable sharing of political power among all communities, the formation of widely representative governments through voluntary coalitions of willing political parties, and governments that take full account of the interests of all communities.
The new system is fair and inclusive. It provides a positive instrument for the equitable representation of individuals, communities and women, and for promoting inter-ethnic accommodation and co-operation to an extent never achieved before. The reserved communal seats, which have been a common feature of all our three constitutions since Independence, have only served to fuel race-based politics.
What is needed of the Forum is to make decisions on the finer details of the new system such as, for example, whether there are to be three, four or five regional constituencies, or a single national constituency as is the practice in Israel, and whether voters are to choose their preferred candidate directly, or whether they are simply to place their vote on their preferred political party .
Multi-party Cabinet
In addition to the new system of elections, the interim Government is also recommending in its Charter the discontinuance of the mandatory requirement for a multi-party cabinet under section 99 of the Constitution. I commend this to the Forum.
We know from experience with the SDL/FLP multi-party Cabinet in 2006 that this kind of enforced marriage between two parties with diametrically opposed policies is not workable in the long run. A typical voluntary coalition government is successfully self-sustaining because the partners need each other to maintain their combined majority in parliament.
They co-operate out of mutual necessity. The multi-party cabinet is not a coalition. The PM and his party already have the necessary majority to maintain their government in the House of Representatives. They do not need the support of the entitled party in the multi-party cabinet in voting in Parliament for their political survival.
There is another very cogent reason for dispensing with the multi-party cabinet requirement. Since Independence, we have consistently adopted the British model of parliamentary government. The party or coalition of parties that wins a general election forms the government.
The second largest party forms the opposition in parliament if it chooses not to join the government. The role of the parliamentary opposition is to keep the government fully accountable and in that process it presents itself to the electorate as the alternative government. The multi-party cabinet requirement has severely undermined and weakened this accountability structure which is critically important in protecting the State from the dangers of the tyranny of the democratic majority. The result is a very weak and ineffective parliamentary opposition. Further, it has caused much confusion in the nomination of opposition senators. As clarified in a High Court ruling, the leader of the entitled party in the multi-party cabinet is empowered to select the majority of opposition senators, and not the constitutionally appointed parliamentary leader of the opposition. So, we now have the ridiculous situation where the entitled party in the multi-party cabinet is concurrently part of the government and the opposition in the senate. How can a party be in government and be part of the opposition at the same time? The interim Government is, therefore, fully justified in its Charter recommendation for the revocation of the multi-party cabinet provisions.
Enabling promulgation
The Forum will have to discuss how the proposed new electoral system and the discontinuance of the mandatory multi-party cabinet requirement are to be brought into effect for the next Elections. This is a difficult issue. The Constitution is still extant and as the High Court highlighted in its October 9, 2008 judgement, the President's assumption and exercise of prerogative power has not consolidated any revolution. But, then, we are now under direct presidential rule and through it the President has legitimised the dismissal of the constitutionally-elected Qarase Government and the 2006 Parliament.
There are those who insist that any amendment to the Constitution has to be undertaken strictly in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Constitution. They are right. But, then, in the present circumstances, this would virtually be a political and practical impossibility. Can a President who is governing under reserve powers re-convene Parliament by invoking the emergency provisions of the Constitution? Even if this were possible, could Parliament be summoned only for a day or two, to effect the constitutional changes, when during that specified period the ousted PM Qarase and his dismissed Cabinet would have to be re-instated whilst PM Bainimarama and his interim Administration would carry on with their assigned role under the prerogative power regime?
The High Court carefully explained in its Qarase versus Bainimarama case ruling the President's authority to promulgate legislation prior to the return of Parliament. This prerogative authority is to be exercised on the clear understanding that it is for the incoming Parliament to scrutinise all promulgations and to decide on their continuance. The question that, therefore, arises is whether it is possible on the basis of this judicial advice to effect the needed changes by promulgation? This assumes that the electoral and multi-party cabinet provisions of the Constitution would remain but they would be temporarily set aside for the next elections. Following the elections, the new Government and Parliament will then commission an independent review of the whole Constitution.
This comprehensive review would clearly be better than a piecemeal approach. Its main objective is to ensure the full and complete harmonisation of the Constitution with the Charter. The additional advantage is that it will involve country-wide consultations with the people.
Caretaker administration
This is obviously a politically sensitive subject but it needs to be considered by the Forum in the interest of ensuring free and fair elections and speedy and unhindered preparations.
The proposal is that once there is agreement on the holding of elections, the President and the PM are to consider the appointment of an all-civilian, non-political and non-military caretaker administration to organise national elections within 10 months.
This will require a big decision by the interim PM and the military. But it will be for the overall good of Fiji and the military can be proud and be satisfied that their contribution through the electoral reforms, good governance initiatives like FICAC, and the Charter as a whole, will be their lasting legacy.
* This article is published on the understanding that these are exclusively the views and opinions of the author and this newspaper is not in any way responsible.

Friday, March 27, 2009

Gremlin of grief

Gremlin of grief
By Jone Baledrokadroka
www.fijitoimes.com - Friday, March 27, 2009

Short of docilely donning sackcloth and ashes as in the Bible, the appeal by former prime minister Qarase for all participants at the upcoming Presidential Political Dialogue Forum to come free of party politics in our quest for national unity is quite saintly really.
However, for most of them the realists mindset is deeply embedded for as much as we love to hate our politicians, as what cynics describe as those doyens of political dexterity, the sultans of spin, the high priests of hypocrisy, the prophets of pretense or the Rajahs and Ratus of ruse. I could go on, but you get the point we live in a sinful world and we need politicians just as they were made to be.
For politics is the art of the possible, remember, "Yes, we can" the Obama slogan.
Also for the first time, NGOs will be included, Yes, those indomitable idealists, the devotees of democracy, the human rights rearguard, the developmental do-gooders. Yes, you also get the point as I also could go on.
Obligingly these sentinels of society are only too willing to keep our politicians and 'um, um' non-political regime in check and balance.
Then there are the pragmatists; the regime seated at the head of the table in power and glory with the chosen few at the right hand of the father so to speak. So what is the problem? Now that it is close to show and tell time.
Evidently we were all constantly regaled with the grave need for the clean up campaign or call it what you may, which has turned out like last Friday's tsunami warning a false alarm although the threat remains somewhere over time, over yonder the horizon.
For the waves of alleged corruption that were emphatically trumpeted from the roof tops that generated so much hype like last Friday morning remains just that.
As it is Transparency International has not graded us after our quite respectable 55th-position-corruption perception index (CPI) rating in 2005. In fact we have failed to register a rating since for ironic reason, we are 'un - rate - able' with the present 'clean up' regime.
And furthermore let's all pray that the IG were able to convince the Moody's rep on his recent visit that it was not just reshuffling the deck chairs as on the Titanic. For our global credit rating hangs precariously on that representative's opinion.
So how can we know we are cleaner after more than two years of cleanup? The true measure lies in our economic growth and foreign exchange reserves since. Which to paraphrase Professor Narsey, "the coup wolves are delicately trying to fix for good". Depending what one means by fix I suppose.
Well unless the regime pulls a 'rabbit from the hat trick' soon to try and convince us once and for all. Or will the forum be the circus venue for the 'rabbit in the hat trick', where all will be revealed?
So having discerned the mindsets of our future PPDF participants, we still need to find the gremlin that has caused our nation so much grief since the December 5, 2006 coup. That gremlin that has badly mangled and mauled the national economy. For as much as the IG would like us to believe, the global economic gremlin and its tsunami killer waves have not hit our shores yet.
Therefore, to explain, in modern speak, a gremlin is a tiny imaginary evil spirit that people say is the cause of the problem, especially in a machine which they cannot explain properly or locate.
Judging by the recent two public outcry issues, the majority of us would say these gremlins have taken up residency in the boardrooms of the FNPF and the FRU. Strewth? E dina? Satche boleh?
But I've gotten ahead of myself. Where then is this gremlin that has caused the nation so much grief?
Butadroka said it resided with the Indo-Fijian, Rabuka said it was in the Constitution, Speight said it was both. To the believers and the converted at the time it felt so right.
Bainimarama now says after FICACing the gremlin out of government and corporate corruption it now lays in the electoral reform. Oh, how it feels so right to many today. Hum to naihi janeh.
Perhaps it is as our icon of sevens Serevi says, "it's in the combination of all the players."
Forebodingly for the PPDF and us the entire nation, the devil could very well be in the detail.
It will take statesmanship or to be politically correct, statesperson ship, of the highest order in all concerned, to finally grapple with our national gremlin of political grief, which still lurks out there, somewhere.
Who knows it could even be what the hit squad vandals were trying to hit lurking in those victims' cars or even with moce Jo.
* The views expressed in this article are exclusively those of the author and are published in this newspaper on that sole understanding.

Wednesday, March 25, 2009

Cane farmers ‘unaware' of $6.5m deal

FCGA ‘unaware' of $6.5m deal
http://www.fijitimes.com/ - Wednesday, March 25, 2009
THE Fiji Cane Growers Association claims members were kept in the dark about the Sugar Cane Growers Fund's $6.56million loan to a fertiliser company at the expense of cane farmers.
Association general secretary Bala Dass said farmers felt cheated by Mahendra Chaudhry, the then sugar minister who gave the order in June 2008.
Mr Dass was reacting to the $4.02 per tonne third cane payment announced for growers, which also has deduction for the loan given to South Pacific Fertilizer Limited by the SCGF.
He said the remaining $2 was likely to be deducted in May but found it deceitful that farmers had been short-changed by $1.98 and were compelled to pay the part of the debt of the technically insolvent SPF.
"Mr Chaudhry directed FSC and SCGC that the money paid to SPFL be recovered from industry proceeds and this meant FSC pays 30 per cent of the $6.56m, which comes to $2m ($1.98m) and growers pay 70 per cent of the $6.56m.
"Growers' share of the deduction is therefore $4.6m ($4.592m) from cane proceeds or about $2 a tone from the third cane payment which has been confirmed by SCGC. The certified amount would have $8.02 a tonne as the third cane payment and $2 a tonne of cane has been deducted as repayment of $4 a tonne advance payment following the floods in January."
Mr Dass said farmers were demanding an answer from Mr Chaudhry and urged authorities to take those involved to task.
"The association calls on the authorities to institute an inquiry into this fraudulent activity. Worse still, the farmers are now learning that the directive to short-change them was given by none other than Chaudhry –– a man anointed with the task of protecting sugarcane farmers after having been installed as interim sugar minister."
Attempts to obtain a comment from Mr Chaudhry were futile yesterday after numerous calls to his mobile and home landline were not answered.

Investigate $6.5m advance: FPP
By MARY RAUTOMonday, March 30, 2009
THE Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) has been sought to investigate the $6.56million advance to the South Pacific Fertilisers Company, which farmers have to repay.
Fiji People's Party general secretary Charan Jeath Singh says a full scale investigation should be launched into dealings by the interim PM Voreqe Bainimarama, Mahendra Chaudhry, FSC chairman Bhoo Prasad Gautam and the entire FSC board of directors.
"...the farmers have been cheated outright, which is why my party is asking FICAC to get to the bottom of this issue and expose all the culprits who got the farmers into this situation today," he said.
* For earlier story, click on FCGA 'unaware' of $6.5m deal

Tuesday, March 24, 2009

FICAC declared legal, questions linger

FICAC declared legal, questions linger
www.fijilive.com - 24/03/2009
Sai Comment:
-There will always be doubt unless and until a properly convened court with judges untainted by the 2006 coup is convened to retry the Qarase case. The people of Fiji will expect nothing less and no doubt look forward to it happening when democracy returns to Fiji and the courts are once again held in the highest regard by citizens. Otherwise doubt and lack of confidence will persist. I personally support Grahan Leung in his argument about the status of the President's reserve power and disagree with the Shameem interpretation and that of the judges who ruled eralier in the Qarase case.

The High Court in Suva has dismissed an application by Suva lawyer Rajendra Chaudhry to declare the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) illegal.Chaudhry had filed an appeal that FICAC had no jurisdiction and was an illegal body, while defending former Nasinu mayor Rajeshwar Kumar and town clerk Jaswant Kumar against FICAC’s charges of abuse of office.The ruling by Justice Nazhat Shameem has been made as Suva lawyer Graham Leung today again claimed in a separate case, that FICAC was “conceived out of illegality and was still born”.Defending former Airports Fiji Ltd chief executive officer Sakiusa Tuisolia against abuse of office charges, Leung argued that the law setting up FICAC had not been approved by Parliament, which he said was the only body that could make laws under the Constitution.He said FICAC was promulgated under the President’s reserve powers, the source of which had been broken when Fiji gained independence from Britain. The President, he said, no longer had the reserve powers of the Queen of England. However, while quashing the appeal against FICAC’s legality by lawyer Chaudhry, Justice Nazhat Shameem said the question of the President’s legislative powers had now been judicially determined.“Until and unless the decision of Qarase v. Bainimarama is set aside on appeal, the FICAC promulgation is valid and must be given effect by the High Court and the Magistrates’ Court. It is not for this court to conduct an enquiry into what the President thought he was doing when he wrote the following words in the preamble of the Promulgation, “In exercise of the powers conferred upon the interim government and upon the exercise of my own deliberate judgment …… and with the approval of Cabinet, I Josefa Iloilovatu Uluivuda, President of the Republic of the Fiji Islands hereby make this promulgation.”“It appears, from the wording of the preamble to the FICAC Promulgation, that is precisely what His Excellency did when he signed it,” said Justice Shameem.She said: “I decline to overrule Qarase v. Bainimarama. I decline to find the FICAC promulgation invalid and of no effect.”Rajeshwar Kumar and Jaswant Kumar are alleged to have cashed a Nasinu town council cheque of $2,344.42 they allegedly made out as payment to Post Fiji Ltd.

Please talk to us, Mr President

Please talk to us, Mr President
www.fijitimes.com - Tuesday, March 24, 2009
THE President, Ratu Josefa Iloilo, made a rare public appearance at the opening of a luxury resort on Saturday.
Apparently in good health, Ratu Josefa delivered a prepared address to guests before taking part in activities associated with the opening.
It has been some months since the President was seen in public, leading to rumours about his health.
Hopefully, by attending the event on Saturday, public doubts about the health of the iTaukei Vunisei and the Tui Vuda will be allayed.
Unfortunately, it has been Ratu Josefa's low public profile which has fuelled speculation about his condition.
While the President is the Head of State, it is important to remember that he holds a public office and is paid by the taxpayers of this country.
The incumbent is, therefore, responsible for his actions to the people of Fiji and has a duty to each citizen of Fiji.
Increasingly, however, there appears to be a view within the higher echelons of the regime that the President is their personal property.
Members of the regime continue to refer to the "presidential mandate" given to them to administer the nation.
In effect, that mandate was never the President's to give.
Ratu Josefa was put in place by the regime and is subordinate to that authority.
His powers are superficial because he holds office at the pleasure of this administration.
That is why this newspaper will continue to call for the President to be elected by the people.
The decisions made in this high office affect the daily lives of the people of Fiji.
Laws to which the President gives assent have the potential to bring about good or bad.
This means the holder of such a high office must be mentally and physically capable of executing his or her duties.
The President must also be capable of challenging the Government on the decisions that it makes about national life.
It is for that reason that the holder of the office of President must be accountable directly to the people, not to elected – or in the present case, unelected – officials.
But that is a matter for an elected government to address.
For the time being, Ratu Josefa must be seen to become more active in national life.
It is at times like the present, when the nation is under internal and external threat, that the people look to a strong, father-like figure for guidance.
If there was ever a time when the President must make regular public appearances and speak to the nation, it is now.

Women tell Teleni to redirect energy

Women tell Teleni to redirect energy
http://www.fijisun.com.fj/ - 3/24/2009

Commissioner of Police Esala Teleni has been asked to direct his energy to apprehending culprits rather than using it on his crusades.
The Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre, Coordinator Shamima Ali said they were urging Commissioner Teleni to stop expanding so much energy in dancing and his brand of Christianity.
She said Commissioner Teleni should be directing all his energy during the crusades towards apprehending the culprits of the morning attacks on individuals who spoke against the interim Government.
“It is also of great concern that we have had many such attacks in the past few weeks and the police have not been able to apprehend even one of these culprits,” she said.
“We condemn these attacks as they raise serious concerns about democracy, the rule of law and the protection of human rights in Fiji,” Ms Ali said.
She said it was an attack on freedom of speech, freedom of the media and on democracy and individual’s constitutional rights.
Ms Ali said it was a terrible implication for the interim regime since those people whose homes and vehicles have been attacked were some of those who spoke out and against some of the regime’s actions.
She said in a democracy people must be allowed to express their opinion as to how the country should be run since the people of Fiji own the country and human rights and rule of law is for all.
Police spokesperson Ema Mua said Police were currently working on the investigations.
She said people should not interfere with the work of police since it takes time to complete and labeled Ms Ali’s comments as childish and shallow.
Ms Mua said Ms Ali did not have the right to dictate what the commissioner should or should not do and advises Ms Ali to keep her mouth shut.

Minister condemns continuing attacks
http://www.fijisun.com.fj/ - 3/24/2009
Interim Minister for Defence and National Security Ratu Epeli Ganilau has condemned the early Sunday morning attacks on the homes of Fiji Times chief editor Netani Rika and Global Risk Strategies boss Sakiusa Raivoce.
Ratu Epeli yesterday said that no one should be subjected to this type of criminal behaviour.
The former army commander pointed out that the interim Government does not condone such cowardly acts.
“The interim Government does not condone such acts on any citizen of this country or organisation.
“At the moment we cannot blame anybody by saying it is an organised crime.
“Everyone is just speculating but no one is subjected to this cowardly behaviour,” he said.
Ratu Epeli said people who are caught committing such crimes should be taken to task.
He has called on the police to thoroughly investigate the incidents and bring those responsible to task.
Police spokesperson Ema Mua said investigations were being carried out.

Chief calls on attackers to stop
http://www.fijisun.com.fj/ - 3/24/2009
Attacks against prominent members of the community seem to have escalated and become more violent.
Marama Na Roko Tui Dreketi and ousted Education Minister Ro Teimumu Kepa yesterday called on perpetrators to stop their cowardly acts on citizens who had spent their life serving the country.
She was commenting on the petrol bomb attacks to the homes of former army colonel Sakiusa Raivoce and Fiji Times Editor-in-Chief Netani Rika.
“I am concerned about these attacks because they seem to have escalated in the level of violence.
“It started with stone throwing and damaging of vehicles and now it’s home-made bombs which could cause so much damage,” she said.
Ro Teimumu also said the attacks were systematic and connected.
“It is lucky Raivoce had the training to be able to respond to such attacks. If the fire bomb had reached its target, which was the engine of the vehicle, there would have been an explosion and lives would have been lost.”
Ro Teimumu said people behind such attacks should stop such cowardly actions before a life is claimed.
“These people should think seriously about what they are doing. Because I know there are people behind the perpetrators who are the real culprits of these attacks,” she added.

Greed the Hallmark of Illegality

TPI query interim PM’s payout report
www.fijilive.com - 24/03/2009

Transparency International Fiji (TPI) has openly criticised the justice process concerning the holiday back pay made to the interim Prime Minister Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama.TPI chairperson Suliana Siwatibau said justice in Fiji was being compromised."
We are happy the auditor general has done the investigation but we’re not happy by the fact that it was done in a non-transparent manner," Siwatibau said."As we understand it, the payment was made even before he became head of the army, and the payment is set at the rate at which he was paid at the end of his contract as head of the army, and we are concerned that this report may not be released for the public to know,” she said.
Auditor General Eroni Vatuloka said the investigation into the payout was complete. However, he said the report had been forwarded to the military for its comments and no response had been received.Bainimarama was paid $178,000 for leave accrued from 1978.

Coward Vandals Retreat as Cowards Do, Where is the Military in all this?

Military silent on vandals

http://www.fijitimes.com/ -Tuesday, March 24, 2009

THE Fiji Military Forces have remained silent on attacks against Global Risks Services chief executive Lt Colonel Sakiusa Raivoce and Fiji Times Editor-in-Chief Netani Rika early Sunday morning.
Military spokesman Major Neumi Leweni's mobile phone was switched off yesterday and comments could not be obtained from him on the issue.
When the Fiji Times called him on Sunday on numerous occasions reporters were given the run-around by officers who were receiving the calls.
A call was made after 11am and the Fiji Times was told it was the wrong number.
In another attempt at 2pm, the person who answered the call said it was the wrong number and gave another number to call Mr Leweni.
When the Fiji Times called the given number, the person who answered the phone did not sound like Mr Leweni but said he was busy at a church service and to call later.
Numerous calls made to the same number after 4pm remained unanswered.



SDL tells of patterns to attacks
Tuesday, March 24, 2009

SOQOSOQO Duavata ni Lewenivanua Party leader Laisenia Qarase said there was a pattern emerging of properties being targeted.
He said they appeared to be the property of those who oppose the interim Government.
He said there have been a number of similar incidents in the past.
"There is a pattern emerging targeting properties of those who appear to oppose the Government and this a matter of concern to SDL and the people of Fiji," Mr Qarase said.
"To make things worse, police investigations arrive at nothing and we wonder if any investigations are being done at all."
Mr Qarase said this was a shameful performance of the police force.
"These attackers are cowards and spineless people who take the law into their own hands. I call on the police commissioner to accelerate the investigations in all these incidents," he said.
Mr Qarase said if they failed in their investigations it would send the wrong message to the people of Fiji and the international community that people could take the law into their own hands and get away with it.
Police spokesman Corporal Suliano Tevita said the investigation was normal.
"Normal investigations will be carried out," he said. "These are two isolated incidents and not something that happens everyday."
Cpl Tevita said the CID was handling the investigations.
Meanwhile, the use of petrol bombs gives the recent attacks a political dimension and must be condemned, says Fiji Labour Party acting general secretary Lekh Ram Vayeshnoi.
After labelling as unfair the Fiji Times editorial yesterday which criticised the party for its "deafening silence", Mr Vayeshnoi condemned the attacks on the home of Fiji Times Editor-in-Chief Netani Rika and Global Risks chief executive Sakiusa Raivoce, and pointed out "violence and intimidation tactics are not the answer".



Beddoes mulls bullying motives
Tuesday, March 24, 2009

A cowardly orchestrated attempt by elements to intimidate and provoke a reaction from pro-democracy advocates justifies the reimposition of emergency rule and further delay the dialogue and with it elections, says the ousted opposition leader Mick Beddoes.
"What other possible motive is there? They were not after money or any valuables, they wanted to deliver a message, as they have done previously," he said.
Mr Beddoes said these attempts were clearly to do "harm" and the country was now seeing intimidation and threats moving to another level.
He said the people of Fiji must never allow these "dysfunctional" elements the freedom to intimidate and attack them at will because of the lack of interest by the authorities.
Mr Beddoes called on interim Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama, Home Affairs Minister Ratu Epeli Ganilau and Police Commissioner Esala Teleni to condemn the attacks and do everything possible to bring the perpetrators to justice.
"Anything less than this will be seen as encouraging these acts of violence against innocent citizens," Mr Beddoes said.

Act like a Commissioner not a Preacher Teleni says Beddoes
www.fijivillage.com - 24/03/2009
He should act like a Commissioner and not a Preacher.These are the sentiments of Former Opposition Leader Mick Beddoes on Police Commissioner Commodore Esala Teleni's recent preaching at a crusade in Valelevu. Beddoes said if the Police Commissioner wants to be a preacher, then he should hang up his uniform and go and preach.Beddoes added if not then Teleni should start acting and behaving like a Commissioner and should go out and catch the law breakers and early morning pro-democracy attackers because that is what the taxpayers of Fiji are paying him to do.



Thugs target Zinck again
By SAMUELA LOANAKADAVUTuesday, March 24, 2009


Damage assessment ... unionist and ex-MP Kenneth Zinck inspects the damage to his vehicle in central Suva yesterday.

A MONTH after unionist and former parliamentarian Kenneth Zinck paid $8000 for damage caused to his car by vandals, he was at it again.
But this time he was a victim of a daylight robbery in the middle of Suva City, just metres from the Central Police Station.
Mr Zinck told the Fiji Times yesterday his car was parked in front of Sogo (opposite McDonald's) while he was attending a union meeting when thieves smashed the left-rear window and took a friend's bag and personal belongings.
"The incident happened between 1.30pm and 3.30pm today (yesterday) in broad daylight - in the middle of the city," he said.
"I hope it's not just another case of vandalism as was the case a month ago when my home and car were stoned.
"This one is different because they took a bag from the car. The intention I suppose must have been just to get the bag."
The former Cabinet minister in the Soqosoqo Duavata ni Lewenivanua-led government that was overthrown by the military in 2006 said the family continued to live in fear since the first incident.
"I just hope that one day it stops. Police patrols should also be stepped up because the situation is not getting any better now," he said.
The cost of damage has been estimated at $1000.
The police are investigating.

Political Novices' Coup

Political Novices' Coup
by intelligentsiya
With the upcoming farce of a Presidential Political Dialogue Forum commencing soon, there’s a heck of a lot of activity going on. There will undoubtedly be many more entertaining moments during the actual process.The diplomatic stuff-up and blatant offence to PNG is another delaying factor (we hope its becoming abundantly clear to all and sundry why we continuously refer to the Melanesian Spearhead Grouping as “wantoks when convenient” where Bainimarama et al are concerned), to this show getting on the road.What was most interesting was the caucusing of the minority political players in a sinister attempt to block out the majority political parties views towards elections ASAP.Today’s Daily Post editorial (reproduced below in event that the link moves) therefore hit the nail on the head for us.How is it logically tenable that micro – miniscule – novice - obscure - political parties with a constituency totaling approximately only a measly 2% of our population (check out for yourself how they fared in the 06 elections) want to cheat us out of our right to an election ASAP and our right to pick parties that represent the majority’s best interests?We will declare our political interests. We have no personal desire to see SDL back in the driver’s seat governing this country because we believe many of their policies were flawed --- they got complacent and forgot about those who put them there. That is however only our opinion. What we will hold firm to is that we will bow to the wishes of the majority in this land. That is the cornerstone of democracy.No matter how tightly these political small-timers form their blocs, they are still up against the populist parties. Not many in this country have even heard of some of these overnight miracle political parties, so they don’t speak for anyone but themselves.If that ain’t bad enough, those attempting to block early elections are already in the thick of the school-yard bickering for supremacy and/or control. You’ve got to hand it to the FLP and their political skills though. They never miss a beat and will use any and every opportunity to campaign.What we’d really like to see is the SDL and the NFP endeavoring to join forces (perhaps with some very key x-FLP stalwarts like Krishna Dutt in the mix) and giving those political runts a good run for their money. This is really what Fiji needs. Political pragmatism and an acceptance that politics must now sincerely (i.e. no token Fijian/Indians in their parties as is a common trend) bring together ethnicities to make “Fiji Inc” really the way the world should be.Anyway the masses are getting a raw deal out of these aspiring “servants of the people” who think that the majority want delayed elections.We will not forget this. In the event that these political neophytes did not see the how the movie Slumdog Millionaire wrapped up, the moral of the story in that blockbuster was that people always love the underdog who rises from the ashes despite the most ardent adversity.
Political novice
www.fijidailypost.com - 21-Mar-2009
HERE we go again. The ink on the paper had hardly dried – yet we see in broad daylight a group of obscured or perhaps “wannabe” politicians already fighting over crumbs trickling down from the interim regime’s table.It just goes to show how these apprentice politicians unashamedly fall over each other in broad daylight and in full view of the public too, just to have a ride on Bainimarama’s bandwagon.Last Friday’s Presidential Political Dialogue saw a total of 19 registered political parties mingled with the regime’s strongman Commodore Bainimarama in an effort to agree on an agenda that would form the basis of the proposed political dialogue being spearheaded by the Commonwealth and United Nations mediation envoys. The dialogue of course is part of a concerted effort by all stake holders, both locally and internationally, to enhance Fiji’s quick return to parliamentary democracy.It is no secret that apart from the Soqosoqo Duavata ni Lewenivanua (SDL) party, the Fiji Labour Party (FLP), the National Federation Party (NFP) and the United People’s Party (UPP) the remaining 15 political parties in last Friday’s political dialogue neither have a political following nor clout.I have nothing against the so called political leaders that represented these minor political parties at last week’s forum. But the issue that worries me is that whether these so called leaders have the capacity, the capability, the experience and the right political frame of mind to negotiate or speak on behalf of the people of Fiji on vital matters of the state when the Presidential Dialogue Forum proper gets underway.The type of discussions, negotiations and exchange of ideas at that Forum would be a different cut from what transpired last Friday. It will be a no nonsense affair chaired by mediators from the United Nations and the Commonwealth.Matters to be deliberated at the Presidential Dialogue Forum would be sensitive and in many ways will shape the future of how this country of ours is to be governed well into the millennium. It will require mature thinking, meticulous planning, calculated and conclusive negotiating skills aimed at extracting the best resolutions that would take Fiji out of the quagmire we are currently immersed in.Why representatives of these minor political parties were invited to be part of the Presidential Political Dialogue at all in the first place was and still is a mystery. I suppose your guess is as good as mine.Now, hardly a week after last Friday’s meeting, the ugly head of political “ganging up”, the cause of many political theatricals in Fiji, has slowly surfaced once again.Here I refer of course to the announcement by neophyte politicians Mr Fred Caine of the redundant General Voters Party and Mr Ropate Sivo of the dormant Conservative Alliance Matanitu Vanua Party orchestrating the possible amalgamation of 14 of the minor political parties that were part of the Presidential Dialogue Forum last week. The proposed merger irks of political conspiracy and sabotage.You don’t have to be Einstein to gauge the strength of these political green horns. They hardly have any followings.If figures deduced from the 2006 General Elections are anything to go by; then the sum total of support mastered by these small political parties is less than 2 per cent of the overall voting figures.Ropate Sivo’s CAMV Party had been dissolved and merged with the SDL to contest the 2006 polls. Fred Caine’s GVP is now so badly fragmented with both its MP’s Mick Beddoes forming the UPP and Ganilau forming the Green Party. A point to note here is that Fred was Ganilau’s campaign manager in the 2006 polls.The point to be made here is what agenda these small political parties are carrying.Judging from what transpired at last Friday’s meeting, most if not all of these so called political leaders were too eager to please Commodore Bainimarama that they lost track of the meeting agenda altogether. Some of these leaders openly questioned Sir Rabbie Namaliu’s nomination as Chair of the Presidents Political Dialogue Forum although the Chairmanship’s appointment was not on the agenda. Word has since got to Papua New Guinea resulting in Sir Rabbie withdrawing his nomination causing bad blood between Fiji and PNG. Such political ganging ups is nothing new to the political corridors of Fijian power play. It had been done in past elections with very negative results. Perhaps Fred and Ropate have yet to learn from history. Their action will not move Fiji forward but rather backward

Saturday, March 21, 2009

Tackling corruption

Tackling corruption
www.fijtimes.com - Saturday, March 21, 2009
THOSE paid from the public purse should never be given a tax free salary, says Professor Satendra Nandan.
He said this was greed and immorality of the elite who should be the trustees of the people.
He said anyone who was also paid from aid money meant for the region or the nation should not be given tax free salaries.
"No one, I repeat no one in Fiji who is paid from the public purse should never be given a tax free salary," he said.
"It should not be encouraged by the generosity of the aid donors."
Professor Nandan made the comments at the Ethical Business Principles in Countering Bribery workshop in Nadi yesterday.
He said lack of transparency was conducive to corruption.
He said this was often done on the basis of confidentiality of the contract or through hierarchy.
"You can have a moral environment, an ethical culture, accountability systems and auditing controls. But corruption grows most virulently in the dark where secrecy or lack of transparency in secretive social and institutional environment," he said.
"That's why I consider the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption as a potent anti corruption measure. It prevents potential corrupt behaviour.
"Its function is not only to arrest corruption but act as a deterrent. It is my contention that anyone who is paid form public coffers, his or her contract must be available to the public with all the perks coming under public scrutiny through public record.
"All corruption takes place in context. It is here the ethical culture of an organisation plays a crucial role in creating a climate of ethical behaviour that is part of the values of openness and transparency." Professor Nandan said institutions should commit themselves to openness and people in authority should welcome criticism respecting the views of all staff of the organisation.
He said whistleblowing made an alleged immoral, corrupt or criminal activity a matter of public knowledge and concern.
He said it was often done by a current or former employee of the institution.
"The integrity and courage of the whistleblower should be rewarded and not punished.
"They should be protected through tenureship and the strength of staff associations and unions."
The workshop was aimed at introducing participants to basic concepts of ethics, social responsibility and general rules relating to combating corruption in the workplace. These include issues relating to whistleblowing, bribery, corporate governance, employee rights and duties and protection of consumers.

A-G's report on Voreqe's Pay must be made public

A-G's report must be made public
Saturday, March 21, 2009

WHEN it comes to accountability, the Constitution of this nation is very clear, spelling out in an entire chapter the rules that guide the way for the State.

Within that Chapter 11, there are five parts dealing specifically with accountability: Code of Conduct, Ombudsman, Auditor-General, Gene-ral provisions relating to certain constitutional offices and Freedom of Information.

The first part obliges Parliament under section 156 (3) to draft a law to "implement more fully the conduct rules" which apply to, among others, the President, Vice-President, Mini-sters, and those who hold statutory appointments or governing or executive positions in such bodies.

The fifth part, under section 174, obliges Parliament to "enact a law to give members of the public rights of access to official documents of the Government and its agencies".

Neither of these laws has been passed since the Constitution (Amen-dment) Act 1997 came into force on July 25, 1997.

This leaves three other parts in Chapter 11 that deal specifically with accountability.

Of these, the Ombudsman and the Auditor-General are offices set up to deal with holding the State accountable. But there is a clear distinction between them – the Ombudsman is not allowed to investigate actions of ministers, judges or conditions surrounding the removal or appointment of a person to public office.

So this leaves the Auditor-General to hold the State accountable over how it handles public accounts, money, property and transactions.

At least once a year, the Auditor-General has to tell Parliament whether transactions involving public money or property are in line with the Constitution and used "to the purpose for which it was authorised".

To do this, the Constitution authorises the Auditor-General to access "all records, books, vouchers, stores or other government property in the possession or control of any person or authority".

It's clear then that anyone authorised to use public funds or property must submit to the independent scrutiny of the Auditor-General.

It's also clear that his report must be laid before the House. If the Constitution did not want the public to see that report, restrictions would have been put on public access to the document. But by insisting it be laid before the House, it's clear that report must come into the public domain.

The interim government insists the Constitution is alive and well. If so, the Auditor-General's report must then be put into the public domain.

In the absence of Parliament, this report is the only possible accountability mechanism for the people.

An eight-page sanitised media release is not good enough.

The Constitution dictates that the whole report reach the public domain.

And the people of Fiji deserve no less than that.

Thursday, March 19, 2009

Tell us the truth, mining community tells State

Tell us the truth, mining community tells State
www.fijisun.com.fj - 3/19/2009
Sai Comment:
- Who is surprise at this dishonest act by the intetrim regime?? It is sad but what can you expect from a regime that ursurped power at the point of the gun! They can't be expected to be honest, starting from the reasons for the coup to promises for help to citizens such as the mining community. Now that Voreqe is the Minister of Finance, he will be hoping he could keep disgruntled military people with similar promises of pay increases etc.. No wonder they're keen to raid the FNPF to fund their bloated expenditure in unproductive areas such as having a large military that does not contribute an ounce to the national economic output or GDP! Begs why ever needed a military as I have argued eslsewhere, because it is simply unproductive expenditure, except perhaps the engineering arm of the military, but only when the private sector is unable to fully meet infrastruture development needs. The word then for Fiji is - prepare for more broken promises of assistance in the current onslaught of the global crisis by a regime that is only bent on its survival in order to avoid their just fate when power returns to the people of Fiji.

The Vatukoula mining community is still waiting for the $6million rehabilitation fund that was promised to them three years ago. Community representative Salote Marama yesterday called on the Interim Government to tell them the truth since the people have been suffering for so long.

“We urge the interim government to be honest,” she said. “They need to tell us if there is money to help the people or not. Every day I’ve got people on my doorsteps asking about the money which was promised to them.”

Ms Marama said there are many problems and challenges faced by many families in Vatukoula.

“Kids are not going to school since their parents simply can’t afford to pay their fees and it’s hard to put food on the table in time like this. “You have to come to see it yourself and hear from the people.”

Ms Marama said the Vatukoula tragedy has taken its toll on the people. “Government must act now to realise a sustainable resolution and rehabilitation process, a process which should also be led and owned by the people of Vatukoula.

“We cannot be fooled around by government and the mining company and we are calling them to be honest since the people deserve to know the truth on that promised royalty”

Vatukoula community consultative committee spokesman Ponipate Ravula said things have not changed much since then.

He said government and mining company have been hopelessly silent on the Vatukoula issue and the media is their only hope to highlight their plight.

“There is still no movement with the $6 million rehab fund, no resolution of outstanding payments to workers, no resolution of land claims, no resolution of injury compensation claims,” said Mr Ravula.

“We urges the interim government to amend the Rehabilitation and Social Assistance Deed signed by former Interim Lands minister Tevita Vuibau on behalf of the Fiji Government and Westech in August 2007 to ensure that the immediate resolution of all outstanding company obligations to the people and environment of Vatukoula be important components of the revised deed,” he added.

No amnesty for soldiers

No amnesty for soldiers

www.fijisun.com.fj - 3/19/2009
The eight soldiers and a policeman jailed over the death of 19-year-old Sakiusa Rabaka are not covered under the immunity promulgation.
This was revealed by prosecution lawyer Wilisoni Kurisaqila. In an interview, Mr Kurisaqila said that the issue of amnesty had been raised before the case went to trial but he strongly objected to it. He said this is because the amnesty period was from December 6, 2006 to January 5, 2007.
Mr Kurisaqila said the incident in which Sakiusa Rabaka and four other complainants were assaulted by the soldiers and a policeman occurred on January 28, 2007 and that this date does not fall in the period of amnesty. When contacted yesterday defence lawyer Haroon Ali Shah said the issue of amnesty for the nine convicted men was never used as a defence strategy.
Mr Shah said the issue was not raised by him as a defence tactic for his clients’ case because ‘it was not part of the plan’. “It was never part of the plan to raise the issue of amnesty as a defence strategy. Even if we had the chance to plead amnesty, we would not have raised the issue because I wanted a fair trial since the charges were serious,” he said.

“We could have pleaded amnesty or even alert the judge’s mind to the possibility that the men could be protected under the amnesty period but like I said, I wanted a fair trial to take place and everyone’s had their day in court.”
Interim Attorney General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum refused to hear queries on the matter and instead referred all questions to his public relations officer Sharila Lazarus. Fiji Law Society president Dorsami Naidu said people who had been assaulted by soldiers during the amnesty period still has a right to report or lodge a formal complaint with police. “I think they should and time will not be an obstacle because of the circumstances. And I believe the police should act because they are duty bound to assist members of the public who have such complaints because the rule of law and Constitution are still valid,” he said. Mr Naidu said in such cases, the issue of being protected under the amnesty period would be challengeable in court. “The validity of amnesty is challengeable in court because there are factors like, who issued the amnesty and was it properly done, that need to be determined,” he said.
Meanwhile, Mr Shah confirmed that he has filed an appeal at the Lautoka High Court yesterday.
Police man Patrick Nayacalagilagi along with soldiers Taione Lua, Ulaiasi Radike, Etonia Nadura, Ratunaisa Toutou, Joeli Lesavua, Jona Nareki, Ilaisa Kurimavua and Napolioni Naulia were each sentenced to four years on a lesser charge of manslaughter and four months imprisonment for each of the five counts of common assault they were convicted of.

Civil service reshuffle ‘won’t bring reforms'

Civil service reshuffle ‘won’t bring reforms'
www.fijilive.com - 19/03/2009
Sai Comment:
-Pramod Rae is right of the ball on this. What Fiji now has is a fully militarised public service led by ill-equipped puppet military officers. No wonder the key departments of government are being run down due to poor leadership and lack of intellectual foresight, starting from the interim PM, who is only interested in controlling key departments in order to achieve his selfish and illegal coup aims. These officers all know, they would have no show in any of the positions they now hold, in a proper democratic state of government with a neutral and apolitical public service. We all pray they will be booted back to the military camp when democraccy and sanity returns to Fiji and its public service for the benefit of the beloved people of Fiji.
The reshuffle of Fiji’s permanent secretaries will neither bring about efficiency nor public reforms as the interim government believes, says the National Federation Party. NFP general secretary Pramod Rae said the appointment of former navy commander Viliame Naupoto as the permanent secretary to the office of the interim Prime Minister in place of career civil servant Parmesh Chand was a clear indication of the interim regime’s intention “to entrench itself in power for as long as possible”.“For the first time in Fiji’s history of governance, both during parliamentary democracy and rule of interim government after coups, the positions of permanent secretaries to the PM’s office and Finance Minister is being held by military officers,” he said.Rae said with the appointment of Naupoto and the fact that interim PM Voreqe Bainimarama was also holding the position of interim Finance Minister showed that the office of the PM was ‘totally militarized’.He added that, “the reshuffle of the permanent secretaries will be a continuation of the culture of mediocrity that has prevailed in the civil service since December 2006”.In a major reshuffle, Chand will now head the Public Service Commission as its permanent secretary while Taina Tagicakibau will be PS for Public Enterprise and Tourism.Chand will be replaced by Director Immigration Viliame Naupoto while Fiji Development Bank chairman John Prasad takes up the post of acting Finance PS.Finance PS Peceli Vocea has been transferred to Foreign Affairs while Ross Ligairi will become Roving Ambassador.

Justice will be done

Justice will be done
www.fijitimes.com - Thursday, March 19, 2009
THE High Court's decision to send eight soldiers and a policeman to jail for the killing of Sakiusa Rabaka should be a warning to all members of the security forces.
It should also be a reminder to every citizen in this country that in the fullness of time, justice will be done. For two years the Rabaka family waited to see these killers face the court and answer for this heinous crime. On Tuesday the long wait for justice finally came to an end.
Justice Daniel Goundar ruled that the nine service personnel must serve four years in jail for torturing and injuring him so severely at the army's Black Rock Training Camp that he later died from his injuries. There are those who argue that the penalty for this death should have been more severe in order to underline the gravity of the crime. In his judgment Justice Goundar alluded to the seriousness of the offences committed by the nine. He also highlighted a trend which has become painfully apparent since the overthrow of elected government and the removal of parliamentary process in December 2006.
Far too often, members of the security forces have taken matters into their own hands and subjected detainees to cruel, inhumane treatment. Justice Goundar said: "Instead of being custodians of the law, you took the law into your own hands and became both the jury of guilt and the executor of punishment." Rabaka was not the first, nor was he the last, to suffer degrading and inhumane treatment at the hands of the security forces. Several cases – including the killing of rebel soldiers after the 2000 mutiny and the slaying of escapee Josefa Baleiloa – remain unsolved.
It is likely that if these men had been produced before a judge and subjected to due process, they would have been incarcerated for life for their crimes against the State. But they were denied this right by soldiers and policemen who took not only their civil liberties but also their lives. In the Rabaka case Justice Goundar told the nine accused men: "Every detainee in this country is entitled to the constitutional guarantees such as due process of law and protection from degrading treatment."
Ironically, their actions took place at a facility built to train troops for participation in United Nations peacekeeping and protection efforts around the world. Members of the security forces must remember now, more than ever before, that their most important duty is not to follow orders – it is to follow the law.

The raging rhino

The raging rhino
By Thakur Ranjit Singh
http://www.fijitimes.com/ - Thursday, March 19, 2009
Sai Comment:
- Like other analysis by Thakur, this contributoin is just another in a similar vein! A careful and deep analysis of Voreqe's motive for the coup would reveal nothing like Thakur is postulating here- it was self preservation such that all his actions up to now is towards an exit strategy he thinks would leave him unscathed from the treasonous act he committed, not to mention the inhuman treatment of innocent citizens by the military! In fact a model behaviour profile for Voreqe would suggest a "directive, dictatorial" make up who is simply blind and mute to other's views. I am afraid such approach to leadership has been extinct for ages, even in the military of advanced nations. In truth, all that Voreqe has done, is destory the very fibre of Fijian ethos, as can be evidenced by the breakdown in Fijian respect, and regard for each other, to look after each other, especially in times of crisis. What we have now, is the birth and growth, especially in the military, of Fijians whose approach to life is that you can overcome any challenges by throwing those with the mandate to lead out of office and terrorising those who criticise you. Such may be the mentality of a Raging Rhino, in a barbarian society, but this was to have been eradicated since the arrival of christianity on the shores of Fiji back in 1835. In that sense, Voreqe and his supporters are swimming against the tide of history and therefore doomed to fail well before they even started.
They say, when a rhinoceros rushes on its prey, it puts its head down, with its deadly horn protruding with a resolute to accomplish its mission of striking and demolishing its target and opposition. It is unfortunate that sections of the Fiji community, especially the SDL and NFP and certain NGOs and sections of the international community have failed to realise or understand the mood of Fiji's interim Prime Minister, Frank Bainimarama. This can be summed up as a raging rhino which is out to accomplish what he had wanted to achieve. Despite all forms of threats and demand for deadlines for an election, Bainimarama has stuck to his guns and is almost like a raging unstoppable rhino.
Fiji's second political leaders' forum was held at the Parliamentary Complex on March 14, 2009 where Bainimarama addressed the leaders.
-He emphasised on the need for political leaders to accept changes to the electoral system so that the racially divisive provisions in the electoral system could be removed.
-He reiterated that to hold elections under a communally divisive system, for the sake of satisfying deadlines imposed by outsiders, would not solve Fiji's deep seated problems.
-He emphatically warned that it was not the time to arouse ethnic fears and racial mistrust as grounds to win elections because indigenous interests were protected by the Constitution.
-He added that the interim Government would oppose those who undermine Fiji's independence and sovereignty.
-And he had been doing exactly that.
He recently told an international agency to go and jump in Suva Harbour. He effectively told them in Clint Eastwood's Dirty Harry style: "... go ahead, punk, make my day and sack Fiji from the Commonwealth."
The advantage of doing a Masters in Journalism while being a columnist is that you are required to read articles as part of your studies which are quite pertinent to the subject being pursued. In this context I read an article by Mark Revington in the Listener of August, 2000 where David Robie, Associate Professor in Media Studies at Auckland University of Technology was quoted, questioning what Fiji had achieved in the aftermath of Rabuka's coups of 1987. Chauvinistic, nationalistic struggles of this kind (like Rabuka's coups) based on nepotism, racism, opportunistic crime, opportunities for corruption and suppression of human rights of others undermine genuine indigenous struggles such as the Kanaks struggles for independence from France in New Caledonia.
Fiji which has been independent from Britain since 1970 has had indigenous government except for one month in 1987 when Bavadra was Prime Minister and one year in 1999-2000 with Chaudhry.It has been questioned what the indigenous leadership had done in all this time for the underprivileged indigenous villager? Why were they blaming the Chaudhry government after three decades of failure by Mara and Rabuka and the chiefly oligarchy?
Those who are pushing and rushing Fiji for election need to honestly ponder on this. They need to answer, what would an election achieve for Fiji when it did not do so in the past three and half decades? Why should Fiji not be allowed to sort out its unique problem in its own unique way which those pushing for elections conveniently forget that elections of the past failed to deliver democracy and social justice to Fiji. We have politicians hijacking democracy which allows unscrupulous leaders to discriminate against their own people under the revered shelter of democratic sovereignty. What will the Commonwealth, Australia, New Zealand and the Pacific Island Forum do if an election sends back the same culprits who were raping democracy under the sanctity of supposedly democratic elections, and continue doing what they were doing before December 2006?
It is time Fiji was allowed to sort out and find home grown permanent solutions to its political problems. This looked a step closer to being realised when the leaders' forum met under very cordial atmosphere and even the greatest critics of Bainimarama were pleasantly supportive of the move to involve all leaders, NGOs and other stakeholders to seek a permanent solution to Fiji's fundamental problems. It was a pleasant surprise to see the deposed PM Qarase supporting the forum and seeing the positive side of the meeting. It is good that politicians and trade union leaders realise the reality of the situation and understand the mood of the raging rhino. For those who cannot appreciate the reason why Bainimarama is pushing for changes and coming hard on his opponents, they need to realise that he had come within a hair's breadth of becoming history. His opponents need to delve in Pacific history. Since 1981, there have been 10 political assassinations in Melanesian countries. Frank Bainimarama narrowly escaped becoming assassination victim number 11.
It was through good luck and a band of loyal soldiers, who enabled a dramatic dash through a cassava patch in a gully behind Suva's Queen Elizabeth Barracks when the elite Counter Revolutionary Warfare Unit rebel soldiers mutinied on November 2, 2000. In light of this background, can you really blame the rhino for its raging mood?
* E-Mail: thakurjixtra.co.nz* Thakur Ranjit Singh is recipient of Pacific Islands Media Association(PIMA) and Auckland University of Technology (AUT) Pasifika Postgraduate scholarship for Masters in Communication Studies. Apart from being a community worker and a political commentator, he is a student at AUT while also being the Chief Reporter of a new weekend newspaper, Indian Weekender.

Coup wolves circling FNPF

Coup wolves circling FNPF
by Professor Wadan Narsey
Fiji National Provident Fund contributors and pensioners should be concerned. Perhaps worried. Perhaps frightened. Because our FNPF life savings are under threat.
Fijian Holdings Limited, a company now controlled by the Military Government, tried to borrow more than a hundred millions from FNPF, when private banks had refused. Thankfully, FNPF refused. More ominously, the Military Government wants to borrow hundreds of millions, basically to sustain their increased recurrent expenditure and military over-spending. The private banks, local or overseas, will not oblige. Should FNPF oblige? Will FNPF oblige?
If FNPF continuously gives in to such lending pressures from Government, without economic growth, it will only encourage inflation to rise in the long term, thereby slashing the real value of everyone's savings and pensions. And if ever pensioners totally lose confidence in FNPF, it may become insolvent, with future pension rates slashed, and even existing pensions reduced in dollar terms. The key issue is that the FNPF Board is now controlled by an unelected Military Government's appointees.
We the FNPF contributors who own the savings do not have a single direct representative on the FNPF Board who can be accountable to us. Why don't we? We remain quiet at our peril.
Fiji's life savings
Annually, by law, some 16 percent of our wages and salaries, is deposited into the FNPF.
The FNPF is therefore the depository of the bulk of the life savings of most people who work in Fiji's formal sector, amounting to more than$2.5 billions. The assets are supposed to be worth more than 3 billions. Bigger than the assets of all the commercial banks put together. From the outset, with successive governments controlling the Board, the bulk of FNPF funds have been lent to Government, at interest rates much lower than that demanded by commercial banks.
Since 2000, to shore up Fiji's foreign exchange reserves, successive Governments and the Reserve Bank of Fiji have forced FNPF to bring back its foreign investments, thereby losing FNPF revenue.
Worse still, with idle funds in Fiji, FNPF is also forced, in the absence of bankable private sector demand, to lend even more to Government, as currently. Some FNPF savings are invested in property. But significant amounts have now also been lent to investment projects such as at Natadola, Momi and GPH, the returns on all of which have been delayed, largely because of the 2006 coup. The FNPF rate of return has been going down for a decade. It will godown further if the FNPF Board makes more mistakes.
The FHL wolf
For decades the borrowing wolves have been circling the easy money at the FNPF. Recently, the FHL Board and management, which have been taken over by the Military Government, tried to borrow more than a hundred million from FNPF, to finance the purchase of British Petroleum South Pacific at the massive price of $190 million. An Indian company would first take out its own management fees from the revenue, with the remainder then being available for loan repayments,other costs and dividends. Not surprisingly, the commercial banks won't touch this loan. And thank goodness that the FNPF Board has also apparently refused. But the FNPF Board may not be able to withstand the Military Government's pressure to lend hundreds of millions more, to finance Government's budget deficit and spending plans. And that could be as damaging as the FHL loan.
Government Deficits and killer inflation
There is nothing wrong per se with FNPF financing the Fiji government's budget deficit. As long as the borrowed funds are spent on productive capital expenditure, which leads to increased economic growth, incomes and tax revenues for government. But with an unelected Military Government in place, we are unlikely to see the required economic growth, income and increased tax revenues, which could repay the loans.
All that is likely to happen, is an increase in the money supply, increased imports, reduced foreign reserves, bigger public debt, and an upward pressure on inflation.Since December 2006, Fiji has suffered total inflation of 10%, by which most people's real incomes have declined in real terms. Worse, everyone's savings and pensions have lost 10% of their value since December 2006.
The bad news is that every bit of future inflation, very quietly and secretly working through higher prices in the market, will continue to steal away our savings and pensions. And it will be a horror story, if inflation is accelerated by a devaluation. If our economy does not grow enough with new jobs, FNPF will not see the required growth in employee contributions and neither will government see increased tax revenues. If the economy deteriorates enough, Government may not be able to repay their FNPF loans on time.
The rate of return to FNPF shareholders will keep dropping. FNPF may have to further reduce the pension rate to future retirees. And in the worst case scenario, if retiring people lose their confidence in the FNPF, and simply withdraw their savings in lump sums rather than take the pension, then FNPF may face a liquidity crisis and could even become insolvent, i.e. bankrupt.
Current pensioners may then not be paid on time or, horror of all horrors, may have their pensions illegally reduced. Imagine the suffering. Let us hope it never comes to that. But it may, if this Military Government continues to hold on to power and continues its fiscal irresponsibility.

Question: who should be held responsible for any future destruction of our FNPF life savings?
FNPF and Unelected Governments
If mistakes are made by an FNPF Board appointed by an elected government, the voters must ultimately take responsibility. But if mistakes are made by an FNPF Board appointed by an unelected Military Government, then the military themselves (Bainimarama and the Military Council including most of the former Military Commanders) and the Board Members appointed by the Military Government, must be personally held responsible.
Also responsible will be all the coup supporters who volunteered, after the 2006 coup, to help run the Military Government and Boards: the Fiji Labour Party and their stalwarts Chaudhry, Vyeshnoi, Tom Ricketts, Koroi and others.
Also responsible will be those who supported the NCBBF/Charter/Electoral Reform excuses for the 2006 coup: Archbishop Mataca, CCF's Jone Dakuvula and Akuila Yabaki, Kamlesh Arya, Jo Serulagilagi, Finau Tabakaucoro, Lorrini Tevi, John Samy, Kevin Barr, David Arms, Francis Narayan, Robin Nair and others, now also including FIT's Mahendra Reddy. While some claimed to be serving the President's Mandate, they disappeared without any reference to the President, when they were booted out by Bainimarama.

FNPF Board and us
FNPF decisions are now being made an FNPF Board controlled by the Military Government.
We, the FNPF contributors and pensioners have no representation whatsoever on the Board.
If thieves came into our house and stole a thousand dollars from the drawers, and took the family jewelry, we would be outraged and screaming for the police.
But people with guns have taken over the government and control of tax revenues and public expenditure, reduced our incomes by more than a billion dollars in the last two years, and now, are mounting attacks on our FNPF which could erode our life savings.
Why are the FNPF contributors, including FMF soldiers, police, civil servants, and blind coup supporters, all staying silent?
This article serves notice: if our Fiji National Provident Fund suffers because of forced irresponsible lending to government and other carpet-bagger companies, this military government and the coup supporters must be held primarily responsible. But also jointly responsible with be every FNPF contributor who chooses to stay silent in the face of this impending disaster. We will not be able to wash our hands, like Pontius Pilate, if our FNPF cow ever ends up in the slaughter house.
As a minimum we must demand direct representation on the FNPF Board to protect our interests. And FNPF must also be allowed to invest overseas to maximise return to shareholders, and diversify its portfolio.