The immunity question

The question of immunity seems to be based on an assumption that we’ll never be rid of Bainimarama without giving him a safe exit.

According to this line of thought, he’ll hang on to power just to keep himself safe, so we’d better find a way of making him feel really secure. Recalling that he gave Speight immunity and then reneged on the grounds of missing weapons that have never been found, we should expect Bainimarama to be suspicious of any terms of immunity.

What this line of thought ignores is the possibility that Bainimarama will hang on to power purely because he’s addicted to the trappings of office, the jet-setting and high life at taxpayers expense.

There’s also the issue of what Bainimarama can be given immunity against. Treason and the associated acts are not the full extent of his crimes. What about his back-pay, not to forget the alleged secret double dipping of ministerial salaries? And what about countless other acts of corruption which he might be guilty of? Acts that may be illegal even in terms of the perverted legal system Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum has set up.

What the question of immunity is really all about is trust. Any peaceful resolution of the current situation requires trust on the part of Bainimarama, just as it requires trust on the part of all other parties.

So where do we find trust in a situation where distrust has been the modus operandi of the regime from the very start? Inside the regime there’s been an endless game of snakes and ladders with gossip and backstabbing as the snakes and hidden favours as the ladders.

Bainimarama’s leadership style has to change completely if he’s to lead us anywhere other than down the same path to destruction.

NAVOSAVAKADUA