[Dec 7, 2013]
As we in Fiji share the grief of the Mandela family and people of South Africa at the passing of Madiba, we also celebrate the extraordinary life of this great freedom fighter, unifier, reconciliator, statesman and founding father of the rainbow nation of South Africa.
Nelson Mandela succeeded in liberating his people through his defiant, persistent and disciplined approach towards the repressive apartheid regime that subjected millions of black South Africans to many indignities and much suffering by stripping them of their rights, freedoms and basic humanity.
The suppression of basic rights and freedoms continues here in Fiji, under the repressive Bainimarama regime, who represent all that Nelson Mandela spent his entire life opposing.
We can draw strength and inspiration for our own struggle from Madiba’s willingness to forfeit his own freedom and liberty for the greater need and good of his people.
After sacrificing 27 years of his life in prison he became, at 76 years of age, South Africa’s first democratically-elected President. His choice of weapons for unifying a divided people was forgiveness, compassion and reconciliation. He embraced his enemies despite decades of harsh and inhumane treatment. Although he could have remained in his job for life, as many leaders try to do, he relinquished power after just 5 years.
Nelson Mandela shows us that outright rejection of any form of imposed rule and fighting for people’s rights, freedoms, humanity and dignity is not only just and moral. It is also a responsibility and obligation we all have towards each other. By endeavoring to adopt the same persistence and discipline of Mandela, and armed with the courage of our own convictions, we can and must restore our peoples’ freedoms, rights and dignity.
Authorized By UFDF
For further elaboration or interviews on our statements please contact anyone of the following:
Mick Beddoes – 830524; Laisania Qarase – 9993113; Mahendra Chaudhry – 9921865
Attar Singh – 9921184; Tupeni Baba – 9373364
LOCAL MEDIA REMINDER
FIJI INDUSTRY DEVELOPMENT DECREE 2010
(DECREE NO 29 OF 2010)
Media Code of Ethics & Practice
Sec 1: Accuracy, balance and fairness: (d) ‘Media organizations have a duty to be balanced and fair in their treatment of news and current affairs and their dealings with members of the public’ & (e) Editorial comment in any medium must be clearly identified as such and kept separate from news reports.
Sec 2: Opportunity to reply: Media organizations have an obligation to give a fair opportunity to reply to any individual or organization on which the medium itself comments editorially
Sec 21: Impartially and balance: Media organizations shall endeavor to show fairness at all times, and impartiality and balance in any item or programme, series of items or programmes or in broadly related articles or programmes over a reasonable period of time when presenting news which deals with political matters, current affairs and controversial questions.
Crosbie Walsh has found his culprit in the torture video case and, as I expected, it’s Fijian (sorry iTaukei) culture that’s to blame. Someone so skilled in the arts of condescension would never call them ‘savages’, but then he doesn’t need to, we can all get the picture.
Walsh tells us: “Butaraki (an arbitrary beating) is part of traditional iTaukei culture. It will not be eliminated overnight”. Is he hinting that Bainimarama wants to eliminate it? Perhaps he’s banking on ASK, Bainimarama’s trusted adviser, to ensure that iTaukei culture is consigned to the dustbin of history?
Does he really think that the systematic beating of a helpless man in handcuffs has any place in iTaukei culture? The humiliation of removing the victims pants, the poking with batons? it could be RFMF culture, but it’s not iTaukei culture. The perpetrators in this video were experts in the field of torture, the clinical infliction of pain. This is not iTaukei culture.
Fists sometimes enter into Fijian disputes and the meting out of rough justice happens when tempers are hot, but the expert sadism, not to forget the cowardice we’ve witnessed are not part of iTaukei culture. Blaming iTaukei culture for this is the lowest form of ethnic stereotyping. It’s racism. If anyone has ever suspected that racist motives underpin Crosbie Walsh’s thoroughly inconsistent commentary on events in Fiji, it seems there is no doubt. He owes iTaukei culture an apology for this slur.
Violence by police and prison staff against criminals occurs all of the world, but seldom do we find courts and doctors so helpless to act against such blatant violations of the law. And even more rare, is a Prime Minister who stands up and defends these actions. This is the Bainimarama military government, nothing else, and it must be held to account.
Allegations of human rights abuses have dogged Bainimarama from day one of his coup. His opponents argued that the coup was provoked by fear that he was going to be charged in relation to the deaths of the CRW soldiers (who, by the way were not mutineers, merely suspects).
Then there were allegations of mistreatment of critics at the QEB, followed by deaths in custody which were swept under the carpet or token sentences handed out.
Bainimarama’s supporters regarded these allegations as politically motivated. They were either fabrications or exaggerations. In the case of the CRW deaths, Bainimarama successfully put out the story that they were an understandable human response by his troops to the trauma of the mutiny and the deaths of innocent loyalists.
The video, however, has changed all this. It’s not an allegation. It’s nine minutes of brutality practised by methodical torturers. There was no heat of the moment, only callous infliction of pain designed to minimise injuries so they can be explained away as resulting from ‘resisting arrest’ while being ‘armed with cane knives’.
Finally, there is Bainimarama’s seal of approval of their actions. Suddenly all the allegations have to be seen in a different light. For supporters like Crosbie Walsh there is a sinking feeling that more of the allegations may be true. Could it be that he is collecting more than one salary? And if the allegations are true, what does this say about Bainimarama’s agenda? Is he trying to build a non-racial Fiji, or just using that as an excuse to keep power in his hands
The blogs have been full of talk of revenge following the release of the video showing cowardly thugs torturing two men in handcuffs. Some bloggers call for revenge against the thugs doing the beating, even saying their families should be threatened or harmed, others say this is pay-back for what happened in 2000.
Mentioning the Speight business is interesting. Iowane Benedito would have been 12 at the time, so it’s unlikely he terrorised anyone in 2000. What these people mean it was done by people like him – young iTaukei men. According to this theory, inflicting pain on Iowane punishes people who are in some way like him, so it’s almost as good.
And these people baying for revenge are the same people who support the idea that Bainimarama is trying to move Fiji forward, building a new Fiji etc etc. The problem is crime. It was in 2007 and it still is today.
To reduce crime we need an efficient and effective police force which gets cooperation from the public. Bainimarama has done nothing to help to achieve this. He got rid of a highly professional Police Commissioner with an international reputation (that took him to a top job in the UN when he left). In his place he put Teleni who siphoned FPF funds to pay for his brother’s religious cult. The effectiveness of the FPF has plumetted, as has the confidence of the community.
It’s catching criminals, or better still, preventing them from committing their crimes, that counts. Criminals fear being caught, not being punished. Upping the punishment does little, catching the perpetrators works well.
Graham Davis was honest enough to say he saw a little of himself in the 9 minute video, but he was wrong to generalise this to “ourselves” ie all of us. I saw nothing of me in those videos, and neither did others I discussed it with. The last thing I and others who share this view would want to see is the perpetrators of the beating receiving the same treatment, or even anything similar. If the fact that it’s against Christian teaching isn’t enough, it also doesn’t work. It makes matters worse and perpetuates violence.
You don’t have to be bandsman Leweni to read between the lines of the statement issued by Naivalurua in response to the Video of Shame. He has no intention of investigating these crimes.
His statement that “Fijian security agencies have worked tirelessly over the past few years to give protection and security to ordinary Fijians who suffered through constant home evasions, robberies and violent and wanton crimes” tells us all we need to know about his attitude.
The end justifies the means, in other words the philosophy of the Bainimarama coup. It started with the beating and intimidation of people, women as well as men, who protested the takeover and it’s continued ever since, as Felix Anthony or Ben Padarath can attest. Neither of these is a home invader or robber, but they were abused in custody and nothing was done.
If the get tough approach works so well, why in year 7 of the coup are these methods still needed? When Teleni was the Commissioner we were told that crime rates had fallen – there was talk of towns and cities being crime free – but we all knew this was a lie. Home invasions have continued. Rapes are more common than ever.
The idea that it will take months for the incident to be investigated is an insult to our intelligence. The evidence of the video is very revealing and Naivalurua knows it. He’s sacked people for less.
It’s clear he believes the end justifies the means, which makes him as guilty as the brutal thugs under him. And of course, sharing this guilt are all the apologists who have rationalised or ignored the abuse of human right under the military government. Some apologists, like Felix and Ben, have already learned the error of their ways. Others, even more self-centred, apparently have to have it happen to them before they can understand.
A law that doesn’t protect everyone, protects no-one. This is life under the law of the jungle.
The Foreign Ministers of Australia and New Zealand are intelligent men. It is therefore very surprising that, in their recent ‘handling’ of Fiji’s alleged return to democracy and their relations with the Fiji regime they have been duped by someone who is very well known for being unintelligent – the current illegal Prime Minister of Fiji, Frank Bainimarama.
Specifically we call on Australia and New Zealand to abandon rapprochement towards the Fiji regime. The regime is duping them in saying that it has any sincere desire to return to true democracy. (It asserts that that step is being fulfilled by preparation of a new Constitution and preparations for elections in 2014.)
The present rapprochement process began just after the middle of last year, at whose inspiration it is not known, although the New Zealand Foreign Minister appears to be at least proximately the chief suspect, but of course he may have been galvanised by other powers. It followed the alleged expose by the New Zealand authorities of an asserted assassination plot, which expose led to the Army controlled Fiji media praising New Zealand for guarding the back of the alleged Fiji Prime Minister. (The New Zealand authorities have, however never provided any evidence for their allegation of there being ‘convincing proof’ of such a conspiracy).
Within a week or so of the expose the New Zealand Foreign Minister was in Fiji and the process of cosying up to an alleged transition to democracy was well under way, ignoring all the lies, deceit and persistent oppression of the past.
What has been happening since the beginning of this rapprochement process?
- The Army remains in full control;
- Australian and New Zealand taxpayers have contributed substantially to the alleged process for return to democracy;
- The draft Constitution prepared by a world recognised expert has been burnt on the orders of the alleged Attorney General (Australian and New Zealand taxpayers contributed to the costs of the preparation of this draft);
- The regime has (via the alleged Attorney General) purported to enact a Decree (illegal as are all Decrees of the regime) inhibiting and putting excessive restrictions upon the registration of political parties, including placing such registration in the hands of a person who like all other public personages in Fiji is totally under Army control, and illegally expropriating the assets of any party not complying with its draconian provisions;
- The vast majority of existing political parties have been wiped off the face of the map by non compliance with the said Decree;
- Draconian Decrees restricting unions which have been subject of complaint and proceedings by the International Labour Organisation have not been amended;
- The leader of the party which achieved the highest number of votes in the last democratic election continues to languish in jail.
Any person who ignores these Signs of the Times can only call himself or herself a monkey who can see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.
As we and many others have pointed out before, the current alleged Prime Minister and Attorney General have no more credibility (and probably far less) than used car salesmen. Their word means nothing.
Any ‘election’ held under Army rule will be a farce and the Army is not letting go – it would not be an election.
We ask Australia and New Zealand to abandon the current misconceived rapprochement with the regime, and to stop the irresponsible waste of Australian and New Zealand taxpayers money into attempting to carry out that mistaken step.
Simply Pull the Plug on them.
Ratu Tevita Uluilakeba Mara
Council for a Democratic Fiji
1st March 2013
Commissioner Naivalurua has distinguished himself from most of his military colleagues who swarmed like flies all over top civil service positions. He has at least looked competent and professional. The FPF was in a mess after Teleni, and Naivalurua has worked hard to restore the professionalism of the force.
He has taken stern action against officers accused of corruption and demanded performance, starting with the long overdue demand for physical fitness. If Naivalurua does not now act on the irrefutable evidence of this video his credibility with the FPF he is trying to rebuild is gone.
The video shows the men are clearly in custody, the torture being inflicted is consistent with the reports of their injuries and there must be a chain of custody that stretches all the way from the back of the truck to FPF. If there is not a chain of custody that, too, must be investigated. Commissioner Naivalurua cannot brush this aside?
If his own officers cannot name the men who handed them over to them, he has to charge his officers with obstructing justice. If the men who handed them over cannot explain the injuries, they too must be charged. There is no doubt about what happened, the only question is who did it. The glimpses of individuals in the video also provide some evidence.
LAPD were subject to allegations of brutality before the Rodney King incident and he would have been just another allegation if it had not been for the video which confirmed that he had been brutally assaulted.
But even the Rodney King incident pales next to the RFMF torture video. The LAPD officers acted on the spur of the moment in anger. The RFMF torturers acted systematically and calmly in accordance with looks like a plan to permanently cripple the victim. Only sadists could act in such a casually brutal manner.
Will Naivalurua act? Probably not, because the sadists, while indulging their sick urges, were no doubt acting on orders and the orders came from the same place that the order to sack Naivalurua would come. The best we can hope for is that Naivalurua will act to preserve his honour and resign.
And one final puzzle. Why is the Rodney King full version video available on You Tube, while the RFMF torture video is now hidden behind a warning and requires a sign-on. Is this a little service provided by Qorvis? A threat to You Tube of legal action? Or is it just that the RFMF torturers are a whole order of magnitude worse than Rodney King’s attackers? This video IS shocking and it will not be swept under the carpet.
First, some history. The Fiji Constitution Commission was set up as a body independent of the current Fiji regime and funded by overseas aid – largely Australia and New Zealand – and its membership was approved by the regime.
Professor Yash Ghai, Chairman of the Constitution Commission, has revealed that the Fiji Police (acting on orders of the Aiyaz Sayed Khaiyum) seized copies of the draft constitution and burned them in his presence.This astonishing act of barbarism was apparently carried out to prevent circulation of the document. As is now usual in such cases the law of unintended consequences has resulted in a much wider distribution of the document over the internet (see it here: http://www.fijileaks.com) as the people most affected by the new constitution – the people of Fiji – read it to find out why the regime hates it so much.
The chilling interview of Professor Ghai with Radio Australia and ABC news over his experiences at the hands of the regime is a reminder of just how far Fiji has evolved into a ‘rogue state’.
These events have demonstrated that the Yash Ghai Commission, as we have reported before, was simply a screen behind which the regime creates its own ‘Constitution’ – one which will no doubt be far less palatable to the people of Fiji than the Yash Ghai version – and one which can have no credibility either locally or internationally.
The regime is shortly expected to appoint their favourite legal advisor Nazhat Shameem as Constituent Assembly’s chair leading a group of handpicked members to create their version of the Fiji Constitution. It will be interesting to compare this document, when it appears, with the one which was so symbolically destroyed.
We suggest that the final result will be a document which has been specifically drafted to control the outcome of the elections in 2014 and provide immunity from prosecution for the perpetrators of the 2006 coup and their assistants. From this latest atrocity we can see that it will ignore the input from the more than 7,000 citizens who made submissions to Yash Ghai.
The paradox here, of course, is that, if the regime and its decrees were as popular with the people of Fiji as they continually claim then they would have no need to worry about immunity. As it is, however. they are not popular, are evidently becoming less so and a rigged election will only worsen the situation for them. We strongly suggest, therefore that the sensible thing for the regime is to stop digging their hole and throw themselves upon the mercy of the population and repent their multifarious sins of the past 7 years through the medium of free and fair elections.
It is clear that the various sanctions and measures by international and regional communities to pressure the regime towards democracy have been at least partially successful and we therefore ask the New Zealand and Australian governments and their various partners to step up this pressure in the light of this latest outrage. We suggest that the following measures would increase the pressure upon the regime and therefore hasten progress towards a democratic Fiji:
- Review the appointment of High Commissioners to Fiji from Australia and New Zealand.
- Review the level of and conditions for financial support for the roadmap to democracy.
- Reverse the recent lifting of travel bans on regime ministers and senior officials, civilians and businessmen who support the illegal regime and its actions.
- The US government proceeds with a Duty Free Access Ban for breach of labour rights.
We ask the international community to take serious note of the Yash Ghai commission’s explanatory document which highlights the severe economic distress the 2006 coup has caused.
The regime is not interested in relinquishing power and the International community must stand with the people of Fiji. This election gerrymandering to preserve the financial plundering and vested interests of a small group of military and civilian elites must stop.
In this respect the refusal to publish the Auditor General’s reports from 2007 and now the attempted suppression of the Draft Constitution is evidence of the real motives of the military regime leaders and their cohorts.
Ratu Tevita Uluilakeba Mara
Council for a Democratic Fiji
Students of the Bible will be familiar with the expression which refers to discovery of the real truth being likened to a falling off of scales from the eyes. Such an experience befell Saul on the road to Damascus on his way to persecute the Christians, and is also called a ‘Damascus experience’. Yash Ghai, Chairman of the Fiji Constitutional Commission, is surely familiar with this expression in view of his extensive erudition and learning.
Yash Ghai has (very belatedly) undergone a Damascus experience in now acknowledging for the first time the real truth of the farce in which the Fiji regime has been engaging him – the process of preparing a new Constitution.
He now sees that Fiji cannot have fair and free elections unless the latest Decrees slashing public consultation are ‘cleaned up’ (as many will recall, the phrase ‘clean up’ was used by the regime to justify its 2006 coup, although of course no actual clean up has occurred – rather the reverse).
Yash Ghai also rightly claims that the regime’s leader and so-called Prime Minister has been harassing him in his work.
Yash Ghai has stated that the entire alleged Constitutional consultation process was entered into on basis of deceit by the regime and that recent changes to the plan for a new Constitution are a very serious variation from the agreement for the process made with the regime.
Yash Ghai’s Damascus experience is, of course most welcome, although much delayed. The Council respectfully points out that long ago, in light of interference and intimidation by the regime and in light of the regime’s craven wish to obtain absolution from its crimes through amnesty, his position was untenable and he should reconsider his position.
In light of the continuance of harassment and intimidation, and of course bad faith, and now the united rejection by all major political parties of the entire process, coupled with the contrived political prosecution of Laisenia Qarase, Yash Ghai should reconsider his decision not to resign.
In response to Yash Ghai’s comments and protests the alleged Prime Minister, an intellectual pygmy and a person of no reputation, has done what he always does when confronted with the view of a truly respected figure who disagrees with him in any way. Bainimarama has become a mouthpiece for a set of noble sounding words designed to put Yash Ghai in his place. Those words are without doubt drafted by his henchman and coup planner Aiyaz Khaiyum, whose mastery of grammar and rhetoric, though far from perfect, easily excels that of Bainimarama.
Bainimarama has reasserted his intention to hold free and fair elections. He has accused Yash Ghai of self gratification – though for what ‘gratification’, he does not attempt to describe. He further denies harassing Yash Ghai and states with great hypocrisy, that the Constitution is not for the Government but for the people.
What is to be made of Khaiyum’s words as uttered by Bainimarama?
Quite unlike Yash Ghai, both Bainimarama and Khaiyum have no credibility. The barest examinations of their history record this fact plainly. Their actions are a tissue of hypocritical self serving lies.
Bainimarama and Khaiyum have both been compared with Richard Nixon (a comparison which is admittedly flawed in terms of intellect). However both have an important trait in common with ‘Tricky Dick’. They are both persons of no credibility or integrity, as shown by a host of instances including recently, to name but a few, their dealings with the English Law Society and the International Labour Organisation, and as recently exposed by William Marshall QC.
It has been asked of Richard Nixon: “Would you buy a used car from this man?” The question was asked because of Nixon’s untrustworthy character.
The Council would not buy anything from Bainimarama or Khaiyum. It would not believe anything they say, based on their dubious records. It would prefer the word of an internationally respected figure such as Yash Ghai.
The Council believes that the condemnation by Yash Ghai of the behaviour of the regime in regard to the Constitutional process shows beyond doubt that it is fatally flawed and cannot lead to a democratic conclusion.
The Council repeats its respectful suggestion that Yash Ghai now resign to save himself further embarrassment at the hands of the regime.
The Corrections Service of Fiji, like every other public institution in Fiji, is controlled by the Army – it is headed by a Lieutenant Colonel. Like every other public institution in Fiji it does nothing which would not be approved of by the current alleged Prime Minister of Fiji, who is head of the Army.
From this we can understand the Correction Services’ latest affront to humanity by declining to transfer a sick old man to a medical facility as distinct from the rigours of the Fiji prisons. The person involved is the former Prime Minister of Fiji, Laisenia Qarase, who gathered the largest number of votes at the last democratic election held in Fiji.
A long time ago the current illegal Attorney General was boasting that he would prosecute Qarase and drag the case on to keep him out of public life.
Qarase has been outspoken against the regime, including stating that he would stand in any elections to be held by the regime and that he would win them, and, after the latest coup the current alleged Prime Minister agreed and conceded that if fresh elections had then been held Qarase would win them.
The following is the full list of indignities inﬂicted by the regime upon Laisenia Qarase:
- He was selectively charged upon outdated offences dating back to the early 1990s whereas those who arranged for his prosecution have never been charged for the much more recent crimes which they have committed, in the current alleged Prime Minister’s case extending at the very least to murder and treason, and in the case of the current alleged Attorney General to not only treason but many other offences.
- He was tried by an imported Sri Lankan Judge who, together with other Judges is completely discredited in the recent petition of William Marshall QC, former Judge of Appeal.
- His appeal is being ‘entertained’ if that is the word by another like Sri Lankan import.
- He is being refused a healthful environment for recovery from his grave illness.
Clearly Qarase was charged to remove him from public life, by those who should not even be in public life.
The Council deplores the Regime’s treatment of Qarase.
Commodore Frank Bainimarama, the head of the Fiji Government, is guilty of massive hypocrisy in his attack on Fiji’s Constitutional Commission over the appointment of Ratu Joni Madraiwiwi as a short-term consultant.
Bainimarama claims the Commission is not transparent in its operations. He has issued emergency amendments to a decree governing the commission.
This decree now requires the commission to publish the names and salaries of all its staff and consultants.
Commodore Bainimarama claims that Ratu Joni has a conﬂict of interest because he was a member of a delegation that made representations to the Constitutional Commission calling for Fiji to be a Christian state. The Bainimarama regime has dictated that Fiji must be a secular state and there will be no negotiation on this.
It is scandalous that Bainimarama should be denouncing the Commission and Ratu Joni in view of his government’s notorious lack of transparency. He is also in no position to condemn anyone for alleged conﬂict of interest when he is totally compromised over the procedures for drafting and adopting a new constitution.
The emerging rift between Bainimarama and his Attorney General, Aiyaz Sayed Khaiyum, and the Constitutional Commission was to be expected.
Bainimarama now realises that the Commission is a threat to him and that through its consultations with the people, he has lost a degree of control. The views expressed to the Commission indicate popular discontent with his government and its failure to cater to public needs.
In the interests of the transparency that he now pretends to champion, Commodore Bainimarama should immediately disclose his own pay and that of all his Cabinet members. He has previously refused to do this.
Commodore Bainimarama should also reveal the arrangements for payment of Cabinet salaries and the role of a private accountancy ﬁrm in this. He needs to reveal whether the principal in that ﬁrm is related to his Attorney General.
He should immediately explain why he will not release the auditor general’s reports on the ﬁnances of his government for the last ﬁve years. It is the mark of a dictator that he does not feel compelled to tell the people, whose tax payments he is using, how their money is managed.
As the announcement for the 2013 budget approaches, the long-suffering public expect Commodore Bainimarama to tell them what measures he will introduce to make the Fiji budget process more open and accountable. His Government has been judged internationally to have one of the least transparent budget systems in the world.
Following his call for the Constitutional Commission to give details of payments to its consultants, the public will now anticipate Commodore Bainimarama revealing the level of payments to all government consultants.
He should immediately conﬁrm the monthly fee paid to the international public relations ﬁrm Qorvis, which specializes in cleaning-up the images of dictators. Can Commodore Bainimarama conﬁrm that Qorvis is still paid at the rate of $US40,000 a month? Or is it now being paid extra?
It is disgraceful that his government should be allocating large sums for an expensive PR consultancy when it cannot ﬁnd the funds to maintain roads and bridges. But that is the way dictatorships work.
The taxpayers should be told why there is no transparency in the issuing of some contracts for civil works.
Why are major contracts regularly awarded to a few select companies from China and Malaysia?
Commodore Bainimarama has knowingly placed himself in a position of severe conﬂict of interest by seizing the power to appoint the members of the proposed Constituent Assembly.
The Assembly will decide on matters that directly concern and threaten him. From Commodore Bainimarama’s perspective, therefore, it is imperative that he should personally control appointments to the Assembly and try to inﬂuence its decisions. It is this group that will decide on such issues as immunity for crimes committed during and after his 2006 military coup. He is very much aware that the people are opposed to immunity.
The Council for a Democratic Fiji again warns the international community that Commodore Bainimarama is not to be trusted. He is a dictator in a very difficult position who must, for his very survival, attempt to manipulate Fiji’s return to constitutional government to serve his own ends. In doing so, the entire process of constitutional reform and elections is likely to fall far short of acceptable international standards and further penalise the citizens of Fiji.
HE Ratu Epeli Nailatikau LVO, OBE,CSM,MSD,OStJ, jssc,psc
Republic of Fiji
re: Proposed constitutional process and Fiji‟s return to democratic rule
First and foremost,Sir, it is imperative to ensure the credibility and legitimacy of any roadmap that is adopted to return our nation to constitutional rule.The roadmap proposed by the interim Prime Minister does not meet this important requirement. Further, we are concerned that it has been unilaterally imposed on the people of Fiji without any consultation with the legitimate representatives of the people.
In our view, the legitimate way forward for the country is to abide by the decision of the Fiji Court of Appeal judgment of 9 April 2009. As advised in the judgment, a caretaker cabinet should be appointed with the specific mandate to oversee the process of holding general elections and restoring constitutional rule within a realistic time frame.
Firstly, members of the Constitutional Commission were appointed by the regime without any consultation with key stakeholders. There are serious reservations about the independence of certain members of the Commission who are perceived by the people to be too close to the current administration.
Secondly, the restrictive environment in which the constitutional process is taking place, will not encourage free and open discussions on the subject. Draconian decrees that suspend and violate human rights especially the right to freedom of expression, assembly and association, remain in force as instruments of fear and intimidation. The local media is still operating under constraints that undermine its freedom to disseminate news fairly and in a balanced manner without fear of repercussions from the regime.
There are credible reports of a certain media organization being threatened by the interim Attorney General following its interviews of two prominent leaders of political parties.
A State sponsored civic education programme on constitution making has begun but key stakeholders, such as, political parties, trade unions and other important civil society organisations have been excluded from participating and/or playing an active role in this exercise.
It is also a matter of grave concern that military officers and civil servants are assigned to head the civic education programme.
Moreover, threats by the RFMF warning people not to “mess with the Army” make a mockery of the initial assurances by the interim Prime Minister that people will be free to openly state their views on the proposed constitution.
The requirement that political parties and trade unions seek separate permits for each consultation/discussion meeting has now been relaxed but political leaders and party activists are still being closely monitored and harassed by the security forces.
We re-iterate, no meaningful dialogue or consultations can take place in such a restrictive climate. In shortthe process is not inclusive or participatory and it lacks credibility and legitimacy.
Thirdly, the composition of the Constituent Assembly which according to the interim Prime Minister‟s statement of March 9 will finally decide the constitution, has not been fully disclosed. There is widespread concern that it may be stacked to ensure a particular outcome. The Prime Minister has full control over appointments to the Assembly. This, in itself, undermines its independence and integrity.
We note with some concern a recent government announcement that chair persons of provincial councils will, from this year, be appointed by the Minister and not elected by members of the respective councils as had been the case in the past. There is little doubt, judging from past practice in such matters, that provincial councils will be invited to be members of the constituent assembly.
Furthermore, why are appointments to the Constituent Assembly put back to December 2012, just days before it is to begin its deliberations? Why has there not been any consultation on the subject?
The role of the Military
The significance of reserved seats for different ethnic communities that make up the nation cannot be brushed aside in a multiethnic and multicultural country like ours, more so, in light of our political history.
The Electoral Process
There is much that is questionable about the manner in which the electoral process is being implemented. The Attorney General‟s office has taken charge of the voter registration process when it should be the responsibility of the Office of the Supervisor of Elections. In the interest of credibility, it is vital that the entire electoral process, including that of voter registration, be completely detached from the current administration.
The provisions of the Electoral Act and Regulations were arbitrarily amended by a Decree to assign this responsibility to the Attorney General‟s office. The chair of the Constitutional Commission has also been critical of the interim regime assuming charge of the electoral process, saying that it undermines the integrity of the process as it is likely that some members of the current administration may be competing in the forthcoming elections.
The following appointments are essential to oversee the entire electoral process, independent of the regime and political parties:
- Electoral Commission
- Boundaries Commission
- Supervisor of Elections
In the absence of a Constitutional Offices Commission (1997 Constitution), these appointments should be made by the President on the advice of a caretaker administration(see Para 24) after due consultations with key stakeholders.
The promulgation of Decrees 57 and 58 undermine the independence, integrity and credibility of the process. The provisions therein relating to the grant of immunity from prosecution to the perpetrators of the 2006, 2000 and 1987 coups and the absolute powers of appointment of the Constituent Assembly conferred on the interim Prime Minister, make a mockery of the entire constitutional process.
It is significant that the Chair and members of the Constitutional Commission have said that as much and we quote below from the media release issued by the Commission on 19 July 2012:
Nonetheless there are a number of aspects of the Decrees about which we are concerned.
First, although the Constituent Assembly Decree lists some of the groups that will be represented in the CA (such as political parties, trade unions, women, the military, and civil society etc.), it gives the Prime Minister full control over the size and composition of the Constituent Assembly. There is no indication of how many members will be drawn from each sector or what other sectors might be included. There is also no provision giving the groups that are represented a say in who should represent them in the Assembly. The Prime Minister will also appoint the Speaker of the Assembly.
These arrangements effectively mean that the essential principles of democracy are ignored and the independence of the Assembly is negated. In the light of the fact that members of the present government may wish to compete in the forthcoming elections, it is particularly important that they should not control the process that will, among other things, set out the rules for the elections. This will undermine the credibility of those elections.
Secondly, the Decrees require a broad immunity provision forthe 2006 and earlier coups to be entrenched in the new constitution. Among other things, the new constitution is to grant the same, broad immunity for actions up to the first meeting of a new Parliament to members of the government, administration and security forces as was granted by decree in 2010. This type of prospective immunity is most unusual, perhaps unique, and, we believe, undesirable. The only exception is that the new constitution is not required to give immunity for common crimes (such as murder and assault) committed after the date of issue of these Decrees.
The Commission recognizes that immunity has been given in the past and that the immunity required in the new constitution is similar to those immunities and it also understands that the issue of immunity must be considered in the process of transitioning to democracy. However, we are concerned that the people of Fiji have not been consulted in any way on this important matter.
We believe that a better approach would be for the question of immunity to be part of the constitution-making process. If immunity was part of the process, it could be discussed through submissions to the Commission and debate in the Constituent Assembly. Then a solution could be reached that citizens believe would promote the transition to democracy and contribute to a sustained democracy as envisaged in the Preamble to the Decrees.
Thirdly, although the temporary suspension of the requirement of permits for meetings is an important step forward, we are concerned that the current atmosphere in Fiji is not conducive to an open process in which Fijians can debate their future properly. Controls over the media and the wide reaching powers of the security forces in this regard are particularly worrying, as is the fact that generally people have no redress for actions taken against them by the state because the right of access to the courts has been removed.
An important part of the process for the constitution making should be the bringing together of all the people of Fiji to discuss freely, and agree on, the future of their country. It should be an occasion for national reconciliation, acknowledging the violation of human rights and other abuses of power, and to commit the nation to a vision of Fiji based on democracy and respect for human rights, and a determination to overcome the divisions of the past. This task requires the full participation of the people in the process, and the freedom of their representatives in the Constituent Assembly to negotiate a settlement that enjoys wide support in the nation.
These comments must not be taken lightly. Indeed, they make a highly cogent case for not proceeding with the constitution making exercise as fashioned by Decrees 57 and 58 to which Your Excellency, most regrettably, gave his assent. The Commission clearly recognizes that the process is being controlled by the interim administration to protect their own interest. In the event we urge Your Excellency to consider the alternative which we outline hereunder:
The legitimate Way Forward
In our view, the only legitimate course of action that should be followed to return to the rule of law and constitutional rule, is to revert to the Fiji Court of Appeal judgment of 9 April 2009 (Qarase v Bainimarama – Civil Appeal No ABU 0077 of 2008).
The only appropriate course at the present time is for elections to be held that enable Fiji to get a fresh start.
Taking cognizance of the principle of necessity… for the purposes of these proceedings, it is advisable for the President to appoint a distinguished person independent of the parties in litigation as caretaker prime minister to advice dissolution of Parliament and direct the issuance of writs for an election under s60 of the Fiji Constitution. This is to enable Fiji to be restored to constitutional rule in accordance with the Constitution.
Your Excellency, we hold that the course of action advised in the judgment should be followed. A caretaker administration should be appointed with the specific mandate to oversee the process of holding general elections and restoring constitutional rule, within a realistic timeframe. This should be no longer than 12 months as we deem it is possible to hold credible elections within that period.
We, respectfully, propose that Your Excellency give serious consideration to act on the advice rendered in the Fiji Court of Appeal decision to appoint a caretaker Prime Minister – a distinguished person, independent of the political parties and the regime and one in whom our people can repose confidence – to advice dissolution of Parliament and direct the issuance of writs for an election under Section 60 of the Fiji Constitution
The caretaker administration should then assume full responsibility for the constitutional and electoral process.
A President‟s Political Dialogue Forum (PPDF) can be established following the appointment of the caretaker administration. The mission of the PPDF would be to assist the caretaker government in obtaining consensus on the roadmap for the restoration of constitutional government via free, fair and credible general elections.
Our feedback from the peopleis that there is overwhelming support for the 1997 Constitution to be retained. Any changes to it can be discussed and agreed to in the PPDF. The constitutional Commission can be tasked to write a draft national charter using the 1997 Constitution as the base (reference) document. There is no need to rewrite the entire constitution as the 1997 Constitution was promulgated after wide consultations with the people.
Your Excellency, Fiji no longer has the luxury of time on its side. Conditions have deteriorated considerably in the past five years and our people are being held to ransom while those in authority abuse the power that they have usurped.
The President‟s mandate to the interim administration given in January 2007, remains unfulfilled. There has been constant rhetoric from the regime that it will spend the first three years ( 2009 to 2012) on “reforms” such as rebuilding the economy and fixing up the infrastructure. To date, there is little to show for it. The economy continues to be in recession and much of our infrastructure has deteriorated considerably, both in the urban and rural areas.
State finances are more precarious now than they were in 2006; the national debt crisis has deepened with State borrowings having risensharply in the past three years. We are now borrowing new money to repay old debts.
Poverty levels have escalated with at least 40% of the population living in absolute poverty according to credible sources – indicative of the hardship facing our people. Business confidence is so low that private investment levels sank to a worrying 2% of the GDP last year.
FNPF‟s decision to cut pension rates down to 8.7% from the current rates ranging from 25% to 15%, will cause severe hardship to many of the nation‟s elderly. It is a worry even for future pensioners considering that some 60% of Fiji‟s workers receive wages that are below the poverty line. In a country where there is no social security net, the majority of Fiji‟s senior citizens will no longer be able to retire in dignity and on a livable pension.
Key sectors of the economy are deeply troubled. The sugar industry is in a highly critical state with sugar production virtually halved, down from 330,000 tonnes in 2006 to 165,000 tonnes in 2011. The Fiji Sugar Corporation is insolvent, surviving on borrowed funds and government grants.
The Corporation registered a loss of $37m for the 2011 financial year, its total borrowings stand at $218m and it faced debt repayment commitments of $113m for the year ending 31 May 2012 which it was unable to meet, according to the 2011 report of the independent auditors of FSC.
Air Pacific is similarly placed with heavy financial losses -$92million sustained in the 2010 financial year, reduced to a $3.6m „book‟loss last year.But the actual loss is believed to be much higher. Recent announcement of a$11m profit last financial year is viewed with a great deal of scepticism by financial experts in the absence of published audited accounts of the airline.
Other troubled public entities are: FNPF, PAFCO, Hardwood Corporation, Telecom Fiji, Post Fiji and Tropik Woods.
Official corruption is rife and there is no accountability or transparency in government’s dealings. Government accounts and the Auditor General‟s reports have not been published for public scrutiny since 2008.
The Asian Development Bank in its latest economic survey, Outlook 2012 released in April has warned that unless the debt to GDP ratio is reduced significantly, there would be little scope for further fiscal expansion and the provision of public services would be adversely affected. It also warned that Fiji‟s medium term macro-economic outlook was “weak and foreshadows greater poverty challenges”.
Your Excellency, urgent action is needed to stabilize State finances, revitalize the economy, restore investor confidence, and deal with the worsening social issues of poverty, unemployment, housing, health care and rising crime levels.
The current administration has been unable to demonstrate that it has either the competence or the acumen to deal with these issues. The past five years have illustrated this quite graphically. It has failed on various counts with dire consequences for our people and the future of Fiji as a viable State.
The following developments also cause a great deal of anxiety about Fiji‟s future:
- massive outmigration of skilled people who do not see a future here
- influx of foreign nationals with questionable intent. There are reports linking them with drugs, prostitution and gambling rackets etc
- high rate of unemployment among youths
- the dismantling of democratic entities and traditional indigenous Fijian institutions
- serious violations of human rights – as cited in independent reports (Amnesty International, UN Human Rights Council, US State Department Report on Human
Rights and the ILO Report on Trade Union rights – ILO Case No. 2723)
- promulgation of draconian decrees which curtail or completely deprive the workers of their rights to organize and bargain collectively – a gross violation of ILO Conventions 87 and 98 which have been ratified by Fiji
- interference with the independence and integrity of the judiciary
- disrespect for the rule of law as clearly demonstrated by the promulgation of various draconian decrees that debase human rights and compromise the rule of law, including interference with due judicial processes
The entire nation is held to ransom by a small group of individuals who have usurped lawful authority for their own benefit. These same individuals continue to use the Military and the Police to remain in power.
Failure to come up with a credible roadmap to restore democratic rule in the past six years has resulted in our isolation from the international community. We have been suspended from the Commonwealth and the Pacific Islands Forum, while hundreds of millions of dollars of much needed development aid has been withheld by the European Union.
This is the stark reality about our Fiji today. Ordinary people are getting restive as they find it difficult to meet even the basic needs of their families- to put food on the table and to provide for other essentials. The rising rate of malnutrition among our children, increasing incidence of diseases such as TB, substance abuse and suicides are all indicative of the worsening poverty situation in our country.
Your Excellency, we call on you as the Head of State with executive authority to take action now to halt this rapid decline of our nation. This can be done through steps we have proposed in this petition. We entreat you, respectfully, to act with due urgency in the interests of Fiji and her people.
Yash Ghai, Chairman of the Constitutional Review Commission, has now concluded receiving submissions. A Constitution will be drafted and presented at a later stage to a creation
of the current regime called the Constituent Assembly, that body being purported to be created by another of the illegal Khaiyum Decrees which the regime continues to issue on the pattern of the practice followed in the seventeenth century by the Stuart kings.
The body imitates the name of the Constituent Assembly set up in France between 1789 and 1791 and it is very much hoped that those perceived by the regime to be opposed to it will not be subject to the guillotine as were those targeted in the French Revolution. No doubt an even worse fate is in store for them under Khaiyum.
The Constitution as drafted by Yash Ghai and his team will be subject entirely to the wishes of the Constituent Assembly. That Assembly will be at liberty to make whatever changes it wishes in his draft and even to reject it altogether. Yash Ghai has already publicly admitted this. He has stated that all members of the Assembly will be ‘totally picked by Frank.’ (perhaps unfortunately for a scholar of his distinction he seems to be on first name terms with the dictator).
Section 9 of the relevant Decree purports to give the alleged Prime Minister full control over the size and composition of the Constituent Assembly, a matter recently taken issue with (quite rightly) by the Fiji Labour Party.
Yash Ghai, unfortunately, seems to have a touching and indeed childlike faith in ‘Frank’.
The Council respectfully points out that ‘Frank’ cannot be trusted to properly and impartially regulate the size and composition of the Assembly. His track record totally contradicts any element of trust in his judgments and decisions. His recent advance vetoing of Shamima Ali from the Assembly is simply a sign of worse to come. His arranging for prosecution of the political leaders who garnered the vast bulk of votes in the last democratic election is calculated to ensure that they are not represented in the Assembly.
If Yash Ghai has bought into faith in ‘Frank’s’ judgment, he has joined the ranks of the monkeys who see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil.
‘Frank’ in many ways resembles the late US President Richard Nixon, also known as ‘tricky Dicky’.
A common question asked in regard to Nixon was: ‘Would you buy a used car from this man?’
Should the international community and more importantly the people of Fiji buy into a Constituent Assembly from ‘Frank’?
The alleged Attorney General of Fiji, Saiyed Khaiyum, has in his time made many grotesque and bizarre allegations. Yet none in any way parallels his assertion that the recently expressed view of the Law Society of England and Wales as to the lack of independence of the Fiji judiciary shows that that Society has no credibility.
It is not the Society, but Khaiyum, who has no credibility. His adamant insistence that the Fiji judiciary is independent, in the teeth of all evidence to the contrary, is tiresome and repetitive – repeating a lie ad infinitum does not make it true.
Khaiyum attacks the English Law Society for its comments made ‘from thousands of miles away.’ It is indeed true that England is thousands of miles away from Fiji; however the views of the Society are based upon an on the spot inspection carried out in Fiji itself. That on the spot investigation had perforce to be carried out incognito because to openly approach Khaiyum would simply elicit the same discredited blandishments he has been uttering over the years as to the alleged independence of the Fiji judiciary, and would enable him to bar all doors of enquiry to stop any information being elicited from his terrified staff.
Further, the views of the English Law Society match those of the Australian and New Zealand Law Societies – does Khaiyum also say that those institutions are discredited? If that is so he would be well advised promptly to surrender whatever certificates or qualifications he procured from any of such jurisdictions.
The fact that the Fiji judiciary is not independent has in any event been confirmed from a multitude of sources including outgoing staff and most recently in the Marshall petition. Judges content to remain in Fiji cannot of course open their mouths and in any event they have taken oaths acceptable to the current regime and are on its payroll.
Khaiyum should now apologise to the Law Society of England and Wales for uttering offensive nonsense in his attack on it.
The Council refers to the practice of the current regime of seeking to brand as ‘cowards’ its overseas opponents who are the subject of trumped up charges by the regime but who decline to accept the invitation of the regime to return to Fiji to, in the regime’s words, ‘face justice.’ A prominent person falling into that category is Ratu Tevita Mara, who considerably embarrassed the regime by his flight from Fiji last year after being the subject of alleged sedition charges.
The Council has pointed out many times that there is no more justice in Fiji to which any opponent of the regime can return, that the regime trumps up charges against any party disagreeing with it, and that Bainimarama’s view of sedition as any disagreement is wrong and perverted.
William Marshall QC, who recently left Fiji when his contract was not renewed, has cast further light on the matter of Ratu Tevita Mara’s departure in his 143 page petition to the regime, in which he refers to Ratu Tevita’s distrust of the Fiji prosecution process and legal system which led to his flight from Fiji and to his declining to return to Fiji to ‘face justice.’ He is entirely in agreement with the attitude taken by Ratu Tevita.
Thus, Ratu Tevita in fleeing Fiji and declining to return was not being cowardly in any way. His departure and refusal to return were inspired by his clear knowledge that there was now no rule of law in Fiji and that the sedition charges against him were drummed up to harass him.
Ratu Tevita is not of course alone. There are many others the subject of trumped up charges by the regime, some of whom have rightly fled and rightly stayed away.
Who then are the real cowards?
The real cowards are those who enjoy luxury and domination at the point of a gun – the regime and all its adherents.
The 143 page petition to Bainimarama of William Marshall QC, recently a Judge of Appeal in Fiji, whose contract expired in June this year, confirms clearly what the international
community already knows – namely, that the current regime has abrogated the rule of law and terminated the independence of the Judiciary in Fiji. While these facts are already very well known and proved, Mr Marshall’s additional wisdom is greatly appreciated and he has done the people of Fiji and the international community a great service in showing documentary evidence of the corrupt machinations of the Fiji regime.
In particular Mr Marshall shows how all Judges in Fiji live in fear of the alleged Attorney General and understand clearly that their fates depend upon tailoring their decisions to suit his will; how Sri Lankan judges are relied on having regard to their customary subservience to the Executive; how the alleged Attorney General has grossly interfered in many vital cases including even arranging for the bringing of false murder charges; how he has arranged the selection of compliant Judges and exclusion of those likely to be non compliant; and how he has used the legal system to harass and persecute his perceived foes. Further, his use of the courts to enforce executive wishes is transparently obvious.
Mr Marshall expressly calls for the removal of all Sri Lankan Judges including the Judge who recently convicted Laisenia Qarase.
Mr Marshall speaks of the doctoring of evidence and distortion of litigation and prosecutions and gives full details of such doctoring and distortion.
Rightly of course Mr Marshall calls for the removal of the alleged Attorney General.
The Council whilst agreeing with that proposal notes however Mr Marshall’s apparent naivety in taking the view that the alleged Prime Minister has been kept in the dark by the alleged Attorney General, and that the alleged Prime Minister does not share the alleged Attorney General’s guilt.
With respect to Mr Marshall, the alleged Prime Minister has been fully aware from the beginning of the antics of the alleged Attorney General. It is ridiculous to suggest that Khaiyum has been acting, in legal terms.’on a frolic of his own’ – Khaiyum simply could not have done what he has done and exercised the power which he has exercised without Bainimarama’s knowledge.
The Council therefore concurs in the removal of Khaiyum but also presses for the removal of the entire regime, and of course its prosecution.
Is Khaiyum going to tell the AFL-CIO that they are “plainly ill informed, issuing knee-jerk commentary about our country with an utter disregard for the truth”? That’s exactly what he had to say about Ged Kearney of the AFL-CIO’s sister organisation, the ACTU, when she dared to criticise the regime.
The AFL-CIO has told the regime that it is plainly wrong about the impact of industrial relations laws and its treatment of trade union leaders. The regime should be listening, not denying.
They cannot deny they targetted the FTUC, the equivalent of the ACTU and the AFL-CIO. Felix Anthony, the FTUC National Secretary, was assaulted after being arrested on phony charges, while Daniel Urai, FTUC President, was charged with “Inciting Political Violence by Urging to Overthrow Government.”
The Bainikhaiyum regime propaganda machine has tried to say that Urai and Anthony don’t have the backing of the workers. Even if they can sell this story to their apologists, how do they expect the AFL-CIO to buy this kind of propaganda?
This time it’s different. Khaiyum is not running his critics into a court where he has appointed the judge and prosecutor and interfered with evidence all along the way. His claim that his critics have it all wrong will be tested by US authorities, and his critics, the AFL-CCIO, will be the prosecutors.
A smart dictator would cut Khaiyum loose at this stage. He promised Bainimarama that his laws designed in concert with his buddy at the helm of Air Pacific, Dave Pflieger, would not cause any problems. But we don’t have a smart dictator. We have Frank. He has a good instinct for self-preservation, but he has become totally dependent on Khaiyum.
Unless Frank can find someone else he trusts who can understand the issues and explain them to him with simple analogies and examples, he’ll be relying on Khaiyum. But let’s look on the bright side – the disaster of losing duty free access, combined with the crumbling sugar industry, might just be enough to bring down the house of cards.
The American Federation of Labour-Congress of Industrial Organisations (AFL-CIO) Hearing in the United States against Fiji for breach of labor rights and standards has ended its preliminary hearings with issuing a 21 day Notice served on Fiji to resolve the labor rights breaches or face the consequences of losing the duty free access.
This effectively means all the decrees that infringe rights and interest of workers will have to be revoked.
These decrees include:
- State Services Decree of 2009 (No. 6);
- Administration of Justice Decree of 2009 (Decree No. 9);
- Administration of Justice (Amendment) Decree of 2009 (Decree No. 10);
- Administration of Justice (Amendment) Decree of 2010 (Decree No. 14);
- Trade Disputes Decree of 2009 (Decree No. 10);
- Employment Relations Amendment Decree of 2011 (Decree No. 21);
- Public Service Act (Amendment) 2011; and
- The Essential Industries Decree of 2011.
Following the Hearing, the AFL-CIO categorically stated that only the Fijian authorities can avert the US sanctions now before the substantive ruling on the matter is completed.
Radio Australia has also reported;
“…in an interview with Radio Australia, the United States trade union movement has said that suspending Fiji’s access to the US market is the last resort, at least not right away, and that they would prefer the interim government work with the authorities to improve workers rights. Speaking to Radio Australia, American Federation of Labour- Congress of Industrial Organisations Trade Policy Specialist, Celeste Drake said the trade union movement in the United States do not necessarily want Fiji to be punished with loss of preferential access to the US market because of its record on workers’ rights. She said onus is on the Fiji Govt saying that the massive job losses to Fijians will only occur “if the government has absolutely no intention of working with the US government to try and improve things for workers. So it’s really all in the Fijian government’s hands.”
The regime’s leader and its rogue Attorney General must swallow their oversize egos and pride to immediately revoke all the decrees identified by ILO and open fresh dialogue with the Trade Unions and Employers without delay.
This is not a time procrastinate or massage each other’s ego. The regime must accept responsibility now for a cardinal error of judgement in promulgating such anti-labor rights laws without considering international conventions. It’s defeat for tyranny and victory for workers in Fiji.
The Fiji village website reported that;
“The prime minister has revealed that as part of Fiji’s progress toward establishing parliamentary democracy, the government is reviewing current labour laws to ensure their compliance with the 34 International Labour Organisation conventions that Fiji has ratified”.
The regime leader has finally succumbed to the truth that several decrees his tainted Attorney General has promulgated threaten Fiji with the most serious employment crisis ever, involving 39 companies and 15,000 – 36,000 jobs. It appears that the rattled leader has been forced to make this conciliatory announcement and it may well be more of his typical trickery and lies.
The CFDF wishes to remind the people of Fiji, the trade union leaders and the US government of some of the previous broken promises and pledges of the regime leader and which render this review process meaningless and untrustworthy – it must be treated with grave suspicion.
Following the 2006 coup, Bainimarama vowed to preserve the 1997 constitution under the President’s mandate and subsequently included this in the People’s Charter – he later trashed the Constitution. He also made a personal commitment to the Pacific Forum leaders to hold Elections in March 2009 and later broke that promise.
He promised to be accountable and yet refuses to release the Auditor General’s report on government accounts from 2007 – 2011. He publicly stated that he will only collect the Commander’s salary while holding the position of interim Prime Minister but secretly receives multiple salaries, paid privately through Nur Bano’s Accounting firm in Suva – the details of which he refuses to disclose to the taxpayers of Fiji.
With such an impeccable record in keeping his word; should the US government and the trade union leaders dare consider the review process as free, fair and transparent? The regime leader’s public record is as poor as his ability to separate issues of national importance from the corrosive influence of his attorney general’s ego and tantrums.
The CFDF urges the Trade Union Leaders not to fall victim again to the lies and dishonesty of Bainimarama – he has no credibility or integrity. The latest knee-jerk reaction comes from international and domestic pressure and is merely a ploy to escape the scrutiny of on-going abuse of labor rights, human rights and the other fundamental rights of Fiji Citizens.
The Unions in Fiji must insist that all decrees identified by the ILO and the ICFTU must be immediately rescinded.
Further, the tainted Attorney General must be ejected from Office. He is the source of most of Fiji’s political and constitutional problems. The review process does not go far enough. It lacks goodwill, competence and commitment to deal with the issues in a holistic manner.
Bainimarama must do the right thing if the jobs are to be saved. The decrees and its author must be removed from public life permanently to allow for genuine dialogue at all levels.
The workers of Fiji deserve nothing less.