*Who is PAYING for the trip of some of Fiji's most senior journalists?
*What are they doing, gallivanting from one place to another, in the US?
    |    |
*Who is PAYING for the trip of some of Fiji's most senior journalists?  *Among the 10 charges NFP leader BIMAN PRASAD was facing, included his failure to disclose that his wife Dr Rajni Chand was one of the three Trustees of the Global Girmit Institute. He had handed $200,000 of taxpayers funds without any tender to GGI to organise the Global Girmit Conference at the USP  Fijileaks to Pio Tikoduadua and Biman Prasad: |
"I don't respond to parties led by convicted criminals" |  |
*Fijileaks: Shortly after Victor Lal had revealed Mahendra Chaudhry's $2million in the Sydney bank account, Bainimarama's military thugs were unleashed on Fiji Sun publisher Russell Hunter. He was abducted from his Suva home, tortured, and deported out of Fiji the next day, and was declared a prohibited immigrant.
*The RFMF army thug leader was later identified by Russell Hunter.
From Fijileaks Archive, 11 September 2014
Standing "shoulder to shoulder" with Tiko...
The six-week long Middle-East trip of Defence Minister Pio Tikoduadua to visit our peace - keeping troops to 'hear their concerns directly', as he puts it, is unbelievably absurd.
Six weeks is a long, long time for a highly paid Minister to be away from his duties at home.
To make it worse, he adds that he is ..'not going on a vacation but to stand shoulder to shoulder with our men and women in uniform'.
Minister, it's going to cost the taxpayer thousands to send you on this junket as we see it.
Besides, we think our men and women in uniform are quite capable of standing shoulder to shoulder on their own- they hardly need a Minister to inspire them.
As for 'hearing their concerns directly', may we ask the Minister: Does the RFMF not have its own machinery to deal with such matters?
Thousands of dollars will be wasted on this puerile trip while our hospitals and health centres remain deprived of money to provide medicine and other critical supplies to our sick.
Just how the Prime Minister allows such abuse of funds and irrational ministerial conduct, boggles the mind!
The six-week long Middle-East trip of Defence Minister Pio Tikoduadua to visit our peace - keeping troops to 'hear their concerns directly', as he puts it, is unbelievably absurd.
Six weeks is a long, long time for a highly paid Minister to be away from his duties at home.
To make it worse, he adds that he is ..'not going on a vacation but to stand shoulder to shoulder with our men and women in uniform'.
Minister, it's going to cost the taxpayer thousands to send you on this junket as we see it.
Besides, we think our men and women in uniform are quite capable of standing shoulder to shoulder on their own- they hardly need a Minister to inspire them.
As for 'hearing their concerns directly', may we ask the Minister: Does the RFMF not have its own machinery to deal with such matters?
Thousands of dollars will be wasted on this puerile trip while our hospitals and health centres remain deprived of money to provide medicine and other critical supplies to our sick.
Just how the Prime Minister allows such abuse of funds and irrational ministerial conduct, boggles the mind!
 Navakamocea | *POLITICAL TURNCOAT. Navakamocea was State Minister for National Planning in the SDL government of Laisenia Qarase. |
*Navakamocea was one of a few members of the Qarase government to run and join Bainimarama's interim regime. |   Ganesh Chand |
Deputy Secretary Operations in the Ministry of iTaukei Affairs, Culture, Heritage and Arts Jone Navakamocea has been appointed as the Acting Permanent Secretary in the Ministry of iTaukei Affairs, with the agreement of Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka.
This has been confirmed by the Chairman of the Public Service Commission Luke Rokovada, who says Navakamocea is holding the position for now, as the Permanent Secretary for iTaukei Affairs, Culture, Heritage and Arts Pita Tagicakirewa has been on medical leave from 31st March 2025. Rokovada says Tagicakirewa will take his annual leave following medical leave. He says Navakamocea has a background in economics having acquired a Master of Science in Macro Economics, Policy and Planning in Developing Countries from the University of Bradford, West Yorkshire, England. Rokovada says Nakavamocea has had extensive experience in economic planning and development in Government and the public sector spanning more than thirty years.
This has been confirmed by the Chairman of the Public Service Commission Luke Rokovada, who says Navakamocea is holding the position for now, as the Permanent Secretary for iTaukei Affairs, Culture, Heritage and Arts Pita Tagicakirewa has been on medical leave from 31st March 2025. Rokovada says Tagicakirewa will take his annual leave following medical leave. He says Navakamocea has a background in economics having acquired a Master of Science in Macro Economics, Policy and Planning in Developing Countries from the University of Bradford, West Yorkshire, England. Rokovada says Nakavamocea has had extensive experience in economic planning and development in Government and the public sector spanning more than thirty years.
 |  |
'Talibanistic' views of Indo-Fijians, with Navakamocea claiming that the late deposed Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase had endorsed his views on Indo-Fijians
  |    |
"Minister, you don't have to apologise. There was nothing wrong in your speech. Sometimes they just need to be told who they are, and who we are," Prime Minister Qarase to Navakamocea, allegedly in August 2006
 | *Navakamocea, did you know that Laisenia Qarase (RIP) was a JEW? |
*Unlike the political JUDAS Jone Navakamocea in 2006, I fought for deposed Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase's rights until he passed away.
 |  |
*American ambassador Larry Dinger in secret cable to Washington
*Jone Navakamocea, Interim Minister for Local Government and Urban Development. Navakamocea won a parliamentary seat in 2006 under Qarase's SDL banner and served as State Minister for National Planning in the multi-party cabinet.
*He reportedly formally applied for a cabinet position in the interim administration and resigned from the SDL Party.
Navakamocea was previously Deputy Secretary of Finance.
*From Prussia to Mavana. From Madras to Muaniweni
Fijileaks Editor-in-Chief: We fully endorse Riddhi Damodar's views against the call for a 30% Quota for Women in Parliament. In 2014, we fully supported Lynda Tabuya when, as president of the People's Democratic Party, she contested the election. We supported Ro Teimumu Kepa when she led Sodelpa into the election. We supported the former Acting Permanent Secretary for Education Basundra Kumar when she stood in the 2022 election as NFP candidate. In fact, in 2014, we had exposed how the then FFP Education Minister Mahendra Reddy had allegedly, based on personal vendetta, ousted her from her position as acting Education Secretary.
*We firmly believe that if activist Shamima Ali adopted her position on a case by case basis, instead of always claiming 'I am My Sister's Keeper', voters might be more favourable to women candidates.
*We notice another champion of women's rights Imrana Jalal is once again calling for the reservation of 30% of seats in Parliament. During the formulation of the 1997 Constitution, she had presented a lengthy written submission to the Reeves Commission:
'An initial 20% of reserved seats might be a realistic aim. This does not mean that women are limited to just 20% of seats, only that 20% of all seats must be reserved for women and all parties have to field candidates for these seats."
*The Reeves Commission merely mentioned women in passing by referring to the UN Convention on Women (CEDAW) and did not give it any other added importance in the 1997 Rabuka-Reddy Constitution other than advise that the 1997 Constitution 'must not discriminate against a person on any other prohibited ground, such as sex, gender or age, and they must not deny to any person any other human right or fundamental freedom recognised by law'. Other than this, there was no specific mention of the reservation of seats for women.
*Our understanding is that race and ethnic politics, the divisions and efforts to reconcile simply dominated the political and national landscape at the time. So, something like the reservation of seats for women, would simply be rendered invisible in the highly charged tension of post-coup 1987 military politics, ethno-nationalism, land issues along with the racial/ethnic lines.
*Throughout Fiji's electoral history, women candidates managed to break through the political wall. Take, for example, Mrs Irene Jai Narayan, the former NFP Deputy leader who was part of the delegation to London that negotiated Fiji's independence.
*In both the 1972 and 1977 elections, she comprehensively beat my paternal uncle for the Suva Indian communal seat in the Muanikau Ward, despite him being the Alliance Party's former Lord Mayor of Suva.
*Mrs Narayan became the most hated figure in the Indo-Fijian community when she became Sitiveni Rabuka's Minister for Indian Affairs after the racist 1987 military coups.
*She was one of the few Indo-Fijians who agreed to serve in the transitional government of 1987-1992, a government that was widely condemned by many of her fellow Indo-Fijians for promulgating the racist 1990 Constitution of Fiji.
*Once again, we fully endorse Riddhi Damodar, the failed 2018 NFP candidate.
On the 30% Quota for Women in Fiji’s Parliament
As someone who firmly supports women in leadership, I want to see more capable, confident women in Parliament. But I don’t believe the answer lies in guaranteed quotas or handouts. Real progress means building systems that empower women to rise on their own merit—and win because they’re the best for the job.
Fiji’s population is nearly half women. Our voter base reflects that. And yet, women remain underrepresented in Parliament. Why?
Let’s ask the harder questions. Are women not putting themselves forward—or are political parties not selecting them? Is the political culture discouraging women from contesting? These are structural issues we must address before we fall back on quotas as a fix-all.
But here’s a question that’s often left unasked—especially for voters:
In past elections, did you vote for a woman candidate? Or did you choose a male candidate instead? Why?
If voters and especially women are not voting for women candidates, we need to understand why. Is it a lack of trust? Lack of visibility? Lack of women candidates? Or a reflection of deeper societal attitudes? This isn’t about blame—it’s about introspection.
If we want more women in Parliament, it’s not just about how many women stand—it’s about how many of us, especially women, are willing to vote for them.
I believe women are more than capable of running strong, winning campaigns without needing 30% of the seats handed to them. But we need to give them a fair shot: better support from parties, safer spaces to campaign, and a culture that takes their candidacy seriously.
Let’s fix the system—not force the outcome, And let’s back women—not just in talk, but in the ballot box.
As someone who firmly supports women in leadership, I want to see more capable, confident women in Parliament. But I don’t believe the answer lies in guaranteed quotas or handouts. Real progress means building systems that empower women to rise on their own merit—and win because they’re the best for the job.
Fiji’s population is nearly half women. Our voter base reflects that. And yet, women remain underrepresented in Parliament. Why?
Let’s ask the harder questions. Are women not putting themselves forward—or are political parties not selecting them? Is the political culture discouraging women from contesting? These are structural issues we must address before we fall back on quotas as a fix-all.
But here’s a question that’s often left unasked—especially for voters:
In past elections, did you vote for a woman candidate? Or did you choose a male candidate instead? Why?
If voters and especially women are not voting for women candidates, we need to understand why. Is it a lack of trust? Lack of visibility? Lack of women candidates? Or a reflection of deeper societal attitudes? This isn’t about blame—it’s about introspection.
If we want more women in Parliament, it’s not just about how many women stand—it’s about how many of us, especially women, are willing to vote for them.
I believe women are more than capable of running strong, winning campaigns without needing 30% of the seats handed to them. But we need to give them a fair shot: better support from parties, safer spaces to campaign, and a culture that takes their candidacy seriously.
Let’s fix the system—not force the outcome, And let’s back women—not just in talk, but in the ballot box.
Jalal A call is being made to support a submission by the Fiji Women’s Rights Movement (FWRM) and Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre (FWCC) to have temporary special measures for 30 percent reserved seats for women in parliament.
Imrana Jalal, who is a founding member of the FWRM, is calling on NGOs and civil society organisations to support the submission titled “Reforming our Electoral Legislation for Gender Equality in Fiji’s Parliament” by the FWRM and FWCC to the Fiji Electoral Law Reform Commission.
Jalal says the submission calls for temporary special measures to reserve 30 percent of seats in Parliament for women, to be contested only by women, but open to votes from all voters, not just women.
She says they ask for either extra seats for women or a proportion of existing seats.
The renowned lawyer says they believe that this is a temporary solution to create a level playing field between men and women until women can compete fairly with men in normal seats.
She says their submission contains a plethora of evidence in support where they also ask for other improvements which they believe will create a better representative democracy such as a geographical constituency representative model where people can go to their MP for accountability.
Jalal says they also ask for scrapping of the current system which glorifies the ‘Big Man’ autocratic patriarchal concept and allows MPs with minuscule votes to be in Parliament and Cabinet.
They also ask for better protection for female candidates and MPs against online and offline sexual harassment, bullying, intimidation and threats of violence.
Imrana Jalal, who is a founding member of the FWRM, is calling on NGOs and civil society organisations to support the submission titled “Reforming our Electoral Legislation for Gender Equality in Fiji’s Parliament” by the FWRM and FWCC to the Fiji Electoral Law Reform Commission.
Jalal says the submission calls for temporary special measures to reserve 30 percent of seats in Parliament for women, to be contested only by women, but open to votes from all voters, not just women.
She says they ask for either extra seats for women or a proportion of existing seats.
The renowned lawyer says they believe that this is a temporary solution to create a level playing field between men and women until women can compete fairly with men in normal seats.
She says their submission contains a plethora of evidence in support where they also ask for other improvements which they believe will create a better representative democracy such as a geographical constituency representative model where people can go to their MP for accountability.
Jalal says they also ask for scrapping of the current system which glorifies the ‘Big Man’ autocratic patriarchal concept and allows MPs with minuscule votes to be in Parliament and Cabinet.
They also ask for better protection for female candidates and MPs against online and offline sexual harassment, bullying, intimidation and threats of violence.
*We won't be surprised that sooner or later Indo-Fijians and Other Minorities will demand Reservation of Seats in Parliament to prevent Idi-Amin like expulsion from Fiji, now that i-Taukei have become MAJORITY.
*From Fijileaks Archive, 9 October 2021.
The recent glorification of NFP founder and leader A. D. PATEL
in the Fiji Times is all HOGWASH. The London Constitutional talks, even though Patel had passed away before the talks, revolved around majority and minority population rights, without taking into account the fact that the Indo-Fijians were on their way to becoming a minority race in Fiji
*There were projections that by 1988 the Fijian (i-Taukei) population would overtake the Indians (Indo-Fijians) as the largest racial group in the country. Apart from the far-reaching implications, this trend also raises a fundamental question: which group is to be treated as a minority in need of constitutional and political safeguards?
Victor Lal, Fiji: Coups in Paradise - Race, Politics and Military Intervention
*The NFP also handed veto power to CHIEFS, argued against DUAL CITIZENSHIP, and accepted ongoing future COMMON/COMMUNAL ROLL voting system talks. In a hurry to KICK the British out, they went to London with the voice of NFP founder and India-born AD Patel ringing in their ears, and returned empty-handed, except with a new Constitution of Fiji that was the final depository of an i-Taukei's Charter of Rights. Since 1970, NFP kept Indo-Fijians trapped into a BOTTOMLESS PIT but hopefully in 2022 they will have broken free from their inglorious past. So much has been made of the 1997 Constitution. It was designed to ensure that SVT-NFP (Sitiveni Rabuka-Jai Ram Reddy) formed the new government (mandatory power-sharing) after the 1999 election but the
heavy baggage of history and bigotry was against them.
"Colonial rule on its departure left Fiji in Fijian (i-Taukei) hands and might thereby be deemed to have fulfilled, at least in a political sense, its promise of paramountcy of indigenous interests. By permitting European over-representation and facilitating an alliance of European and Fijian communities, it substantially secured the European positiion. As for Indians (Indo-Fijians), who had been brought in initially as indentured labourers but with the prominence of 'employment of rights' and a large majority of whom in 1970 supported the opposiiton National Federation Party, the care of their future was transferred, without any specific legal provisions, from the British to the new rulers of Fiji." - The late Dr AHMED ALI, who later ran and became a Cabinet Minister in the Alliance Party and Rabuka's Interim Coup Cabinet
The Great Council of Chiefs. We look forward to the day when WOMEN (especially i-Taukei women) will rise up and demand equality in the Great Council of Chiefs. So far, there is only one lonely figure - Ro Teimumu Kepa in the GCC. PATRIARCHY on full display in Fiji.
*Ro Kepa was also cheated of the Presidency, for it went to Rabuka's paramount chief, who had only managed to get 300 votes in the 2022 general election as PAP candidate.
*Maybe, those (including Daniel Fatiaki) now screaming against candidates with 200-300 votes in Parliament, will agitate to remove Ratu Naiqama Lalabalavu as President of Fiji.
*From Fijileaks Archive, 12 November 2024.
*The NFP's Deputy Leader Mrs Narayan signing away Indo-Fijian rights (while her fellow Indo-Fijian women and young girls were being raped-confirmed by Shamima Ali despite Lynda Tabuya asking for evidence like Police Reports) to Coupist Sitiveni Rabuka in October 1987.
*Mrs Irene Jai Narayan oversaw the passage of the racist and feudalistic 1990 Constitution that disenfranchised Indo-Fijians.
*The Australian Justice Michael Kirby had branded the 1990 Constitution 'quite as bad' as the apartheid laws in South Africa.
*'Those who lift their voice against that form of entrenched legal discrimination must do saw against this new and completely unacceptable [1990] Constitution of Fiji', said Justice Kirby.
*Fijileaks: Who says more women in Fiji's Parliament will protect and defend women's rights - Mrs Narayan is a disgraceful example why more women like Riddhi Damodar should reject calls for the reservation of 30% of seats in Parliament for Women.
Fijileaks Apology: We apologise to our worldwide readers, including those inside Fiji, who couldn't access Fijileaks. We have fixed the 'Glitch'
 |  |
Daniel Fatiaki, you told Fijivillage, the Coalition's $1.7m annual recipient of public taxpayers money and propaganda lapdog, that you have put out questions in all three languages, including FIJI HINDI.
*No, it is not Fiji Hindi. Its Biman Prasad's Mother India HINDI.
*Take, for example, Mahilaaon. For God's sake, we say 'Aurat'.
*The majority of Indo-Fijians who contacted us claim they are struggling to read the English translation into Biman Prasad's Hindi.
 |  |
 |  |
*For years we have called for reform of Fiji's Electoral System but we condemn how Fatiaki-Narsey came to be chosen to draft the changes
*The 'Runaway Elephant' emerges in Fiji after retiring as Chief Justice of Nauru, begins writing Letters to the Editor on Fiji's Electoral System (in the Fiji Times), puts in a tender to the Coalition government to review the Electoral System, gets Wadan Narsey on 'the Elephant's back', and is lecturing Fiji. |  |
*It was Wadan Narsey's NFP party leader Jai Ram Reddy who agreed to insert the IMMUNITY Clause from the racist 1990 Constitution into the Rabuka-Reddy 1997 Constitution that remains entrenched in the Bainimarama-Khaiyum 2013 Constitution of Fiji |  |
"A classic example is the FNPF Decree 51 which ripped the heart out of pensioners as those receiving 15 to about 25 percent were forced to accept 9 percent. The pensioners went under the poverty line as a result because no consultations were done. It was just done by authority, whoever has the power. That decree remains today and no government has bothered to actually ratify it and make it an Act of Parliament. The level of unlawfulness in this country is shocking."
Daniel Fatiaki, Chair, Electoral Reform Commission
Daniel Fatiaki, Chair, Electoral Reform Commission
From Fijileaks Archive, 6 February 2022
"No, there was no discussion in Parliament on whether Fiji should become a REPUBLIC, but the legal advisors at the time
said, “The only way to go now is to go all the way to being a Republic,
because you have sacked Her Majesty the Queen. If she comes back, then you are all liable for treason against Her Majesty. So, the only way to put an end to that is to just say, “This is no longer Her Majesty’s Government. It’s no longer Her Majesty’s territory of Fiji. It is now a republic.”
Treasonist Coupist SITIVENI RABUKA, who declared Fiji a republic, severing the Chiefs and the Country's 113 year link with the Crown.
Hi Fijileaks,
Coup hanger-on Alipate Qetaki replaced at NLTB: What next for Rabuka-Bainimarama henchman - remember he became A-G in Rabuka's post 1987 coup, and resurfaced in same role after the George Speight coup!,
"This man who was a prime mover and shaker in the racist, violent Rabuka coup of 1987 got me charged under the Official Secrets Act for publishing an article on Social Welfare in Fiji. That article did no citizen of Fiji any harm. In fact many professional people said they came to better understand what the Social Welfare Department was doing even though it was rather poorly resourced. By contrast Alipate Qetaki and his like minded racist colleagues in Rabuka's inner circle and the Taukei Movement did a great deal of harm to thousands of fellow Fiji citizens and to the country.
Has Qetaki been charged for anything? Has he faced justice for his role in the 1987 coup? No, he hasn't. Instead he continued to be rewarded with top posts in the government and other institutions like the NLTB." - Rajend Naidu, Sydney, 3 April 2015
Coup hanger-on Alipate Qetaki replaced at NLTB: What next for Rabuka-Bainimarama henchman - remember he became A-G in Rabuka's post 1987 coup, and resurfaced in same role after the George Speight coup!,
"This man who was a prime mover and shaker in the racist, violent Rabuka coup of 1987 got me charged under the Official Secrets Act for publishing an article on Social Welfare in Fiji. That article did no citizen of Fiji any harm. In fact many professional people said they came to better understand what the Social Welfare Department was doing even though it was rather poorly resourced. By contrast Alipate Qetaki and his like minded racist colleagues in Rabuka's inner circle and the Taukei Movement did a great deal of harm to thousands of fellow Fiji citizens and to the country.
Has Qetaki been charged for anything? Has he faced justice for his role in the 1987 coup? No, he hasn't. Instead he continued to be rewarded with top posts in the government and other institutions like the NLTB." - Rajend Naidu, Sydney, 3 April 2015
 |  |
 | *Chinese Whispers. There are rumours that Wadan Narsey and Daniel Fatiaki had put together a proposal for Electoral Reform, and for Coalition government to rubber-stamp and tagged on other members as part of their Electoral Review Team. |
*Now, Daniel Fatiaki is calling for the binning of the 2013 Constitution.
*And suspicions have arisen whether their call for the review of the Political Parties Act 2013 is designed to protect NFP leader, Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Biman Prasad who is most likely to be recommended by the Commission of Inquiry to be charged in the coming weeks. He is on the run from FICAC, courtesy of Barbara Malimali.
*We may recall that Wadan Narsey was slated to be the Finance Minister if the Rabuka-Reddy SVT-NFP coalition had won the 1999 general election.
*Along with Biman Prasad, Narsey lost in that election. Since then he has been licking his political wounds and lurking on the fringes without success to shape Fijian political landscape.
Meanwhile, it was under another Constitution, the racist and feudalistic 1990 Constitution that saw the collapse of the National Bank of Fiji, with thousands of DEBTORS disappearing into the sunset. Now, many back on the horizon. Have they paid up?
From Fijileaks Archive, 15 October 2017
Wadan Narsey, The SODELPA website quotes Rabuka saying:
“When the issue of NBF was brought to my attention as the then Prime Minister, I responded immediately to minimise any further risk to the financial sector and to the economy as a whole, rather than sweeping the matter under the carpet”.
"This is a blatant lie. The Fiji public knows very well that the rot at NBF started when Rabuka sent in his soldiers with guns to remove the General Manager then, and replace him with [Visanti] Makrava who then proceeded to destroy the NBF from within. Far from responding “immediately” Rabuka allowed all the rot to set in because many of them were his supporters. Rabuka never instituted a full inquiry into the most costly financial disaster that Fiji had ever faced despite many public calls. In the end the taxpayers lost around $200 million to indemnify the depositors. In other words, bad borrowers ran off with at least that sum of money (I say at least because interest was frozen on bad debts). [Multiply $200 million by 2.1 if you want to convert 1996 dollar values to today’s prices, i.e. more than $400 million in today’s money]."
Professor Wadan Narsey, 15 October 2017
*FALL Guy: The late Visanti Petero Makrava blamed for collapse of NBF
"Coupist Sitiveni Rabuka had appointed Visanti Makrava in December 1987, at the point of a gun. Makrava entered the NBF headquarters in Suva with a group of soldiers saying he had been appointed by the Brigadier, as Rabuka was then. At the time Makrava was manager of the NBF's Samabula branch where the army did its banking...The other link Rabuka had with the bank was through his friend and former army commander, Paul Manueli, who had become NBF chairman in January 1988. He was to stay in that position until June 1992 when he left to become Rabuka's Minister of Finance...Makrava certainly did Rabuka no favours when he was reported to have said,
"If I open my mouth, half the Government goes, including the leader."
  |  The late Visanti Makrava  |
In 2011, the Fiji Court of Appeal had upheld the decision of the Suva High Court in 2008 for former Cabinet Minister, Marieta Rigamoto and her husband, Robert Rigamoto to pay their $1.5 million loan with interest. |  The late Robert Rgamoto and his wife Marieta Rigamoto. |
"I agree with the judgment and proposed orders of Sriskandarajah JA.
- "In my view this is a case where the bank cannot be bound by the actions of its Chief Officer, Visanti Makrava .
- He was not acting as authorised agent of the bank but as the agent of his friends the Rigamotos. Visanti Makrava , in so acting, was acting fraudulently in concert with the Rigamotos and with farm hands Ranjit Prasad and Rajesh Chand. Consequently everything done purportedly by the bank including the termination of the security on the land in respect of the Rigamoto's debt and the consideration given to a secured loan to the farm hands was of no effect.
- Visanti Makrava and the Rigamotos were fellow Rotumans and Makrava 's actions in this case demonstrate that he was their close friend. Visanti Makrava had passed away by the time of the trial in 2008.
- Justice William Marshall, Fiji Court of Appeal, 2011
From Coupfourpointfive, Victor Lal, 26 May 2010
The NBF was ordered by the then Rabuka government to grant “soft loans” to the “downtrodden” taukei population. The rationale was that the taukei created instability in the country because they were economically disadvantaged, and the way to prevent future instability was to narrow the gap between their economic position and others by introducing affirmative action policies. Flawed though this reasoning was, and based on no reputable statistics, the programme was immensely popular among the ordinary i-taukei, and who can blame them.
Since the principle of handouts was based only on ethnicity, it provided the basis of a bank policy of soft loans with few questions asked. Between 1987 and 1994, more than $200 million was lent to people on the basis of no or inadequate securities. No one noticed what was happening. Many Cabinet Ministers, already wealthy businessmen, and political cronies of the people in power borrowed money from the bank. They did not pay the loans back. In fact the beneficiaries of many of the loans were political associates, golf playing mates or relatives of those who were influential at the time.
Many were not i-taukei and many were not economically disadvantaged. To hide the nature of some borrowers, lawyers for the NFB allegedly created shelf companies to make the application on behalf of some other client. No one noticed. Allegedly, even the Reserve Bank of Fiji, which is supposed to be a bank policeman, said it noticed nothing. The Opposition noticed nothing. The police noticed nothing. The media noticed nothing until 1992, when another scam broke involving an out-of-court Deed of Settlement between a nationalist politician and the Attorney-General, which was devised to provide security for a loan from the NBF.
When that scandal broke there was an investigation into the NBF, firstly by the Reserve Bank, secondly by the Ministry of Finance, and thirdly by the police. The findings were shocking to our senses: $200 million in unsecured or under-secured loans. The beneficiaries were not the disadvantaged taukei. And no loan was likely to be repaid. Police investigations revealed fraud, corruption, and gross abuse of office, obtaining by false pretences and obtaining credit by fraud.
Of course the first question asked was where were the watchdogs? How could this happen with a strong parliamentary opposition, an Auditor-General, a free media, a banker’s bank (The Reserve Bank) and a watchdog - the Ministry of Finance? It became painfully apparent that none of these “good governance” institutions had the capacity to stop the stinking rot. The jury is still out on whether they all knew what was going on, and failed to intervene in a politically supported hot ‘lovo’. But the institutions failed to detect or expose the fraud, until it was too late.
And so the taxpayers turned to the criminal justice system to demonstrate accountability. Police investigations took almost three years to complete. The Fiji Police Force was under-trained and resourced, and fraud laws antiquated. The investigations were compounded because DPP’s Office, which was destroyed in the 1987 coup, was staffed with under-qualified and inexperienced lawyers. The National Bank prosecutions, led by the then Director of Public Prosecutions, later Justice Nazhat Shameem, were a test of the ability of Fiji’s criminal justice system to try the rich and the powerful. She had already held that office for some three years.
Those of us who eagerly and closely followed the whole saga soon noticed a sinister pattern emerging, prevalent in many other corruption riddled Third World countries. The first was the hostility of the magistracy. State prosecutors were daily maligned, abused, and on one occasion detained in custody for alleged contempt of court. In one absurd case the accused, who was a Cabinet Minister and a high chief, had been permitted to sit at the bar table instead of the dock.
His counsel, in the course of the preliminary inquiry abused the prosecutor on the basis of his skin color. He was an Australian and the Deputy DPP. The Fijian magistrate reprimanded the prosecutor for insulting Fijian culture when he (the prosecutor) led evidence that the accused had received large sums of money “for his people” in exchange for fishing licenses. When the prosecutor tried to present his side of the story, he was detained in the police cell for “contempt of court”, raising the question: when does a cultural gift become a corruptly received gift?
We might recall that the DPP Shameem had to appear to secure his release, and to request the magistrate to disqualify himself. He refused to do so. Shameem moved the High Court to order him to disqualify himself. The High Court did so order, but the defence appealed that decision to the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. So much delay ensued, that the trial of the Minister never proceeded. The DPP, who took office after Shameem left, entered a nolle prosequi. The prosecutor won the battle, but the war was lost.
In the midst of the judicial battles, came the interlocutory challenges. The prosecution tried to ground all the accused by seizing their passports. Their lawyers and the magistrates were outraged. These were important people: Cabinet Ministers, lawyers, and businessmen. In vain the prosecution argued that all suspects should be treated in the same way, and their travelling curtailed. When the prosecution failed, it appealed the bail rulings to the higher courts. Again, the delay worked to its detriment. The prosecution got so caught up in interlocutory hearings that the substantive matters were never aired.
In the few cases that did proceed to trial, witnesses refused to testify. When they gave evidence, they turned hostile. They agreed to everything suggested to them by the defence. A lawyer who had told the police that the signature on a cheque was that of his partner (the accused) said on evidence that he was mistaken and that in fact the accused had been out of the country at the time. One after another, Ministers, senior bank officials, lawyers and businessmen were acquitted. The impatient media, having failed to notice the “cat and mouse” legal game, began to unnecessarily criticize the DPP’s Office.
It only rallied to Shameem’s defence when someone leaked to the press the behind the scenes strong-arm tactics that was being deployed against her. In the midst of the hearings, the Public Service Commission had asked her to sign a performance agreement, which would have made her accountable to the Permanent Secretary for Justice. She refused to sign. The Commission complained to the Chief Justice. She refused to sign. The matter was discussed in the Judicial Services Commission (the appointing body of the DPP). She refused to sign. Cabinet ordered her to sign and expressed “concern” at her refusal to co-operate with the authorities. She refused to sign. When things began to look very ugly, the matter was leaked to the media, which was forced to rally to her support.
Then personal attacks were rained on her. It later emerged that she received abusive memoranda from senior public servants who refused to accept any correspondence from her without approval from the Minister of Justice and Attorney-General. One memorandum expressed the view that she was unfit to hold public office.
The Attorney-General refused to send her requests for mutual assistance from Australia and New Zealand for witnesses to give evidence on video link. Overnight, the Ministry of Finance cut her department’s budget by 40%. The vote most affected was the witness expense vote. She could no longer afford to summon witnesses. It was restored only when she threatened to challenge the decision of the Minister of Finance in court. The end result was that despite the prosecution’s best efforts, no one was convicted. The courts in the NBF scam held no one accountable.
No doubt, many would call that a failure. In one sense it was a failure. It was the failure of Fiji’s democratic and judicial institutions to tackle corruption and give effect to the rule of law.
Clearly, the law could not hold the rich and powerful to account for their conduct.
However, that view is too simplistic. Firstly the police investigations and the prosecutions themselves provided a form of accountability. Chiefs, who had never before been asked what they did with the money they received for their people, had to explain themselves. So did Cabinet Ministers, including lawyers. In order to achieve their acquittals, they had to pay vast sums of money to their lawyers.
Secondly, the prosecutions confronted the inequities in the judicial system. The Judicial and Legal Services Commission disciplined the magistrate, who detained the prosecutor. Another, who cited a newspaper reporter and a prosecutor for contempt, was maligned and savagely attacked in the newspapers. The government machinery, which had with ease silenced many independent officers with threats and administrative heavy-handedness, was unable to silence Shameem as head of the prosecution team. Her office grew in strength. And it took on a wider public interest role
The third positive aspect of the story of the National Bank was the role of the media. The media discovered the scandal. A list of names of people who owed money to the Bank was published in one of the newspapers. For the first time, the media realized that her struggle was one to preserve the rule of law in an ailing democracy. Their stories became much more discerning and informed. The government failed to “shoot the messenger” – in this case Nazhat Shameem, who tried to bring to justice the nations “corruptodiles”.
It is therefore important that the present anti-corruption hunters must not be allowed to suffer the same trials and tribulations experienced by Shameem and her legal team, for corruption is the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. The National Bank of Fiji story showed the inability of Fiji’s institutions to deal with a gross abuse of public office for private gain.
There is no doubt that any investigations in the NBF saga would have been conducted if it had not been for the public outcry. There was an outcry as a result of the strength, perseverance and integrity of Fiji’s media. And the investigation process followed because the political process made it too difficult not to show some signs of accountability.
The investigation of the National Bank of Fiji was hampered by witness reluctance, police resource limitations, missing files and documents and archaic criminal laws.
Since the principle of handouts was based only on ethnicity, it provided the basis of a bank policy of soft loans with few questions asked. Between 1987 and 1994, more than $200 million was lent to people on the basis of no or inadequate securities. No one noticed what was happening. Many Cabinet Ministers, already wealthy businessmen, and political cronies of the people in power borrowed money from the bank. They did not pay the loans back. In fact the beneficiaries of many of the loans were political associates, golf playing mates or relatives of those who were influential at the time.
Many were not i-taukei and many were not economically disadvantaged. To hide the nature of some borrowers, lawyers for the NFB allegedly created shelf companies to make the application on behalf of some other client. No one noticed. Allegedly, even the Reserve Bank of Fiji, which is supposed to be a bank policeman, said it noticed nothing. The Opposition noticed nothing. The police noticed nothing. The media noticed nothing until 1992, when another scam broke involving an out-of-court Deed of Settlement between a nationalist politician and the Attorney-General, which was devised to provide security for a loan from the NBF.
When that scandal broke there was an investigation into the NBF, firstly by the Reserve Bank, secondly by the Ministry of Finance, and thirdly by the police. The findings were shocking to our senses: $200 million in unsecured or under-secured loans. The beneficiaries were not the disadvantaged taukei. And no loan was likely to be repaid. Police investigations revealed fraud, corruption, and gross abuse of office, obtaining by false pretences and obtaining credit by fraud.
Of course the first question asked was where were the watchdogs? How could this happen with a strong parliamentary opposition, an Auditor-General, a free media, a banker’s bank (The Reserve Bank) and a watchdog - the Ministry of Finance? It became painfully apparent that none of these “good governance” institutions had the capacity to stop the stinking rot. The jury is still out on whether they all knew what was going on, and failed to intervene in a politically supported hot ‘lovo’. But the institutions failed to detect or expose the fraud, until it was too late.
And so the taxpayers turned to the criminal justice system to demonstrate accountability. Police investigations took almost three years to complete. The Fiji Police Force was under-trained and resourced, and fraud laws antiquated. The investigations were compounded because DPP’s Office, which was destroyed in the 1987 coup, was staffed with under-qualified and inexperienced lawyers. The National Bank prosecutions, led by the then Director of Public Prosecutions, later Justice Nazhat Shameem, were a test of the ability of Fiji’s criminal justice system to try the rich and the powerful. She had already held that office for some three years.
Those of us who eagerly and closely followed the whole saga soon noticed a sinister pattern emerging, prevalent in many other corruption riddled Third World countries. The first was the hostility of the magistracy. State prosecutors were daily maligned, abused, and on one occasion detained in custody for alleged contempt of court. In one absurd case the accused, who was a Cabinet Minister and a high chief, had been permitted to sit at the bar table instead of the dock.
His counsel, in the course of the preliminary inquiry abused the prosecutor on the basis of his skin color. He was an Australian and the Deputy DPP. The Fijian magistrate reprimanded the prosecutor for insulting Fijian culture when he (the prosecutor) led evidence that the accused had received large sums of money “for his people” in exchange for fishing licenses. When the prosecutor tried to present his side of the story, he was detained in the police cell for “contempt of court”, raising the question: when does a cultural gift become a corruptly received gift?
We might recall that the DPP Shameem had to appear to secure his release, and to request the magistrate to disqualify himself. He refused to do so. Shameem moved the High Court to order him to disqualify himself. The High Court did so order, but the defence appealed that decision to the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court. So much delay ensued, that the trial of the Minister never proceeded. The DPP, who took office after Shameem left, entered a nolle prosequi. The prosecutor won the battle, but the war was lost.
In the midst of the judicial battles, came the interlocutory challenges. The prosecution tried to ground all the accused by seizing their passports. Their lawyers and the magistrates were outraged. These were important people: Cabinet Ministers, lawyers, and businessmen. In vain the prosecution argued that all suspects should be treated in the same way, and their travelling curtailed. When the prosecution failed, it appealed the bail rulings to the higher courts. Again, the delay worked to its detriment. The prosecution got so caught up in interlocutory hearings that the substantive matters were never aired.
In the few cases that did proceed to trial, witnesses refused to testify. When they gave evidence, they turned hostile. They agreed to everything suggested to them by the defence. A lawyer who had told the police that the signature on a cheque was that of his partner (the accused) said on evidence that he was mistaken and that in fact the accused had been out of the country at the time. One after another, Ministers, senior bank officials, lawyers and businessmen were acquitted. The impatient media, having failed to notice the “cat and mouse” legal game, began to unnecessarily criticize the DPP’s Office.
It only rallied to Shameem’s defence when someone leaked to the press the behind the scenes strong-arm tactics that was being deployed against her. In the midst of the hearings, the Public Service Commission had asked her to sign a performance agreement, which would have made her accountable to the Permanent Secretary for Justice. She refused to sign. The Commission complained to the Chief Justice. She refused to sign. The matter was discussed in the Judicial Services Commission (the appointing body of the DPP). She refused to sign. Cabinet ordered her to sign and expressed “concern” at her refusal to co-operate with the authorities. She refused to sign. When things began to look very ugly, the matter was leaked to the media, which was forced to rally to her support.
Then personal attacks were rained on her. It later emerged that she received abusive memoranda from senior public servants who refused to accept any correspondence from her without approval from the Minister of Justice and Attorney-General. One memorandum expressed the view that she was unfit to hold public office.
The Attorney-General refused to send her requests for mutual assistance from Australia and New Zealand for witnesses to give evidence on video link. Overnight, the Ministry of Finance cut her department’s budget by 40%. The vote most affected was the witness expense vote. She could no longer afford to summon witnesses. It was restored only when she threatened to challenge the decision of the Minister of Finance in court. The end result was that despite the prosecution’s best efforts, no one was convicted. The courts in the NBF scam held no one accountable.
No doubt, many would call that a failure. In one sense it was a failure. It was the failure of Fiji’s democratic and judicial institutions to tackle corruption and give effect to the rule of law.
Clearly, the law could not hold the rich and powerful to account for their conduct.
However, that view is too simplistic. Firstly the police investigations and the prosecutions themselves provided a form of accountability. Chiefs, who had never before been asked what they did with the money they received for their people, had to explain themselves. So did Cabinet Ministers, including lawyers. In order to achieve their acquittals, they had to pay vast sums of money to their lawyers.
Secondly, the prosecutions confronted the inequities in the judicial system. The Judicial and Legal Services Commission disciplined the magistrate, who detained the prosecutor. Another, who cited a newspaper reporter and a prosecutor for contempt, was maligned and savagely attacked in the newspapers. The government machinery, which had with ease silenced many independent officers with threats and administrative heavy-handedness, was unable to silence Shameem as head of the prosecution team. Her office grew in strength. And it took on a wider public interest role
The third positive aspect of the story of the National Bank was the role of the media. The media discovered the scandal. A list of names of people who owed money to the Bank was published in one of the newspapers. For the first time, the media realized that her struggle was one to preserve the rule of law in an ailing democracy. Their stories became much more discerning and informed. The government failed to “shoot the messenger” – in this case Nazhat Shameem, who tried to bring to justice the nations “corruptodiles”.
It is therefore important that the present anti-corruption hunters must not be allowed to suffer the same trials and tribulations experienced by Shameem and her legal team, for corruption is the abuse of entrusted power for private gain. The National Bank of Fiji story showed the inability of Fiji’s institutions to deal with a gross abuse of public office for private gain.
There is no doubt that any investigations in the NBF saga would have been conducted if it had not been for the public outcry. There was an outcry as a result of the strength, perseverance and integrity of Fiji’s media. And the investigation process followed because the political process made it too difficult not to show some signs of accountability.
The investigation of the National Bank of Fiji was hampered by witness reluctance, police resource limitations, missing files and documents and archaic criminal laws.
*After the Rabuka coups in 1987, his paramount chiefly family - the Ganilaus - and their companies - disappeared with over $2million from the National Bank of Fiji; the Cakaudrove Provincial Council with $73,179.64; the late Fijian nationalist leader Sakeasi Butadroka with $59,393; G & S Speight $100,591; Rabuka's Attorney-General Kelemedi Bulewa $352,418; three 1987 Taukei Movement leaders Ratu Inoke Kubuabola - $198,951, Ratu Meli Vesikula - $8,000, and Apisai & Melania Tora, $194,393 (Remember their banners before the Rabuka coups:
"We don't want this Indian [Bavadra] government').
We may recall Rabuka's bogus chant about his coup: "It was a matter of sink or swim for native Fijians". Ironically, he sunk the NBF and he and his nationalists swam away with taxpayers money - estimated by
Wadan Narsey at $400 million.
"The accomplices of thieves are their own enemies" - Proverb
 |  |
*LAST month NAKARAWA had sacked a prison officer from the Fiji Corrections Service following an alleged positive drug test for methamphetamine. This termination, the sacked prison officer claimed, was based on incorrect information, and the prison officer respectfully sought an urgent review of his case.
*"Upon learning of the results, I took the initiative to verify the findings directly with the Lab responsible for conducting my test. During our conversation, he confirmed that my test result did not indicate methamphetamine but instead showed MDMA, a compound found in certain painkillers. This aligns with my medical condition at the time, as I was taking painkillers to manage a severe toothache."
The terminated Prison Officer, 6 February 2025.
The Commissioner of Fiji Corrections Service, Doctor Jalesi Nakarawa has been suspended by the Constitutional Offices Commission following several allegations against him that warrant an investigation.
The Commission in accordance with section 137(4) of the Constitution has advised the President to suspend the Commissioner pending investigation and pending referral to a tribunal and appointment of a tribunal.
The Commission has endorsed the appointment of Sevuloni Naucukidi, presently the Assistant Commissioner, to act as Commissioner of Fiji Corrections Service with immediate effect. The COC says this decision is made to ensure the continued efficiency and effectiveness of the Fiji Corrections Service pending the investigation and pending referral to a tribunal of the Commissioner.
In early February this year after a fijivillage News investigation looking into allegations that Doctor Nakarawa had appointed his wife as the Corrections Service Senior Medical Officer, we managed to get comments from the Fiji Medical Association.
The Association raised serious concerns about the alleged conflict of interest by the Commissioner of Corrections, Doctor Nakarawa in the appointment of his wife as a Nurse Practitioner at the organisation on the same day as the termination without cause of the Corrections Senior Medical Officer, Doctor Singh.
Association President, Doctor Alipate Vakamocea also says Doctor Nakarawa’s wife working in the senior medical officer role is outside her scope as a Nurse Practitioner.
Doctor Vakamocea says the Fiji Medical Association is deeply concerned about the decision to terminate the doctor following the meeting with the Commissioner and the doctor’s supervisor regarding a racist email.
The Association says it is concerned that the decision to terminate the doctor’s contract without cause was also personally motivated by the Commissioner of Corrections. Doctor Vakamocea says this termination led to the Commissioner’s wife, to take over as the senior medical officer in charge.
He says from the position of the Fiji Medical Association, doctors are trained to have the breadth of knowledge or skills to treat patients to a safe standard and this is not to the same standard as a Nurse Practitioner.
The FMA President says their position is that Nurse Practitioners have their own scope of practice as outlined by the Fiji Nursing Council which dictates that they cannot replace a doctor.
He says nurse practitioners are not allowed to practice medicine unsupervised and as such, Mrs Nakarawa cannot be allowed to practice in this senior medical role or even act as such. Source: Fijivillage News.
The Commission in accordance with section 137(4) of the Constitution has advised the President to suspend the Commissioner pending investigation and pending referral to a tribunal and appointment of a tribunal.
The Commission has endorsed the appointment of Sevuloni Naucukidi, presently the Assistant Commissioner, to act as Commissioner of Fiji Corrections Service with immediate effect. The COC says this decision is made to ensure the continued efficiency and effectiveness of the Fiji Corrections Service pending the investigation and pending referral to a tribunal of the Commissioner.
In early February this year after a fijivillage News investigation looking into allegations that Doctor Nakarawa had appointed his wife as the Corrections Service Senior Medical Officer, we managed to get comments from the Fiji Medical Association.
The Association raised serious concerns about the alleged conflict of interest by the Commissioner of Corrections, Doctor Nakarawa in the appointment of his wife as a Nurse Practitioner at the organisation on the same day as the termination without cause of the Corrections Senior Medical Officer, Doctor Singh.
Association President, Doctor Alipate Vakamocea also says Doctor Nakarawa’s wife working in the senior medical officer role is outside her scope as a Nurse Practitioner.
Doctor Vakamocea says the Fiji Medical Association is deeply concerned about the decision to terminate the doctor following the meeting with the Commissioner and the doctor’s supervisor regarding a racist email.
The Association says it is concerned that the decision to terminate the doctor’s contract without cause was also personally motivated by the Commissioner of Corrections. Doctor Vakamocea says this termination led to the Commissioner’s wife, to take over as the senior medical officer in charge.
He says from the position of the Fiji Medical Association, doctors are trained to have the breadth of knowledge or skills to treat patients to a safe standard and this is not to the same standard as a Nurse Practitioner.
The FMA President says their position is that Nurse Practitioners have their own scope of practice as outlined by the Fiji Nursing Council which dictates that they cannot replace a doctor.
He says nurse practitioners are not allowed to practice medicine unsupervised and as such, Mrs Nakarawa cannot be allowed to practice in this senior medical role or even act as such. Source: Fijivillage News.
From Fijileaks Archive, 10 May 2024
*In 1987, the 68-year-old Jalesi Nakarawa was a prison officer at the Naboro Maximum Security Prison (he had joined the prison service in 1974) when his future PAP leader, coupist and treasonist SITIVENI RABUKA, an obscure third-ranking army colonel, captured Dr Timoci Bavadra and his FLP-NFP coalition government at gunpoint on 14 May 1987.
*According to Nakarawa, as he recalled to Sashi Singh's Talking Point last year, he was locking the cells on the top floor at the maximum security prison when the deposed prime minister Dr Timoci Bavadra was brought into the prison by coupist Rabuka's thuggish soldiers.
Nakarawa: 'After all the prisoners were locked up in their cells, Dr Bavadra was the last man up to his cell. When I was locking him up, a lot of prisoners in their cells were making a lot of noise because by then they knew what was happening. To be frank, I never forgot the anguish on Dr Bavadra's face. As I was about to lock the door, he actually grabbed my boots and requested me for assistance, basically saying what about these people shouting at him. So I had to stand there and give him a bit of comfort. I told him, "Sir, take a bit of rest, and when I lock this door, it will not open until tomorrow morning." So, when I was standing there, I was thinking, what a dilemma: from Prime Minister's Office one day, to maximum security prison cell the next day. I guess that is where my interest in politics started.
*Nakarawa claimed that after the encounter with Bavadra in the prison cell, he developed an interest in politics and went on to study at USP and in New Zealand, and ended up at the FNU. Now, Nakarawa has been appointed the new Commissioner of Prisons for the next five-years.
*Ironically, very recently he was questioning the legitimacy of the 2013 Constitution in an opinion piece in the media, the very Constitution under which he has been selected as the new Prisons Commissioner.
"The electoral system is clearly protected in the Constitution. Therefore, should not the constitution be amended first? The only changes that the Government can make are the procedural and operational parts of the elections. But the government’s statement implied that the review would change the electoral system. This is incorrect and clearly a political ploy."
 |  Statement by Savenaca Narube, leader of Unity Fiji, on the reforms of the electoral laws “A statement by the Government said that the review of the electoral laws had begun, and submissions were to close next week. The reforms of the electoral laws is an important process. But the people have been given very little time to submit their opinions on these important laws before the deadline. |
This means a few things:
1. First, the Government does not care for the views of the people. The advertisement will tick the box that they have called for submission. But they have no interest in receiving any views from the people. Doesn’t this sound familiar? Yes, this is the tactic of the Fiji First government. As the days go past, the coalition Government is beginning to look more and more like Fiji First.
2. Second, the electoral system is clearly protected in the Constitution. Therefore, should not the constitution be amended first? The only changes that the Government can make are the procedural and operational parts of the elections. But the government’s statement implied that the review would change the electoral system. This is incorrect and clearly a political ploy.
3. Third, the Government seems to be more interested in playing mind games than making real changes. They are clearly putting their interest first, not the country’s. This continues the legacy of Fiji First.
We have seen a string of important legal decisions by this Government that defy common sense. Their constitution amendment motion was defeated because of poor planning. The Prime Minister seems to have downplayed this great embarrassment. To save face, the Government quickly announced that they would take a motion to the Supreme Court on the amendment of the 2013 Constitution. No one knows specifically what motion they would take as the Constitution clearly requires that any amendment would have to follow the processes provided in the Constitution.
These constitutional blunders are on top of the many legal blunders that the Government has made since they took office.
It is therefore reasonable to seek answers to the following questions:
a) Does the Government have the right people in the top legal positions?
b) Does Government know what it is doing?
c) Does the government know where it is going?
d) Does the leader know what is going on?
By what we have seen since December 2022, it is difficult to give positive answers to all the above questions.”
1. First, the Government does not care for the views of the people. The advertisement will tick the box that they have called for submission. But they have no interest in receiving any views from the people. Doesn’t this sound familiar? Yes, this is the tactic of the Fiji First government. As the days go past, the coalition Government is beginning to look more and more like Fiji First.
2. Second, the electoral system is clearly protected in the Constitution. Therefore, should not the constitution be amended first? The only changes that the Government can make are the procedural and operational parts of the elections. But the government’s statement implied that the review would change the electoral system. This is incorrect and clearly a political ploy.
3. Third, the Government seems to be more interested in playing mind games than making real changes. They are clearly putting their interest first, not the country’s. This continues the legacy of Fiji First.
We have seen a string of important legal decisions by this Government that defy common sense. Their constitution amendment motion was defeated because of poor planning. The Prime Minister seems to have downplayed this great embarrassment. To save face, the Government quickly announced that they would take a motion to the Supreme Court on the amendment of the 2013 Constitution. No one knows specifically what motion they would take as the Constitution clearly requires that any amendment would have to follow the processes provided in the Constitution.
These constitutional blunders are on top of the many legal blunders that the Government has made since they took office.
It is therefore reasonable to seek answers to the following questions:
a) Does the Government have the right people in the top legal positions?
b) Does Government know what it is doing?
c) Does the government know where it is going?
d) Does the leader know what is going on?
By what we have seen since December 2022, it is difficult to give positive answers to all the above questions.”
RIP, Mikaele Lewaicei |  RIP. The late Mickey Lewaicei |
Contact
[email protected]
[email protected]
