Fijileaks: Will the Rabuka coalition government SACK Sitiveni Qiliho as Police Commissioner and put him on trial for slapping and spitting in the late Professor Brij Lal's FACE in 2009? Our Founding-Editor-in-Chief and a TEAM of lawyers in London tried to arrest Qiliho on Brij Lal's behalf but he gave us the slip, mainly due to Covid restrictions in Fiji and the UK.
*RABUKA BLUEPRINT: In a remarkable coincidence, the lead lawyer instructed to pursue Qiliho turned out to be the same lawyer who, in collaboration with the former DDP lawyer AMAN RAVINDRA SINGH, now in Australia, had prepared a lengthy legal case for the arrest of Coupist Sitiveni Rabuka under the Doctrine of Universal Jurisdiction, for the rape, beatings, and torture of his opponents following the 1987 Coups. It was established that IMMUNITY granted to Rabuka in the Brij Lal and Other Commissioners 1997 Constitution was invalid in UK law. The UK courts could try individuals for crimes committed in overseas jurisdictions.
*We had jokingly remarked to Brij Lal: 'Bhai, just imagine if we had found out that there was no case against Qiliho because of the IMMUNITY you had granted to Rabuka in your 1997 Constitution of Fiji.'
*Brij Lal's wife, DR PADMA LAL, was also banned from Fiji, until yesterday when the ban was lifted on her.
*We had tried to arrest Qiliho in London but he gave us the slip. A prominent Suva lawyer, another of his victim, had declined to provide an affidavit to the London lawyers, saying he was 'blindfolded' so couldn't say with certainty that is was Qiliho who beat him up, and fired his infamous pistol over the lawyer's head.
*Our lawyers merely wanted the affidavit from the lawyer to establish that he was taken to Rifle Range, Vatuwaqa, and assaulted, without claiming that it was Qiliho, for another 'Colonel' had confirmed Qiliho's identity.
*Expectedly, the Rabuka government has also lifted the ban on the deported USP Vice-Chancellor Professor Pal Ahluwalia and he is welcome back into Fiji.
The late Brij Lal and Pal Ahluwalia deportations, from Fijileaks Archives
The late Professor Brij Lal's PETITION which he claims Rabuka ditched after he (Rabuka) was persuaded by the Speaker Nailatikau to ignore it
Petition to The Parliament of Fiji
"I wish to bring to the attention of the elected representatives of the people of Fiji the matter of life ban imposed on us, myself and my wife Padma, from returning to Fiji, the country of our birth. Life ban is the severest sanction a state can apply to any individual, and it is usually imposed for the most heinous of crimes against humanity. We have at all times been law abiding citizens with an unblemished record wherever we have lived. On the contrary, we both have been honoured in Fiji and the wider Pacific for our contributions to society, including to our respective fields of academia and public service. We would like the Parliament of Fiji to revoke the ban.
I (Brij V Lal) was deported from Fiji on 5 November 2009 and told to take the next available plane out of the country. I was not told then or subsequently the reason for the deportation and the imposition of the life ban on me. My wife, Padma, was refused entry into Fiji in January 2010 and similarly not informed why this treatment was meted out to her.
I have been a principled critic of all the coups in Fiji, including the 2006 military coup. I stood up for the values of representative democracy, the sanctity of the ballot box, the rule of law and unfettered free speech. I believe that democracy dies without the oxygen of free speech, and that dissent and debate are an integral part of a healthy democratic society. Nothing less would have been expected of me as a former member of the Fiji Constitution Review Commission, headed by Sir Paul Reeves, whose report formed the basis of Fiji’s once admired but now revoked 1997 Constitution. At all times, I dissented within the prescribed parameters of Fijian laws.
Padma has always been the consummate professional, widely respected throughout the Pacific region for her expertise in climate change, disaster risk management and more resource and environmental economics more generally. She has never once publicly expressed opinions on politics in Fiji or elsewhere, whatever her individual views may have been. We believe that she being victimized simply for being married to me.
We have both been recognized for our public service to Fiji and the Pacific region. Marking its 70th anniversary, the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) selected Padma as one of 70 most Inspiring Women of the Pacific. Among numerous other awards, I have been honoured with an Officer of the Order of Fiji, and Member of the Order of Australia as well as Australia’s Centenary Medal. Significantly, I was chosen by the Fiji Millennium Committee as one of 75 people who helped shape Fiji’s 20th century history.
We would like the Parliament of Fiji to review and, if possible, revoke the life ban on us. Failing that, we would at least like to know precisely why this severest of sanctions has been applied to us. Contrary to the government’s assertion to the Fiji Parliament, we are not, and never have been, a danger to the peace and security of Fiji and its people. We deeply regret the global opprobrium the ban has brought on Fiji, and hope that this taint on Fiji’s reputation will be removed in due course."
Brij Vilash Lal, AM, BA (USP) MA (Brit. Col), PhD (ANU), FAHA
Padma Narsey Lal BSc, MSc (USP), MREnSc (ANU), PhD (Hawaii)
Petition to The Parliament of Fiji
"I wish to bring to the attention of the elected representatives of the people of Fiji the matter of life ban imposed on us, myself and my wife Padma, from returning to Fiji, the country of our birth. Life ban is the severest sanction a state can apply to any individual, and it is usually imposed for the most heinous of crimes against humanity. We have at all times been law abiding citizens with an unblemished record wherever we have lived. On the contrary, we both have been honoured in Fiji and the wider Pacific for our contributions to society, including to our respective fields of academia and public service. We would like the Parliament of Fiji to revoke the ban.
I (Brij V Lal) was deported from Fiji on 5 November 2009 and told to take the next available plane out of the country. I was not told then or subsequently the reason for the deportation and the imposition of the life ban on me. My wife, Padma, was refused entry into Fiji in January 2010 and similarly not informed why this treatment was meted out to her.
I have been a principled critic of all the coups in Fiji, including the 2006 military coup. I stood up for the values of representative democracy, the sanctity of the ballot box, the rule of law and unfettered free speech. I believe that democracy dies without the oxygen of free speech, and that dissent and debate are an integral part of a healthy democratic society. Nothing less would have been expected of me as a former member of the Fiji Constitution Review Commission, headed by Sir Paul Reeves, whose report formed the basis of Fiji’s once admired but now revoked 1997 Constitution. At all times, I dissented within the prescribed parameters of Fijian laws.
Padma has always been the consummate professional, widely respected throughout the Pacific region for her expertise in climate change, disaster risk management and more resource and environmental economics more generally. She has never once publicly expressed opinions on politics in Fiji or elsewhere, whatever her individual views may have been. We believe that she being victimized simply for being married to me.
We have both been recognized for our public service to Fiji and the Pacific region. Marking its 70th anniversary, the Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) selected Padma as one of 70 most Inspiring Women of the Pacific. Among numerous other awards, I have been honoured with an Officer of the Order of Fiji, and Member of the Order of Australia as well as Australia’s Centenary Medal. Significantly, I was chosen by the Fiji Millennium Committee as one of 75 people who helped shape Fiji’s 20th century history.
We would like the Parliament of Fiji to review and, if possible, revoke the life ban on us. Failing that, we would at least like to know precisely why this severest of sanctions has been applied to us. Contrary to the government’s assertion to the Fiji Parliament, we are not, and never have been, a danger to the peace and security of Fiji and its people. We deeply regret the global opprobrium the ban has brought on Fiji, and hope that this taint on Fiji’s reputation will be removed in due course."
Brij Vilash Lal, AM, BA (USP) MA (Brit. Col), PhD (ANU), FAHA
Padma Narsey Lal BSc, MSc (USP), MREnSc (ANU), PhD (Hawaii)
Fijileaks: We had agreed, without disclosing personal reasons, that I was at liberty to reveal the late Professor Brij Lal's collaboration in our pursuit to arrest Sitiveni Qiliho in London
20 July 2020
To Whom It May Concern
Bhai, I plan to move against him.
Looks like this Academy has turned a blind eye but the coward kept everything in utter secrecy
I need a proper statement on a separate document as an attachment from you to pass it to Amnesty and others, explaining your background involvement in Fiji Constitution, arrival in Fiji, arrest, beating and spitting at barrack etc
And explain why you are coming forward now
Maybe state you were still busy with academic stuff
Also mention how Australia denied him visa etc
Look forward to your cooperation
He can’t get away just like this
I will be approaching my constituency MP to write to the Home Secretary Priti Patel and Foreign Secretary and also Defence Minister now he is definitely arriving in London
Regards
22 April 2021
Bula Brij
I m having a zoom meeting with the lawyers on Friday and they have sent me a few questions. There are some I can fill in but others are for you.
Loloma
Witness evidence
2.1 Brij Vilash Lal:
• How long was Brij in detention and subjected to this treatment?
• Were there any injuries sustained as a result of the slapping? If so:
(a) were any photos taken?
(b) is there any medical evidence available from this time?
• What is Brij’s immigration history? Did he claim asylum in Australia? If so, are the papers relating to this claim/decision available?
• Can we be provided with a copy of the account given to the UNHRC. What was the outcome of this submission?
• Does Brij have any previous convictions?
Brij Lal, 23 April 2021
Bula,
Have been under the weather a bit with winter approaching. To your questions:
Interrogation lasted 3-4 hours.
Slapping and spitting in my face, breaking my glasses in the provess.
No photos taken though I have my broken glasses.
I am an Australian citizen and had proper visa to do research in Fiji
I have no previous convictions anywhere.
I wrote to UNHRC both to Nazhat Shameem Khan as well as to the Australian ambassador to Geneva but did not receive even an acknowledgement of my letters.
After a series of further e-mails, Brij Lal sent to us his "Torture Affidavit".
"Here it is. It will be great if Qiliho is prevented from returning to Fiji
and becoming commander RFMF."
Dear Victor
"By separate email from my computer, I will send you something I have cobbled together. I am not used to this sort of writing so please make any changes to it you see fit. There may be some extraneous matter in it that may have to go. I am very grateful to you for your interest in this case and for bringing this fellow's
vile and vicious behaviour into the public domain. But I also have a deep sense of foreboding that other concerns might drown out our call for justice. I have had a few enquiries from friends from Fiji, but a feeling of fatigue is palpable there,
the spirit to fight injustice quashed...Thanks. I had not seen this news item [Qiliho going up to the Royal Defence Academy in London]. It is shocking. When he was slated to come to Australia, I wrote to Julie Bishop and he was refuseed a visa to study here. Qiliho was a Bainimarama protege who was groomed to succeed him. He was his chief enforcer, assisted by Ben Naliva and Asaeri [Aseri] Rokoura, both viciious thugs.Qiliho interrogated me at QEB. He covered my face with his spitting and slapped me around to the point of breaking my gkasses, He told me that if I did not leave by the first flight the next day, my family would have to fetch my body from the morgue.
He led a group of arsonists to burn down Justice Gordon Ward's Deuba villa. There are stories around of him stomping on the bodies of women taken to the camp for their various protests. It is deeply saddening to see him being welcomed in London. After the Canberra hiccup, he will now realize his ambition. Such are the ways of the world. Keep safe in these strange times, my friend."
"Nothing lasts forever except words. I will re-double my efforts to bear witness to our time and place so that future generations will know what we and our country have gone through, to understand the motivation and the modus operandi of a couple of people at the helm of Fiji’s political leadership in the early years of the 21st century. The government’s victory is a pyrrhic one, hollow, morally compromised. You may keep us out of Fiji but you will never be able to keep Fiji out of our hearts. Someday, you folks will realize the fundamental unjustness of a decision in which you have acquiesced." |
From: Brij Lal
Sent: Wednesday, 1 July 2015 9:30 AM
To: 'Edward Brown'
Cc: Osea Cawaru; Merewai T. Volavola; Karalaini Umu
Subject: RE: Hello
Dear Edward
Thank you for this. Since this will be my last correspondence with you on this or any other matter, I wish to put some things on the record, to get things off my chest.
When Minister Natuva said we could re-apply to have the travel ban on us lifted, I genuinely believed that we would be given a fair hearing. We are disappointed that we were not accorded that basic consideration. I am more than convinced now that Minister Natuva was genuinely open-minded at the beginning but the decision not to rescind the ban was foisted upon him by a couple of individuals in government –we all know who they are -- who don’t have the courage to own up to the decision but prefer to hide behind his sulu instead. Why such cowardice, such lack of openness? Because they can’t justify their decision in public?
Minister Natuva’s defence in parliament of the original decision to ban us from entering Fiji was based on a false premise, based on a lie. He said that we were banned because I was opposed to the return of democracy in Fiji after the coup of 2006.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. In fact the claim is a travesty of the truth and of the historical record. I was among thousands in Fiji who wanted a timely return to parliamentary democracy. The claim that we were banned because we were a threat to peace, security and good order in Fiji is, quite simply, laughable. It was widely and justifiably ridiculed at the time it was made.
I stood up for the values of democracy, the rule of law and a strict observance of the protocols of constitutionalism. This is never a crime in a civilised democracy. For all its claims to the contrary, Fiji has a long way to go in this regard. But 2006 is moot now. The coup makers succeeded, I failed. So why ban us now, when other critics of the coup are free to enter Fiji?. Why are we singled out? Is it because the pen is mightier than the sword?
The situation is very curious. Fijian diplomats, government ministers, members of parliamentary delegations fraternise with me in Canberra but their government keeps us out. People with coup-tainted pasts grab every opportunity to visit Australia where they were once unceremoniously banned, and do so without embarrassment or shame, but do not allow us to enter Fiji. Doesn’t this double standard trouble people, including those in government?
I can understand the Fijian regime having a gripe with me over my stance, but what crime did my wife commit that she is permanently banned from Fiji? Padma has never uttered a comment of political nature in the public. The government’s reaction is pure petty vindictiveness, nothing less.
We hold our heads high. We will never kowtow before unjust power and authority. There comes a time in everyone’s life when you draw a line in the sand and say: this far and no further.
We have been advised by people close to the government, well connected to the powers-that-be, that if we apologized to the Prime Minister and his unctuous Attorney General, that our case would stand a very good chance of speedy resolution.
But apologize for what? On the contrary, we feel we are owed apology by those whose decision keeps us from visiting the land of our birth.
Nothing lasts forever except words. I will re-double my efforts to bear witness to our time and place so that future generations will know what we and our country have gone through, to understand the motivation and the modus operandi of a couple of people at the helm of Fiji’s political leadership in the early years of the 21st century.
The government’s victory is a pyrrhic one, hollow, morally compromised. You may keep us out of Fiji but you will never be able to keep Fiji out of our hearts. Someday, you folks will realize the fundamental unjustness of a decision in which you have acquiesced.
In the end we all have to live with ourselves. And we all know that all that tyranny needs to triumph is for good men and women to remain silent.
Sincerely
Brij V LAL
Canberra.
Sent: Wednesday, 1 July 2015 9:30 AM
To: 'Edward Brown'
Cc: Osea Cawaru; Merewai T. Volavola; Karalaini Umu
Subject: RE: Hello
Dear Edward
Thank you for this. Since this will be my last correspondence with you on this or any other matter, I wish to put some things on the record, to get things off my chest.
When Minister Natuva said we could re-apply to have the travel ban on us lifted, I genuinely believed that we would be given a fair hearing. We are disappointed that we were not accorded that basic consideration. I am more than convinced now that Minister Natuva was genuinely open-minded at the beginning but the decision not to rescind the ban was foisted upon him by a couple of individuals in government –we all know who they are -- who don’t have the courage to own up to the decision but prefer to hide behind his sulu instead. Why such cowardice, such lack of openness? Because they can’t justify their decision in public?
Minister Natuva’s defence in parliament of the original decision to ban us from entering Fiji was based on a false premise, based on a lie. He said that we were banned because I was opposed to the return of democracy in Fiji after the coup of 2006.
Nothing could be farther from the truth. In fact the claim is a travesty of the truth and of the historical record. I was among thousands in Fiji who wanted a timely return to parliamentary democracy. The claim that we were banned because we were a threat to peace, security and good order in Fiji is, quite simply, laughable. It was widely and justifiably ridiculed at the time it was made.
I stood up for the values of democracy, the rule of law and a strict observance of the protocols of constitutionalism. This is never a crime in a civilised democracy. For all its claims to the contrary, Fiji has a long way to go in this regard. But 2006 is moot now. The coup makers succeeded, I failed. So why ban us now, when other critics of the coup are free to enter Fiji?. Why are we singled out? Is it because the pen is mightier than the sword?
The situation is very curious. Fijian diplomats, government ministers, members of parliamentary delegations fraternise with me in Canberra but their government keeps us out. People with coup-tainted pasts grab every opportunity to visit Australia where they were once unceremoniously banned, and do so without embarrassment or shame, but do not allow us to enter Fiji. Doesn’t this double standard trouble people, including those in government?
I can understand the Fijian regime having a gripe with me over my stance, but what crime did my wife commit that she is permanently banned from Fiji? Padma has never uttered a comment of political nature in the public. The government’s reaction is pure petty vindictiveness, nothing less.
We hold our heads high. We will never kowtow before unjust power and authority. There comes a time in everyone’s life when you draw a line in the sand and say: this far and no further.
We have been advised by people close to the government, well connected to the powers-that-be, that if we apologized to the Prime Minister and his unctuous Attorney General, that our case would stand a very good chance of speedy resolution.
But apologize for what? On the contrary, we feel we are owed apology by those whose decision keeps us from visiting the land of our birth.
Nothing lasts forever except words. I will re-double my efforts to bear witness to our time and place so that future generations will know what we and our country have gone through, to understand the motivation and the modus operandi of a couple of people at the helm of Fiji’s political leadership in the early years of the 21st century.
The government’s victory is a pyrrhic one, hollow, morally compromised. You may keep us out of Fiji but you will never be able to keep Fiji out of our hearts. Someday, you folks will realize the fundamental unjustness of a decision in which you have acquiesced.
In the end we all have to live with ourselves. And we all know that all that tyranny needs to triumph is for good men and women to remain silent.
Sincerely
Brij V LAL
Canberra.
By PROFESSOR WADAN NARSEY (re Fijileaks, 27 December 2021
jFiji’s Animal Farm Continues
Letter to the Editor
20 March 2015
Dear Sir,
With the passing of Professor Brij Lal on 25 December 2021, there has been an outpouring of tributes to him. Many had already protested against the ban, such as those who signed a letter in 2015:
Professor Vijay Naidu
Tessa MacKenzie
Rev. Akuila Yabaki
Shamima Ali
Dr Tupeni Baba
Dr Morgan Tui
Dr Claire Slatter
Dr Ganesh Chand
Professor Satish Chand
Professor Croz Walsh
That letter can be read here:
But equally many influential persons speaking today, were silent.
Fiji Times bravely fought draconian sanctions from the Bainimarama/Khaiyum Government, with publishers being expelled, some (Publisher like Hank Arts and Editor Fred Wesley being charged for spurious crimes and facing suspended jail sentences. Eventually they began publishing critical articles from me but only after serious vetting by lawyers Munro Leys (see some of the links below).
But my censored Letter to the Editor in 2015 explains much.
“Fiji’s Animal Farm continues” (Letter to Editor 20 March 2015 (censored)) had the following:
“Dear Sir,
The Minister for Immigration and Defense (Colonel Timoci Natuva) has “explained” the Fiji Government’s ban of Professor Brij Lal and Dr Padma Lal on the grounds that Brij Lal “has been very vocal and opposed the move towards democracy after the events of 2006” and that “his actions were viewed by the Government of the day as prejudicial to the peace, defence, public safety, public order, security of the Government of Fiji.” (Fiji Times, 19 March 2015).
Minister Natuva’s response suggests that not only does he not have to worry about over-taxing his brain cells, but that Fiji’s Animal Farm is alive and well under the elected government of Bainimarama and Khaiyum.
(a) Given that Brij Lal opposed the illegal removal of a lawful democratically elected government of Qarase, only in Animal Farm can Minister Natuva claim this was “opposing the move towards democracy”.
(b) Only in Animal Farm can Minister Natuva “forget” that his “Government of the Day” was the illegal treasonous government of Voreqe Bainimarama who had to write into the 2013 Constitution, complete immunity for unspecified actions for himself and his collaborators, between 2000 and September 2014?
(c) only in Animal Farm can a peaceful law-abiding pen-wielding Australian academic, a former Fiji citizen and recipient of Fiji’s highest Honors, be considered by Minister Natuva (on the orders of Bainimarama and Khaiyum) to be “prejudicial to the peace defence, public safety, public order, security of the Government of Fiji”, which is backed by the might of only 3000 fierce Fijian soldiers and 3000 policemen. Heaven forbid, is brave soldier Natuva admitting that “one pen is mightier than the sword”?
(d) Only in Animal Farm, can Minister Natuva give no justification whatsoever (and not be asked by the media either) for banning Dr Padma Lal, an environmental economist and an expert on the sugar industry who has not been politically vocal at all, whose only “crime” is that she is married to Brij Lal, and perhaps the double misfortune of being my sister.
(e) Only in Animal Farm will great “women’s champions” like Madam Nazhat Shameem and Minister Rosy Akbar remain conveniently silent about the denial of the basic human rights of Dr Padma Lal to enter Fiji, because of her “crime” of being the wife of Dr Brij Lal.
(f) Only in Animal Farm will Indo-Fijian civil society organizations (the Arya Samaj, the Sanatan Dharam, the Sangam, the Gujarat Society) and the great girmitiya descendants and supporters of the Bainimarama Government (like Satendra Nandan, Subramani, Rajesh Chandra, Ganesh Chand, Mahendra Reddy, Rajendra Prasad, Thakur Ranjit Singh,etc.) keep totally quiet about the banning of one of the most peaceful and valued girmitiya “sons of Fiji” who has contributed his entire academic life to the written history of the Indo-Fijians (Dr Brij Lal) and the banning of their former USP academic colleague, luminary and Gold Medalist, Dr Padma Lal.
(g) Only in Animal Farm can an “elected government” ban decent law-abiding people like Brij and Padma Lal, while welcoming and rewarding foreigners who came to support the violent 2006 treason and the illegal Bainimarama Government, like John Samy, Shaista Shameem, John Prasad, Francis Narayan, Robin Nair, Peter Thompson, Sharon Smith-Johns, Graham Davis, etc.
Given Minister Natuva’s statement, a few members of the Fiji public might lose some sleep trying to identify which animals in George Orwell’s Animal Farm might accurately represent Natuva, Bainimarama and Khaiyum.
But the majority of Fiji citizens can always help themselves go to sleep by counting their own numbers (no prizes for guessing which animals they represent in Animal Farm).
Those who wish to read Animal Farm may easily do so at this link:
Click to access animal_farm.pdf
https://narseyonfiji.wordpress.com/2015/03/20/fijis-animal-farm-continues-letter-to-the-editor-20-march-2015/
https://narseyonfiji.wordpress.com/2015/12/12/then-they-came-for-me-no-voice-for-padma-edited-article-in-fiji-times-12-dec-2015/
https://narseyonfiji.wordpress.com/2016/12/12/bainimarama-ignores-senior-citizens-request-for-lifting-of-ban-on-professor-brij-lal-and-dr-padma-narsey-lal-24-oct-2016/
https://narseyonfiji.wordpress.com/2016/12/10/human-rights-are-not-for-begging-ed-in-ft-10122016/
https://narseyonfiji.wordpress.com/2021/02/13/when-the-line-is-not-drawn-ft-13-2-2021/
Letter to the Editor
20 March 2015
Dear Sir,
With the passing of Professor Brij Lal on 25 December 2021, there has been an outpouring of tributes to him. Many had already protested against the ban, such as those who signed a letter in 2015:
Professor Vijay Naidu
Tessa MacKenzie
Rev. Akuila Yabaki
Shamima Ali
Dr Tupeni Baba
Dr Morgan Tui
Dr Claire Slatter
Dr Ganesh Chand
Professor Satish Chand
Professor Croz Walsh
That letter can be read here:
But equally many influential persons speaking today, were silent.
Fiji Times bravely fought draconian sanctions from the Bainimarama/Khaiyum Government, with publishers being expelled, some (Publisher like Hank Arts and Editor Fred Wesley being charged for spurious crimes and facing suspended jail sentences. Eventually they began publishing critical articles from me but only after serious vetting by lawyers Munro Leys (see some of the links below).
But my censored Letter to the Editor in 2015 explains much.
“Fiji’s Animal Farm continues” (Letter to Editor 20 March 2015 (censored)) had the following:
“Dear Sir,
The Minister for Immigration and Defense (Colonel Timoci Natuva) has “explained” the Fiji Government’s ban of Professor Brij Lal and Dr Padma Lal on the grounds that Brij Lal “has been very vocal and opposed the move towards democracy after the events of 2006” and that “his actions were viewed by the Government of the day as prejudicial to the peace, defence, public safety, public order, security of the Government of Fiji.” (Fiji Times, 19 March 2015).
Minister Natuva’s response suggests that not only does he not have to worry about over-taxing his brain cells, but that Fiji’s Animal Farm is alive and well under the elected government of Bainimarama and Khaiyum.
(a) Given that Brij Lal opposed the illegal removal of a lawful democratically elected government of Qarase, only in Animal Farm can Minister Natuva claim this was “opposing the move towards democracy”.
(b) Only in Animal Farm can Minister Natuva “forget” that his “Government of the Day” was the illegal treasonous government of Voreqe Bainimarama who had to write into the 2013 Constitution, complete immunity for unspecified actions for himself and his collaborators, between 2000 and September 2014?
(c) only in Animal Farm can a peaceful law-abiding pen-wielding Australian academic, a former Fiji citizen and recipient of Fiji’s highest Honors, be considered by Minister Natuva (on the orders of Bainimarama and Khaiyum) to be “prejudicial to the peace defence, public safety, public order, security of the Government of Fiji”, which is backed by the might of only 3000 fierce Fijian soldiers and 3000 policemen. Heaven forbid, is brave soldier Natuva admitting that “one pen is mightier than the sword”?
(d) Only in Animal Farm, can Minister Natuva give no justification whatsoever (and not be asked by the media either) for banning Dr Padma Lal, an environmental economist and an expert on the sugar industry who has not been politically vocal at all, whose only “crime” is that she is married to Brij Lal, and perhaps the double misfortune of being my sister.
(e) Only in Animal Farm will great “women’s champions” like Madam Nazhat Shameem and Minister Rosy Akbar remain conveniently silent about the denial of the basic human rights of Dr Padma Lal to enter Fiji, because of her “crime” of being the wife of Dr Brij Lal.
(f) Only in Animal Farm will Indo-Fijian civil society organizations (the Arya Samaj, the Sanatan Dharam, the Sangam, the Gujarat Society) and the great girmitiya descendants and supporters of the Bainimarama Government (like Satendra Nandan, Subramani, Rajesh Chandra, Ganesh Chand, Mahendra Reddy, Rajendra Prasad, Thakur Ranjit Singh,etc.) keep totally quiet about the banning of one of the most peaceful and valued girmitiya “sons of Fiji” who has contributed his entire academic life to the written history of the Indo-Fijians (Dr Brij Lal) and the banning of their former USP academic colleague, luminary and Gold Medalist, Dr Padma Lal.
(g) Only in Animal Farm can an “elected government” ban decent law-abiding people like Brij and Padma Lal, while welcoming and rewarding foreigners who came to support the violent 2006 treason and the illegal Bainimarama Government, like John Samy, Shaista Shameem, John Prasad, Francis Narayan, Robin Nair, Peter Thompson, Sharon Smith-Johns, Graham Davis, etc.
Given Minister Natuva’s statement, a few members of the Fiji public might lose some sleep trying to identify which animals in George Orwell’s Animal Farm might accurately represent Natuva, Bainimarama and Khaiyum.
But the majority of Fiji citizens can always help themselves go to sleep by counting their own numbers (no prizes for guessing which animals they represent in Animal Farm).
Those who wish to read Animal Farm may easily do so at this link:
Click to access animal_farm.pdf
https://narseyonfiji.wordpress.com/2015/03/20/fijis-animal-farm-continues-letter-to-the-editor-20-march-2015/
https://narseyonfiji.wordpress.com/2015/12/12/then-they-came-for-me-no-voice-for-padma-edited-article-in-fiji-times-12-dec-2015/
https://narseyonfiji.wordpress.com/2016/12/12/bainimarama-ignores-senior-citizens-request-for-lifting-of-ban-on-professor-brij-lal-and-dr-padma-narsey-lal-24-oct-2016/
https://narseyonfiji.wordpress.com/2016/12/10/human-rights-are-not-for-begging-ed-in-ft-10122016/
https://narseyonfiji.wordpress.com/2021/02/13/when-the-line-is-not-drawn-ft-13-2-2021/
USP Vice-Chancellor, Professor Pal Ahluwalia says he and his wife Sandra Price are profoundly humbled and grateful at the news that they are free to return to Fiji. While responding to the news, Professor Ahluwalia says they are grateful to the Lord, and to Rabuka. He says their students and staff have relentlessly fought for USP. The Vice-Chancellor adds they will continue to serve and ensure that the work of shaping Pacific futures endures.
Ashwin Raj, the former Director of the Fiji Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Commission has taken up a new role within Government. He has been appointed as Permanent Secretary for Women, Children and Poverty Alleviation, effective from December 12th, 2022. Raj was among five new Permanent Secretary appointments announced by Public Service Commission Chair, Vishnu Mohan.