Blog Archives

Murky Shenanigans at Fiji TV: Sacked Fiji TV executive Tanya Waqanika accuses FHL CEO Fareed of making calculated statements against Fiji TV to devalue the television company's shares- says she has evidence

30/1/2015

Fijileaks Editor: We have decided to withhold the private emails of the recipients until further postings.

From: Tanya Waqanika <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, Jan 29, 2015 at 11:07 AM
Subject: Settlement and Fiji TV matters.

Bula Vinaka Saka Fiji TV,  FHL board members, Hari Punja & Sons and Class B Shareholders,

We thought it best to address our issue directly with you all. We trust that you have all read our detailed 74 page document, addressed to the Hon Prime Minister, Ratu Josaia Voreqe Bainimarama, MP on the allegations against Hon Aiyaz Saiyed - Khaiyum MP.

Our fight for Justice and Righteousness is against those that did this injustice to us and have bowed down to AG's illegal, demonic and unrighteous directive to have our removal based on his personal vindictiveness and vendetta. The mere fact that both boards are still silent on this issue and have silently endorsed the recruitment/appointment of new Fiji TV CEO is morally, ethically and legally wrong. That position rightfully still belongs to Tevita Gonelevu.

For me personally, I believe I have done my time with Fiji TV, my record at Fiji TV speaks for itself. Our Living God has always favored me and fought all my battles- the glory, honor and praise belongs to him alone. First for the record, we are not against the Government of Fiji and the Hon Prime Minister. As believers in Christ Jesus, the word of God says that he appoints and removes rulers and all those in authority are from God. We will not and cannot judge or criticize the Hon Prime Minister, Voreqe Josaia Bainimarama or our democratically elected Government. Secondly, e tiko na neitou dra vakaveiwekeni.

In all my years at Fiji TV, Hon Prime Minister "never ever"interferes in the operations of Fiji TV- a FACT. You can all verify the same from the former Fiji TV Chairperson and former board members, including the 2 former CEOs- they will confirm the non- interference from the Hon PM. You would have read page 63 of our report- my spirit discerns that the directive from "Frankjosh" is not from the Hon Prime Minister. The manner in which Fareed addresses the Hon Prime Minister in the email is very very disrespectful. The truth is already coming out. They all know who this person is.

We have yet to finalize our submission on the unethical conduct of the Fiji TV (FHL) board members and the serious and personal legal implications which they have unfortunately caught themselves in. I honestly and truly believe that Naiveli, Rathod and Tuituki were used and duped by Fareed in our removal with the manipulation of AG. However, this does not immune them from legal proceedings given that "ignorance of the law, is not a defense", moreso, when they are professionals in their own standing.

Fareed is a Compulsive liar and deceiver- I had reported to the MNL board an incident to Mr Naiveli and Mr Lala on the serious legal implications that he did- he set up both board members. He has a cowardly habit of not putting his name or signature to any document which reeks of unethical issues, unfortunately, he was caught red -handed for the Fiji TV saga.   I had reported the same (MNL board incident) to Lt Col Neumi Leweni and Lt Col Pio Tikodudua and I then requested that they hold back from reporting the same to Ratu Voreqe- guess it was meant to be.  Fareed's statements in the media against Fiji TV was calculating that it devalued and drove Fiji TV's share price own - we have all the evidence. Fiji TV's demise and downfall also affects FHL and all its shareholders and all FHL subsidiaries.

We had also recorded (audio)his last meeting with Fiji TV management where he openly admitted to the entire Fiji TV management that his first priority was to protect himself. We recorded the entire meeting. We have other evidence of his unethical conduct.

Whatever that Gonelevu and Waqanika has done- we can assure you all, it has rattled the AG with fear. God have mercy on him
.
To the point of our email- SETTLEMENT and Fiji TV matters :

1) As I had stated above, I have done my time with Fiji TV. Mr Naiveli has openly admitted that we were sacrificed for a long term license - this gives us strong legal grounds against Fiji TV and the 4 board members themselves- alas a 6 months license was issued. We feel for Fiji TV and its employees, they are all scared and worried about their jobs. This spirit of fear has to stop NOW! We are now in democracy. The 4 Fiji TV( FHL) board members only were called to the meeting at FHL on Monday, 14 Dec and they all voted that we be removed- shame on you all and I pray that you are not denied Natural Justice and Procedural fairness - we were denied. God have mercy on you all. It is my request that FHL pays out the remaining term of my contract- 21 months, shortfall of my pay and my bonus. We have been innocently sacrificed for something that we were totally innocent of. Fareed has all the emails in this issue- if you would like,we can email the same to you all upon request.

2) FHL board must and immediately seek independent legal advise against Nouzab Fareed. He is the CEO of a Taukei institution which is publicly listed  and his entire conduct reeks of unethical, immoral and illegal activities. He cannot hold this position in this institution. Do not use Lateef and Lateef- they have given  the wrong advise on our removal. Use a law firm that has strong employment law background- Munro Leys, Siwaitibau and Sloan, Chen Bunn Young and Associates, etc to give you all advise on Fareed's employment.

3) The legal fees from Lateef and Lateef which Fareed sought on his own without Fiji TV board should be paid by Fareed or FHL. Fiji TV should not be penalized for this. The bill was a little over $13,000.00.

4) Company Secretaries- this position (globally and locally) are normally held by Chartered accountants and Lawyers who have the depth and experience in board matters. They merely do not take notes- they are part of the board and advise the board as and when required. Again, I stand by my statement that Fareed uses people and sometimes appoints them to positions and sets them up for failure. Serai Roxburgh is an excellent Human Resource personnel, but my professional opinion, she is not competent to hold this position. I say this with the utmost honesty because a person in this position is the first line of defense/protector to the Board and its members. If the first line of defense is breached, it then exposes everyone else to attacks, failures and lawsuits.  You need a competent person in this position that not only protects the board, but also protects "themselves" as well. There are still improper procedures on board matters at Fiji TV (going on now) wherein the legal board composition is not met as per the Fiji TV articles - any decisions are null and void and subject to legal proceedings. Fiji TV board members need to protect themselves.

5) Given the involvement of the 4 FHL members on Fiji TV board- they should do the honorable thing and resign immediately and also from FHL board. The principles of Good Governance, accountability and transparency must be adhered too at all times. Again, seek legal independent legal advise (FHL board). Fiji TV and FHL are both public listed companies and those in positions of authority must govern with integrity at all times.

6) Tevita Gonelevu to resume his duties as CEO Fiji TV. Given the manner in which he was remove, a fresh new ethical FHL board members sit at Fiji TV. If he is not given this position- pay the shortfall of his pay and the remainder of his contract.

7) Fareed had snitches and Judases inside Fiji TV. He has revealed 2 names to me in an email. There is truly no honor amongst thieves. However, we believe that there are other Judases who were directly feeding AG with lies and inaccurate information for their own self interest and gain - we know who they are. They must be removed provided proper disciplinary process is adhered too.

Conclusion

We bear no personal grudges against anyone, we are driven by Justice by and not Vengeance. Please forgive us if we have done wrong to any of you, we also forgive you all and humbly seek that you forgive us as well.

If one of you is dealt in the same manner, I would fight for you to prove your integrity and innocence. I am blessed that I am a lawyer with a wealth of experience. The Courtroom is my playground and I play quite well.

We have forgiven those that did this injustice to us but rest assured we will keep fighting for the TRUTH.

I can be contacted via email or for any queries to the above.
You all have a blessed day.
Vinaka vakalevu
Tanya Waqanika.
pS- I do not have Mr Kurusiga's email- can this be forward to him please. Vinaka.

Fijileaks Editor: We have not been able to get comments from Fareed or Khaiyum.

23 Comments

ROUNDING UP ON THE FIJI SUN: Veteran Fiji Journalist Dennis Rounds reminds another from the same era - Nemani Delaibaitiki - to get his facts right and to practice the art of TRUE JOURNALISM as it was in the past!

29/1/2015

15 Comments

"It is my firm belief that newspapers not only serve to inform the public but also act as a “Reference” for historical research. It, therefore, is incumbent on me to set the facts straight rather than let lie what, to me, is becoming slewed and agenda-driven reporting." Rounds to Fiji Sun
Fijileaks: 'Journalism is the first draft of history'

Refusing to throw in the towel in fight for truth;
ROUNDS: Journalist in the 1980s (left) and now (right)

28 February, 2015
The Editor
Fiji Sun
SUVA
Dear Sir/Madam,

Allow me to respond to your front page article “Aussies Snubbed? ” of 28 February 2015 and specifically to references to me on Page 3.

It is my firm belief that newspapers not only serve to inform the public but also act as a “Reference” for historical research.

It, therefore, is incumbent on me to set the facts straight rather than let lie what, to me, is becoming slewed and agenda-driven reporting.

Fact One: During my tenure with the Australian High Commission, I held the position of Public Affairs Officer with the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT). That, for those like the article’s author who may not be able to fathom the difference, is quite separate to the position of “Communications Specialist” which was how the author of the article described me.

Fact Two: Ms Merewalesi Nailatikau was not my successor. She was Senior Communications Manager for the then AusAID and continued in that capacity when the two Australian departments merged into a single entity. Let me assure the author concerned that Ms Nailatikau is an intelligent and professionally trained individual with the relevant accompanying tertiary qualifications. To insinuate that her personal life might influence her professional status is, if I may offer an opinion, both demeaning of a very intelligent young woman and degrading to professional women and women in general.

Fact Three: I did not “retire” as your author suggests. I opted to take a redundancy package for personal reasons one of which was to re-enter mainstream media reporting in an attempt to bring back some respect and credibility to the profession. In that regard that is the only “agenda” some might wish to accuse me of.

Fact Four: Opinions I expressed (and continue to express) on social media have been both “negative’, and where relevant “positive”, of the Bainimarama Government. Those postings, while employed by the High Commission, were duly prefaced with constant reminders that I was commenting in my capacity as a citizen of Fiji and not as an employee of the Australian Government. Might I say that I am grateful to my former employer for being able to distinguish between my job description and duty statement and my right, as a Fiji citizen, to free speech. It is abundantly clear that some media personnel are obsessed with the childish notion that anyone who offers an opinion that may be critical of the Bainimarama Government is “anti-Bainimarama Government” and even “anti-Fiji”. I make no apologies for pointing out government shortcomings and I am of the opinion that professional journalists, by the very “nature” of their work, are expected to do likewise.

By way of further explanation, my postings on social media questioned the implications and functionality of the Media Industry Development Decree and the Television (Cross Carriage of Designated Events) Decree. Should your author be brave enough to distance himself from what I perceive to be an agenda-driven comfort zone he might admit that both Decrees are now being questioned with suggestions they may be amended or “fine-tuned” to better meet the “realities” of the media profession. And should he have a memory lapse, it’s worth mentioning that the whole of Fiji was, a couple of months back, made painfully aware of the shortcoming in the Media (Cross Carriage) Decree.

Yours sincerely,
Dennis Rounds

HALLELUJAH TO FIJI FIRST PARTY WIN IN THE SEPTEMBER ELECTION

THANK GOD FIJIFIRST PARTY WON: Fiji Sun's Nemani Delaibatiki (circled) joins FFP supporters to celebrate the party's win in the election

SOFT CLAWS: MIDA chairman Raj to Fiji Sun: 'It must be equally noted that any interference by MIDA in this process would ordinarily be deemed as an assault on the independence of the media by Wadan Narsey amongst others. I wish to reiterate that as much as the media is free to publish, it equally has the right not to publish. Therefore, MIDA will not treat Narsey’s letter as an exception and compel the Fiji Sun into publishing it.'

IMPRISONING RIGHT
to dissent

From: Ashwin Raj [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, 17 December 2014 4:12 p.m.
To: Peter Lomas; [email protected]; Fred Wesley
Cc: Soko Vakacegu
Subject: RE: Response to MIDA on Wadan Narsey complaint

Dear Mr. Lomas,

I acknowledge receipt of Fiji Sun’s response to Wadan Narsey’s official complaint to MIDA.

I note that following his complaint, Narsey’s letter about transparency and appointments processes at USP was subsequently published by The Fiji Times. This was a decision of The Fiji Times.

I wish to reiterate that as much as the media is free to publish, it equally has the right not to publish.

It must be equally noted that any interference by MIDA in this process would ordinarily be deemed as an assault on the independence of the media by Wadan Narsey amongst others.

Therefore, MIDA will not treat Narsey’s letter as an exception and compel the Fiji Sun into publishing it.

The matter is now closed.

Ashwin Raj
Chair, MIDA

Fijileaks Editor: After receiving a cc'd copy of the letter to Lomas, Narsey wrote to Raj but he refused to reply:
https://narseyonfiji.wordpress.com/2014/12/21/is-mida-an-oxymoron-letter-to-mida-chairman-and-media-editors-21-dec-2014/

Fijileaks to RAJ: You must resign over Charlie Hebdo killings comment!
"The killing of Charlie Hebdo journalists result of unfettered Freedom of Speech" - Raj on Fiji TV, in contrast to solidarity shown by many in Fiji:

15 Comments

TWISTED LOGIC: MIDA chairman says Media Decree must be in place to counter lies, hate etc peddled by FIJILEAKS; we gave the "Rottweiler" chance to tell the world if HE WAS INSIDE A POLICE CELL - No Reply!

28/1/2015

22 Comments

Fijileaks to Raj: RESIGN AS MIDA CHAIRMAN FOR SUGGESTING THAT GUNNED DOWN PARIS JOURNALISTS WERE VICTIMS OF UNFETTERED FREE SPEECH; YOU SHOULD BE BANNED FOR LIFE FROM ENTERING FRANCE and the FRENCH EMBASSY IN FIJI!

Six of the Charlie Hebdo staff killed in attack are pictured together in this photo, taken in 2000. Circled top from left is Philippe Honore, Georges Wolinski, Bernard Maris and Jean Cabut. Below them on the stairs, from left, is editor Stephane Charbonnier and cartoonist Bernard ‘Tignous’ Verlhac

Tragic: A desk is still covered with the day's work, along with empty water bottles and a coffee mug, inside the offices of Charlie Hebdo - while underneath the chair there is a pool of blood

Political cartoonist Dave Brown's take on the Paris attack for the British newspaper The Independent; in response to the Charlie Hebdo killings depicts the Eiffel Tower, stylised as a fountain pen, piercing a lone jihadist at its tip.

From The Independent front page. Cartoonist Dave Brown: "I wanted my response to be true to the spirit of Charlie Hebdo. I knew they’d want the magazine to carry on, so it had to be a gesture of defiance. So I thought: I've literally got to draw a gesture. Hence the hand rising out of the newspaper."

ABOMINABLE COMPARISONS: Raj tells Fiji TV unregulated FREE SPEECH spawned the tragedy in Paris - killing of Charlie Hebdo journalists - and went on to say just look at the unregulated Fijileaks containing factual inaccuracies, which the educated are actively participating in, and reading without any restraint! Well, we wrote to him, asking him to tell us if it was true that he was being held in a police cell at
the Samabula Police Station!

He did not REPLY but was happy to pass the correspondence - his side of the story which he gave to Police Commissioner to - guess which newspaper - YES, his favourite pro-regime FIJI SUN, exposing that HE IS NOT A NEUTRAL ARBITER IN POLICING THE PRESS, notably FIJI SUN:

CONTROL FREAK: He wants media decree to stay so that he can be in control and on TV! If his abominable statement linking media decree in Fiji to the Paris shooting dead of cartoonists is anything to go by, no wonder our regular Fijileaks cartoonist has to draw under a fake name!

The regime lapdog, eager to please his masters as always, shouldn't be allowed off the leash on TV with his tongue lolling like that. He accuses Fijileaks of publishing unsubstantiated allegations. For his information and guidance, Fijileaks does not publish allegations. It publishes facts supported by statements and documentation and that's why this lickspittle hates us so much. After all a dictatorship can't tolerate people reading the truth, now can it? No matter what he might asseverate, our reports are factual. So come on, Mr Chamcha, point to one unsubstantiated allegation. We and our thousands of readers are waiting!

Peter Waqavonovono <[email protected]> 28/12/2014

to Ashwin, nemani.delaiba.,

Media Industry Development Authority

Suva

RE: Person of the Year Article (27/12/14) FIJISUN

I write to make a complaint on an article by Jyoti Phatibha in the FijiSun newspaper on the 27 December 2014 under the title Person of the Year.

I am most concerned with Ms Pratibha's decision to attack SODELPA, carrying inaccuracies into the hands of the papers readers. In claiming the Party was resoundingly defeated at the polls, that the party played the divisive race card and whilst falling short of campaigning for Fiji First, that SODELPA's policy's were in no way a contrast to Bainimarama's platform for delivering Economic, Security, Equality and Service to the people of Fiji.

This is a abuse of the newspapers privileges and a clear sign that people like Pratibha can-not be trusted to write neutral, factual and non personal articles, which are journalistic principles I thought guided your newspaper.

Where is the Proof that SODELPA played divisive racial politics in the lead up to the September 2014 General Elections? Where is the proof that SODELPA was canceled out in the national vote or resoundingly defeated and are not represented in Parliament?. Where is the proof that SODELPA via their manifesto and historic democratic governance since 2001 as SDL could not provide a platform for delivering Economic, Security, Equality and Service to the people of Fiji?

Fiji Sun has deliberately produced an article that is not factual and littered with one persons controversial ideas presented as attribution.

I personally think that the Fiji Sun, is fast bordering on embarrassment to Fiji's mainstream media and Ms Pratibha's lack of practice of Journalistic Ethics is a concern, and it seems very likely that Ms Pratibha and the Fiji Sun are seeking to distort facts, create animosity and rekindle racial slurs with it's constant hate reporting on anything political other then FIJI FIRST or Frank Bainimarama.

On the 23rd September 2014, I wrote to the Media Industry Development Authority and the Fiji Sun to complain about an article written by Ms Pratibha about me; where she demanded that I as the SODELPA Youth President should be 'cleaned out' of the Party. She also declared to the Nation that I should Shave and buy myself a deodorant. Since then, no retraction or apology has been issued.

Ms Pratibha also complained to The International Federation of Journalists regarding a story she had fabricated involving my Facebook posts - on the 10/09/14, the Federation reported that Ms Pratibha received threats and was a target of an assault after I posted a comment about her on my Facebook page. I hope Ms Pratibha has evidence that I have written so passionately about her (like she has about me) because uptill now, I have tried not to comment on her unprofessional journalistic skills. I also cannot can-not be blamed for all the racist comments and feelings generated by her articles and hate reporting. These are the fruits of the newspapers inaction over hate reporting and the distortion of the true feelings of indigenous people and our leaders.

As a citizen of Fiji, and a reader of the Fiji Sun, I demand change in the Newspaper's reporting immediately.

I also demand that Ms Pratibha is disciplined for her racist, biased and hate reporting.

I also demand that Fiji Sun perform a background check on the facts calling SODELPA a racist Party; and immediately accept that Indigenous Rights is Human Rights, and the rights of Fiji's Indigenous population to self determination and safeguarding under International Human Rights Standards is not Racist but an exercise of our responsibilities as Indigenous People.

Where is Media Freedom when parcels of the Media act irresponsibly and act to promote one party rather then present a unbiased and factual approach to it's reporting

Vinaka

Peter Waqavonovono

Peter Waqavonovono <[email protected]> 28/12/2014
to Ashwin, nemani.delaiba., Mr Raj

I thank you for your swift response, I also ask, why are you waiting for FijiSun to respond? Does MIDA not have the resources or the time to investigate these serious claims immediately and make a suitable discernment on the matter
I draw your attention to a complaint made to MIDA on the airing of an advice to Frank Bainimarama by a member of the Tailevu Provincial Council in April 2014. In a statement to Fiji Citizens, you said “Masquerading itself as an exercise in freedom of expression, political discourse has, in fact, descended to unabashed racial vilification and in some instances its content is tantamount to injurious or hate speech,” and in part without Fiji TV's official response did you not pass judgment.
Did MIDA wait for the official response of Radio New Zealand and Al Jazeera before claiming the organisations were guilty of biased, unbalanced and inaccurate reporting.
The reason why I think, seeking Fiji Sun's official response is nonsensical, is captured in my initial complaint. Since the 23rd September 2014, I have yet to receive a official response from Fiji Sun and thus you have yet to 'adjudicate' on that matter.
Mr Raj, I ask that you urgently look into this matter as Fiji Sun seems to be running wild on fabricating news and creating much racial tensions by attacking Indigenous Rights, Leaders and Consciousness
Mr Raj, I repost my demands herein
As a citizen of Fiji, and a reader of the Fiji Sun, I demand change in the Newspaper's reporting immediately.
I also demand that Ms Pratibha is disciplined for her racist, biased and hate reporting.
I also demand that Fiji Sun perform a background check on the facts calling SODELPA a racist Party; and immediately accept that Indigenous Rights is Human Rights, and the rights of Fiji's Indigenous population to self determination and safeguarding under International Human Rights Standards is not Racist but an exercise of our responsibilities as Indigenous People.
Where is Media Freedom when parcels of the Media act irresponsibly and act to promote one party rather then present a unbiased and factual approach to it's reporting

On Sun, Dec 28, 2014 at 8:58 PM, Ashwin Raj <[email protected]> wrote:
Dear Mr. Waqavonovono,
MIDA will treat this as an official complaint and will seek Fiji Sun's official response before it convenes to adjudicate on the matter.
Ashwin Raj Chair, MIDA.

22 Comments

It's Ken Clark v Sharon Smith-Johns in the battle to save/destroy Fiji TV

27/1/2015

7 Comments

By VICTOR LAL
Fijileaks Investigation Team

It’s been confirmed by a source close to the accountancy firm PWC, that the popular and well-respected former Fiji TV ceo Ken Clark has applied for his old job – putting him on a collision course with Sharon ‘chief censor’ Smith-Johns, the former Ministry of Information permanent secretary, who, it is also understood, has applied.

The Board of Fiji TV is scheduled to meet Thursday, January 29, where the CEO position is top of a very crowded agenda.

The business community is watching the decision closely to see to what extent the board of a private company is robust enough to select the candidate who is best for the business and shareholders (Ken Clark) or be brow-beaten into selecting the person who is best for the interests of the Bainimarama government (Sharon Smith-Johns) who wants to see a weakened Fiji TV. It was the pre-election Bainimarama regime that signed up to be the guarantor of almost $25m worth of loans and interest from the Fiji Development Bank and ANZ to build the white elephant that is FBC TV, while passing a series of decrees that advantaged FBC TV over Fiji TV.

The way that the job advert has been worded appears to open the door to Smith-Johns who has no management experience in either radio or television. There is no specific reference to experience required in the broadcast industry – just experience and knowledge of the ‘media industry’ and ‘communications industry’. She was a regional print ad and online ad saleswoman for Fairfax newspapers before moving to Fiji to head the Connect internet company.

Smith-Johns would be the preferred candidate of the Attorney-General Aiyaz Khaiyum who single-handledly precipitated the Fiji TV leadership crisis in early December by taking on the International Rugby Board/World Rugby in order to help the government-owned and heavily indebted FBC TV – run by his brother Riyaz - access to the popular 7s Series TV coverage. The rights to this were held on an exclusive basis by Fiji TV.

In a series of confidential emails, texts and documents at the time of the World Rugby 7s coverage crisis, revealed exclusively by Fiji Leaks, Khaiyum was clearly shown to be putting intolerable pressure on the majority owners of Fiji TV, Fijian Holdings, using the carrot of a 12-year extension to their broadcast licence.

Currently Fiji TV has a 6-month licence, the extension of which – bizarrely - is in the sole gift of Khaiyum, even though he is brother to the CEO of Fiji TV’s main competitor, FBC TV, whose borrowings the government are underwriting.

The emails, texts and documents directly contradicted the assurances that Khaiyum gave in parliament, in writing to World Rugby and in press conferences that he, as Attorney-General and head of the Department of Information, would not and could not interfere with the decisions of a privately-held company. Khaiyum said that Fiji TV had volunteered that they were in favour of sharing the broadcast rights and no pressure was placed on them – subsequently shown to be manifestly untrue.

The thought that Smith-Johns might be appointed will send a chill through many bones.

In a 2010 profile by The Australian, Smith-Johns accepted she was the regime’s ‘chief censor’ and that when working for Telecom Fiji subsidiary Connect she had blocked the Fiji-based ISPs of pro-democracy blogs at the request of the military government.

Smith-Johns has been without a significant position since stepping down as Permanent-Secretary in October when, in a surprise move, Information lost its ministerial status and became a department under Khaiyum. In a series of resignation air-kisses Smith-Johns was described as a ‘trusted colleague’ by Frank Bainimarama while Khaiyum credited her with ‘playing(ing) an important role in the transition to our new democracy’.

But by any analysis the job should be Ken Clark’s, which is why the Board’s decision is being so closely watched by the wider business community.

After a rocky start in 1999 (then prime minister Mahendra Chaudhry threatened to deny a work permit for Clark) he successfully steered Fiji TV through two coups to immense profitability and industry acclaim through a programme of careful investment, strategic thinking and overseas expansion into PNG and the Solomon Islands.

He was given the Order of Fiji on his retirement in 2011 for services to broadcasting with the nomination lauding his ‘high standards of professionalism and the best standards of ethics and good corporate governance’.

The CV of Clark’s, submitted by PWC, shows that since 2011 he has worked as a consultant to broadcasters as far afield as Kazakhstan but he continues to reside in Fiji and recently taught a semester at the University of the South Pacific.

In the aftermath of the fiasco of Khaiyum’s broadcast land grab – which saw no TV coverage of the Dubai 7s – Fiji TV’s chairman Padam Lala and deputy chairman resigned, and the CEO Tevita Gonelevu and chief content officer Tanya Waqanika were sacked.

In subsequent press statements Gonelevu and Waqanika have said the actions of the majority-owner Fijian Holdings, and FHL’s Sri Lankan CEO Nouzab Fareed in particular, resulted in the pair of them being coerced into breaching their fiduciary duties to only act in the best interests of Fiji TV’s shareholders.

7 Comments

STOP HIM FICAC: FNU's Director Finance and HR, Narendra Prasad, cons acting VC Ian Rouse to give him LEAVE for unlimited time - THIS man must be ARRESTED before he flees Fiji and from FICAC's clutches!

27/1/2015

18 Comments

Fijileaks: Why Narendra Prasad, a New Zealand citizen, has not been placed on the Travel Ban List by FICAC and FNU informed not to grant him a lengthy leave until investigations are completed against him? Prasad's buddy & former VC Ganesh Chand was interviewed recently under caution by FICAC, so this Chand side-kick knows he is NEXT!
"On my work permit application Prasad mentioned that FNU interviewed 18 candidates for my role. This is false." Andrew Moti Singh to FICAC

Ms Tave Tofinga to be acting Director of Finance at FNU:

Education Minister and FNU Chancellor Mahendra Reddy should also be taken in for questioning, for Reddy also implicated in FICAC Report; he tried to interfere with FICAC probe against FNU; Prasad must not be allowed to join other NZ citizens & regime supporters (John Samy, John Prasad and others) who flooded into the country after the coup and later fled their former Fiji when caught in scandals:

The former FNU's Finance Manager Projects Andrew Moti Singh's complaints against Chand/Prasad to FICAC, and a copy to Bainimarama:

More from Andrew Singh to FICAC - re Narendra Prasad

Prasad’s holding of 2 positions at FNU on consultancy basis is clear conflict of interest and conducive to corrupt practices

As mentioned in the background Prasad is a NZ citizen and has been holding dual positions at FNU – Director Finance and Director HR. He is paid an expatriate salary and is classified as a “consultant”. This raises serious issues.

First, the holding of two roles is a clear conflict of interest. This is patently self-evident from his handling of my case. FICAC will notice that when he complained against me to Chand and sought my summary dismissal, Chand appointed the employment relations manager to investigate Prasad’s complaint. However, the employment relations manager (a Sahadeo Singh) is Prasad’s subordinate and clearly beholden to him. Despite being fully aware of this fact, both Chand and Prasad were content with Sahadeo (a former labour officer who was sacked by Ministry of Labour for unknown reasons) to investigate Prasad’s complaint. It was only when I challenged Sahadeo’s independence and impartiality that Chand removed him and replaced with his house trained poodle – Mikali, despite my objection.

Other staff in the finance section who have legitimate grievance against Prasad cannot complain against him given his dual role. Those who complain have their cases dealt with by Sahadeo who simply does not have the courage to uphold complaints against Prasad.

Second, Prasad does not have the required qualifications to properly and diligently discharge the accountabilities of both the roles. The Director of Finance position requires postgraduate qualifications in accounting, finance or business and holding full membership of a professional accounting body like the Fiji Institute of Accountants or the overseas CPA qualification. My inquiries reveal that Mr Prasad does not hold any such membership, and never held one throughout his entire career. Professional membership is not only a hallmark of professional competence, but a bulwark against corruption or unscrupulous conduct. This is pure common sense.

In order to disguise his incompetence, Prasad has created various managerial positions in both finance and HR departments and uses these managers to do his job and take credit for the tasks. This will be revealed during FICAC investigations. Again Anand plays a major role in this scam.

Thirdly, Prasad has been in his dual role for more than 3 years. This in itself raises serious questions. The Immigration Department’s rule is that an expatriate is only allowed a 3 year work permit by which time the expatriate must have trained a local to fill the role. Further, there must be exceptional circumstances for the renewal of the work permit for more than 3 years.

My inquiries reveal that there is no reason why locals cannot fill Prasad’s dual role. Obviously he does not have any exceptional skills, knowledge or expertise in both finance and human resources. Most of the time he spends in NZ on medical treatment and this raises serious questions why a sickly expatriate person (having four heart bypass at FNU’s expense) is on FNU’s payroll as a consultant. In addition, Prasad has recently been appointed Housing Authority’s (HA) chairman and it beggars belief how an incompetent person like him can hold three roles at the expense of the public purse. I assume this can only happen in Fiji.

I believe that the only reason Prasad still occupies his dual role is due to his close and personal association with Chand. Both have been university mates and worked together during the yesteryears. It is also public knowledge that Chand appointed Prasad as HA’s CEO when Chand was the Minister for Housing.

FICAC must liaise with the Immigration Department as part of its investigation to delve into this issue. It may well be that the Department has been duped into believing that Prasad is irreplaceable. I make this comment because in my case, Prasad advised the Department that I was the successful candidate for the MFP position when as already mentioned, I had not even formally applied for the role. On my work permit application Prasad mentioned that FNU interviewed 18 candidates for my role. This is false.

FICAC must also investigate various other overseas citizens working at FNU under work permits as I have reasons to believe that locals can fill the positions with proper training and development by FNU. The first priority for jobs at FNU must be for Fiji citizens. Again this is pure common sense.

It is my claim that all these matters demonstrate abuse of office and constitute a breach of s139 of the Crimes Decree. Again the conduct of Prasad and Chand are arbitrary acts that is prejudicial to the FNU and the local workforce. FNU is being financially disadvantaged by the conduct of an expatriate who is clearly promoting his self-interest. This must stop immediately. Prasad must be removed from his role as the HR Director. His dual role is a conducive to corrupt practices flourishing at the FNU in cohort with Chand.

http://www.fijileaks.com/home/andrew-moti-singh-the-principal-complainant-to-ficac-reveals-all

http://www.fijileaks.com/home/fnugate-now-it-emerges-that-ganesh-chand-had-forged-professor-rouses-signature-to-appoint-a-relative-of-then-education-minister-bole-to-a-job-she-was-not-qualified-on-merit

http://www.fijileaks.com/home/fnugate-sex-attack-cover-up-chand-allegedly-blocked-police-probe-and-prime-ministers-office-looked-the-other-way-for-suspect-was-brother-of-chand-at-fnu-labasa-camp

Prasad

This separate FICAC investigation (below) was conducted and completed in 2012

From: Fiji Leaks [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Tuesday, November 25, 2014 7:55 PM
To: Director Human Resources
Subject: FICAC Investigation, Date: 28th June, 2012 to 8th August, 2012.

Bula Narendra

Would you like to comment on the following

Editor, Fijileaks:

FICAC INVESTIGATION REPORT 2012:

5.1.Director Human Resource and Finance.

Mr. Narendra Prasad, former Housing Authority CEO (Dr Ganesh’s acquaintance and appointee as CEO Housing Authority) a New Zealand citizen and close friend of Dr. Ganesh was appointed as Director Finance and Human Resources of FNU. Mr. Narendra Prasad’s appointment needs investigation as there are a lot of able qualified people for the two positions he is holding. Issuance of work permit to Mr. Narendra Prasad has to be scrutinised to establish the merit.

Remuneration

Mr. Narendra Prasad is on a salary of F$150,000.00. Was there a Higher Salaries Commission approval sought? No. F$150,000.00 would have to to be approved by HSC. The two positions are inter related and in this case it is conflicting for one individual to hold two positions. However, it has a micro chip attached for the two positions which simply means that it would make decision making easier on non ethical basis. It is evident that integrity and transparency ethics have been compromised. Other perks attached to these two positions will have to be tabulated to justify payment. It must also be determined as to whether he is medically fit for employment or other wise, establish any health related payments which is outside FNU HR Policy.

5.1.1Medical Evacuation

In accordance with the FNU HR policy, inpatient sick leave is only 30 days per calendar year.

Quote Policy Number 19 Sec 4 (Sub Section 4.1) – Any employee requires to undergo treatment as an inpatient in hospital or required by a registered Medical Practitioner appointed by the university to be confined at home on grounds of illness, is entitled to a period of up to 30 consecutive days of sick leave on full salary on any one year of service”Unquote.

In March, 2011, Mr Narendra Prasad has been paid F$30,000.00 for medical treatment in New Zealand and received salary for normal hours when in fact, he should have been paid as an inpatient.

Mr. Prasad was again paid $30,000.00 for medical treatment in New Zealand in June, 2011 and this time his leave was treated as InPatient Sickleave. Further investigations would reveal whether or not a medical review board is in place to determine medical evacuation for employees of FNU.

There is no medical insurance cover in place for employees of FNU and in all such cases taxpayers fund is being abused to fund medical treatment of employees of FNU. Mr. Prasad, a New Zealand resident, had been referred to New Zealand hospital, however, all other employees, have been refereed to India for treatment.

Findings:

a) Mr. Narendra Prasad was not treated as an inpatient for the first payment of $30,000.00. He was paid normal hours salary.

b) Mr. Narendra Prasad was paid a second payment of F$30,000.00 within a span of three months for medical treatment in New Zealand.

c) As a Director for Finance and HR, he would have been the best person to understand the HR/Finance Policy.

d) Accordingly, he has abused his authority insofar as the double payment of $30,000.00 for medical treatment is concerned.

Basically, Prasad wanted Fijileaks to get a comment from guess who- Yes, Ganesh Chand- a principal suspect in FICAC's long-dragging out investigation into alleged fraud, corruption, nepotism etc etc etc!

ALL too familiar ties: Narendra Prasad, like John Samy and John Prasad before him, cosy up to Bainimarama to hide their alleged corrupt secrets

John Prasad - his CV before he fled Fiji

FNU KAMA SUTRA CLUB: Narendra Prasad was allegedly caught red-handed by his wife, with his pants down at a University of the South Pacific party bash!

18 Comments

TEACHING TREASON? Major Ana Rokomokoti, the former coup lawyer and decree enforcer, joins FNU to teach Public Law - PL is set of legal principles which govern exercise of power by public bodies!

26/1/2015

19 Comments

FIJI: THE RULE OF LAW LOST by UK Law Society Charity, January 2012

From Fiji Law Society to Interim Regime's then Lickspittle and Chief Registrar of the Fiji High Court, Major Ana Rokomokoti, 2009, who had forcibly entered the Fiji Law Society Office and removed files and records as regime took over all lawyer regulatory functions:

“I have reason to believe that this convention will be contrary to the provisions of the Public Emergency Regulations 2009" - Commissioner of Police; but see cartoon below of Fiji's then Interim Attorney-General secretly registering FFP domain name and e-mail account, contrary to his own PER 2009

Fijileaks Editor: We will resume the publication of extracts from Andrew Singh's documents to FICAC regarding the Fiji National University

19 Comments

REDDY SEXGATE: Education Minister Reddy sends his Gestapo-like CID Investigators to question residents of Sokoca, accusing them of leaking to Fijileaks information about his alleged affair with tax driver's wife!

25/1/2015

15 Comments

KAMA SUTRA HIGH FEVER: We have a file from PSC against another Indo-Fijian who was allegedly caught red-handed having sex with a top Government civil servant in his office; PSC is yet to act, a year on!

BLACKMAIL: Reddy and His Stooges in Education Ministry also threaten those who featured in Fijileaks with punitive sanctions!

He is accused of having extra-marital affair with wife of taxi driver and later employing the wife as tea lady at the Commerce Commission, and giving the irate husband job at FNU; Damage limitation Control: We are no fools Reddy with all your recent pronouncements in the media regarding education and teacher issues! And reply to us that FNU wrote off your debt to enable you to stand as FFP election candidate!
Reddy is also not responding to questions from Fijileaks: Who was the young woman with you, Dr Reddy, who allegedly went into a Levuka hotel room with you last December?

SEXGATE: The Minister, the Taxi Driver Husband and the wife-TEA LADY

15 Comments

NELSON MANDELA: 'There is no easy walk to freedom'; 'Almost all things are by the law purged with blood; and without shedding of blood is no remission' (Leviticus 17:11)

25/1/2015

1 Comment

A female demonstrator was killed in clashes with Egyptian police during a protest in central Cairo today on the eve of the anniversary of the 2011 uprising against former military dictator Hosni Mubarak. A health ministry spokesman said Shaima al-Sabbagh died of birdshot wounds, which fellow protesters said were fired by police to disperse the march. Prime Minister Ibrahim Mahlab said al-Sabbagh's death was being investigated and vowed that 'whoever committed a mistake will be punished, whoever he may be.'

1 Comment

FACED OUT? Fijileaks receives torrent of requests to find out what has happened to Rajendra Chaudhry's Facebook page; our e-mail inquiries to him remain unanswered-why he has 'dropped off the face of the earth'?

25/1/2015

UPDATE: Chaudhry says he is back online - on his FACEBOOK!

BEHIND THE TALL FACADE: Tappoos boast they have bought out FNFP Investment Ltd's 51% share in Penina and taken over $37m commercial loan - was there any valuation and tender, and what about the lease deal?

23/1/2015

9 Comments

Fijileaks Editor: In 2010, VICTOR LAL wrote a series of articles on the Penina-Tappoocity deal in the pro-democracy website Coupfourpointfive, based on the secret Ernst and Young Report of 2007 titled "FNFP Special Investigation - Internal Report". To date, Aiyaz Khaiyum has not made the Report public. We are of the opinion that the contents of this Report should be re-produced for our readers and for all those interested in the Tappoocity deal between FNFP and the Tappoos!

By VICTOR LAL
The FNFP Board had on 18 October 2004 approved the pursuit of the FNPF/Tappoo Investment through FNPF Investment Board (FIL). Minutes of an FIL meeting held on 16 December 2004 indicate the design of the Project was flagged at this meeting. It was proposed that the Project would compose an 8storey building with retail space (three floors), a cinema, food court (one floor), offices (two floors) and a car park (two floors).

It was estimated according to the Board Minutes that the Project would cost a total of $23-$25 million. This was a change to the original project as described in the MOU, which described only six or seven story complex. Pursuant to the Joint Venture arrangement, land which was owned by Tappoos, located adjacent to the FNPF site, would be simultaneously redeveloped, with the aim of utilising the whole block for development.

On 9 March 2005, a Joint Venture Agreement was signed by FIL and Tappoos. Penina Ltd was incorporated on 2 May 2005. The issue capital of Penina Ltd included 30,000 shares of $1 each, of which 6,500,000 were paid up upon the incorporation of the Company.

Each shareholder contributed their respective land lots as consideration for equity in Penina Ltd, with the land valued at $6,500,000 for the purpose of this equity issue. The following individuals were members of the Board of Penina: Olota Rokovunisei and Neal Wright, representing FNPF and Kanti Tappoo and Vinod Tapoo, of Tappoos Ltd.

FNPF land was valued at $3,315,000 and Tappoos land was valued at $3,185,000 for the purpose of the equity issue, which resulted in 51% of the shares being allocated to FIL and 49% to Tappoos. Further equity comprising 4 million redeemable preference shares in Penina had been issued to the shareholders on a 51% and 49% basis in consideration of cash totalling $4million.

On 10 May 2005 Penina Ltd ratified the Joint Venture Agreement (JVA). Rokovunisei, Wright and the Tappoos were appointed as directors of the Company, and David Hanfakaga was appointed Company Secretary.

Project Cost Estimates

FNPF Board Paper No 1707 dated 23 July 2003 estimated that the Construction cost of the development would be $14 million, with a total development cost of $20 million. It is not known upon what information or assumption that estimate was based, as pointed out by Ernst & Young auditors.

By December 2004 the total project cost range was estimated at $20-25million. The JVA, signed in March 2005, noted that the total project building cost, including consultants, was estimated at $30 million. When the land cost was included the total project was set by the Board of Penina at a board meeting held on 10 May 2005.

A document titled “Board Paper No (no number) Penina-Tappoo City project – Request for Approval of revised Construction Budget from $25m to $38.6m”. In October 2005, FIL estimated the total cost of the project at $42,500,000, which included the estimated construction and contractor cost of $36m (including interest capitalization of $2million) and the land cost of $6,500,000. In mid-2006, after the construction contract had been awarded, the Project cost estimate was revised upwards, to approximately $44 million.

Financing the Project

On 26 September 2005, Pradeep Patel of Deloitte (now charged with reviewing the FNPF’s controversial Natadola Project) provided advice to Penina Ltd regarding the financing of the Project in a document titled “Financial Projections”, in which he proposed that Penina issue equity totalling $10,5000,000 and obtain a term loan of $31,300,000 from FNPF.

Various financial projection scenarios were attached to this document, based upon four different proposed funding scenarios. In the FIL Board Paper No 1948 dated 30 November 2005, Penina Ltd’s request for a loan of $32,000,000, which included the estimated cost of building construction, consultant’s fees and capitalised interest during the construction period, was described.

The Board of FNPF approved a loan of $32 million to Penina on a twenty year term, fixed at 6% for the first 12 years with repayments based on a loan authorization over 20 years, after which the remaining balance will be refinanced or rolled over. On 6 January 2006, FNFP wrote to Penina providing notice that the Board of the FNPF had approved the loan for $32million. Note that after the construction contract was awarded the total project had increased and hence a loan extension was sought by Penina Ltd.

Penina Ltd and FNFP Project Revenue

In relation to the expected or projected revenue of Penina in this development, the JVA at section 9.5(c) provided that, “The tenant shall pay to the owner rent in amount of 8% of the Project Cost fixed for a period of 15 years. The Agreement defined Project Cost as the total construction cost of the building including the consultant’s costs and including the cost of the building.”

In Patel of Deloitte’s ‘Financial Projections’ for Penina dated 26 September 2005, he provided Cashflow Forecasts, project Forecasts and Balance Sheet Forecasts for the Project, which incorporated rent payable by Tappoos to FNPF calculated at 8% of the estimated cost of $39,300,000, set for a fixed term of 15 years (increasing to 10% of the estimated construction cost for the balance of the 10 year contract term).

Oh this basis, Pradeep Patel estimated that the rental income to Penina from the Project would be approximately $3,100,000 per annum for the first 15 years after the completion of the Project, with the next profit of approximately $2,900,000 prior to loan repayments to FIL.

In relation to revenue, FIL would generate from the project, a document titled “Return on Investment from TappooCity Project to FIL” dated 16 May 2005 (author unknown) noted that returns to FIL on this Project would include interest at 5.6% from the loan to Penina; receipt of 1% of the profits form the Joint Venture Company and the increased capital appreciation of building.

Penalty Payments

Another short-term potential source of income for FIL from this Project was a penalty of $40,000 per month, which was payable by Tappoos to FNPF upon FNFP’s initial interpretation of the commence of this Project was delayed beyond 2005. The justification for this penalty payment arrangement was that FNFP would be losing rental income from the time that the initial tenants of the site were evicted and construction of the Project commenced until the construction was completed and the new Tenant commenced paying rent. (N.B. Construction commenced in June 2006 and was expected to be completed by December 2008. It was however not known when the previous rental tenants of the FNFP site were evicted, and hence Ernst & Young was unable to calculate the total lost rental to FNPF by entering into the Project).

It appears, according to the Report, that Tappoos disputed the basis of this penalty payment. It was noted in the FIL Board Minutes of 14 June 2005 that this penalty payment was only payable by Tappoos “if there was delay in finalizing the design concept of the building."

A number of issues arose in regards to the decision to invest in the Tappoocity Project, as described in the confidential Ernst and Young Report of 2007.

There appeared to have been a lack of due diligence on the part of Fiji National Provident Fund prior to its decision to invest in the Project, resulting in the following issues: increased construction cost, increased overall Project cost, design changes to the Project and delays to the Project.

The construction cost estimated had risen from an initial estimate of $14million to approximately $35million. Given this significant variance, and the fact that the proposed design of the structure had not changed significantly, E & Y questioned how this initial construction forecast was produced, and how much due diligence was conducted by FNFP in this regard.

No documentation on files produced to E & Y indicated that any external engineering or other relevant consultant was engaged for the purpose of providing the initial cost of the Project.

The initial construction cost estimate was significantly altered upon receipt of a Report by the Quality Surveyor for the Project in August 2005. It would appear that this Quality Surveyor’s Report should have been commissioned prior to the decision to invest in the Project, which was made in or around late 2003.

The effect of the increased construction cost was that the project was now expected to cost approximately $44million to complete, a significant increase on the initial estimate of $20miilion, and $30million when the decision was made to invest. Generally, in relation to these cost estimate increases, E & Y emphasised that the Project cost estimates had significantly increased the risk and return profile of the Project for FNPF/FIL. E & Y also noted that in 2007 that the expected completion of the project was approximately two and a half years later than initial estimates.

Valuation of the sites

On 31 March 2003 David Ragg of Property Valuation & Consultancy Services provided a market value of $3,250,000 for the FNPF site. An agreement that the market value of the Tappoos site was $3,250,000 was reached by Carl Mar and Kanti Tappoo on 29 July 2003.

A ‘kerbside’ valuation of the site for this amount appeared to have been obtained by Tappoos from Property Valuation & Consultancy Services on a date unknown, and in turn was the price Management recommended FNPF should pay for the site (when that was a component of the development plan).

FIL Board Paper No 1707 dated 19 June 2003 stated that the purchase price paid by FNPF for Tappoos property being CT Number 24623 would be its “current market valuation” of $3,250,000. On 21 July 2003, Rolle Associates provided a document describing a valuation of $3,800,000 for the Tappoo site, comprising a land value of $1,400,000 and buildings value of $2,400,000.

The sites were valued at a combined $6,500,000 for the purpose of the initial equity distribution in Penina Ltd. However, E & Y noted correspondence from Himmat Lodhia, a director of FNPF and president of the Fiji Retailers Association, to Olata Rokovunisei, then general manager of FNPF, dated 6 October 2003, in which Lodhia stated that the valuation of the land to be used for the Tappoocity Project appeared to be “biased”, based upon the fact that the properties of Tappoos and FNPF were attributed as nearly equal in value, however Tappoos' portion of land comprised 27.45% of its aggregate size (762 sq metres compared to FNPF’s 2,014 sq.metres).

On this issue, advice was received from Ragg of Property Valuation & Consultancy Services on 9 March 2003. Ragg concluded that if the equity issue in Penina Ltd was based upon the respective size and value of the land being contributed to the Joint Venture by the Joint Venture Partners, FNPF’s proportionate interest in the Joint Venture should be 65% and Tappoos 35%.

It was noted in this advice that if it was determined that equity in the Joint Venture company should be issued according to the market value of the sites, then a 50/50 equity split would be appropriate.

If this was the case, noting that no documentation had been produced to E & Y which would allow any detailed analysis or comment on the respective properties in terms of size, one issue that arose was that Tappoos received 49% of the equity of Penina Ltd, yet contributed only 27.45 of the land to build Tappoocity in Suva.

In his letter to Rokovunisei dated 6 October 2003, Lodhia had also expressed concern at some of the terms of the Joint Venture Agreement. He stated: “I have listed some of the factors that we should consider for such a project, or else we could end up in serious breach of our guidelines. As stated earlier, this could be a subject of ridicule and incompetency on our behalf as Board Members, in the public eye as well as the parliament.”

The factors listed by Lodhia that contributed to his perception that the contract terms of the Joint Venture may have favoured Tappoos included: the value attributed to the respective properties, rent payable by Tappoos as Tenant should not have been fixed at 8% of total construction cost for 15 years, outgoings should be paid by Tappoos, a proposed loan on terms of 6-8% interest was too low (the loan was in fact advanced at 6%).

Based upon interviews conducted by E & Y, it was considered by FNFP staff in 2007 that the terms of the contract entered into with Tappoos was an area of concern. Principally, a concern was expressed that fixing the rent at 8% for the Tenant for a period of 15 years was less attractive to FNPF than calculating the rent payable by the Tenant according to the current market value of the property at the date of completion.

THE CONFIDENTIAL Ernst and Young Report expressed disquiet that FNFP’s former Property Investment manager, Carl Mar, on resigning from his position, had been retained by Tappoos and FNPF subsidiaries to act as a client representative of Penina Ltd and Grand Pacific Holdings Ltd. After all, Mar had negotiated contract terms with Tappoos on behalf on FNPF’s investment arm FIL.

A file note regarding the Tappoocity Project indicated that general agreement regarding the terms of the agreement was reached on 29 July 2003 between Kanti Tappoo and Mar, including that the value attributed to Tappoos land would be its market value sum of $3,250,000 and the lease term to be 25 + 25 with first rent set at 8& of the Project cost fixed for 15 years (Document: Memorandum titled ‘FNPF/Tappoo Project – General Agreement Reached on Tuesday 29th July 2003 between Kanti Tappoo (Tappoo Group of Cos and Carl Mar (FNPF) undated).

Mar resigned from FNPF on 31 October 2006 to open his own consultancy company. He had been retained by Penina Ltd to act as a client representative and/or project manager and described his position as Client Rep/Project Manager of Penina Ltd (and GPHL).

The negotiation of the terms of Mar’s contract with Penina was delegated to Vinod Tappoo (Document: Penina Ltd Board Minutes dated 20 October 2006). E & Y understood that Mar was paid $10,000 per month for his position. Mar had also allegedly been retained by Tappoos in relation to its Lautoka project with FNPF but E & Y could not confirm it in its Report.

In the circumstances, E & Y concluded that it may have been ill-considered for FNPF to delegate or rely upon Mar to act as Project Manager and negotiate contractual terms for the Tappocity Project with Tappoos. This highlighted the need to have a better spread of commercial skills to be able to consider investment opportunities of this nature.

Appointment of Neo Fiji Ltd as construction contractor

It was stated in Clause 9 of the Joint Venture Agreement that Tappoos or a Joint Venture Company shall be eligible to tender for the construction contract of the Project, notwithstanding its role as a Joint Venture partner.

On 20 August 2003, Kanti Tappoo wrote to FNPF outlining why they should be given the construction contract without it going out to tender, which acknowledged was the normal practice by which FNPF awarded contracts for construction work. In November 2003, Tappoos expressed their interest in their subsidiary company Neo Fiji Ltd undertaking the construction of Tappoocity (Document: FNPF/Tappoo Project – Meeting with Tappoo Directors’ dated 29 &30 November 2003).

In early 2005, Neo Fiji Ltd became a fully-owned subsidiary of Tappoos for the purposes of bidding for the construction contract. Neo was awarded the contract on 25 November 2005 and commenced on site in late March 2006.

There was concern in the marketplace about this appointment, given that Neo was a fully-owned subsidiary of Tappoos. Minutes of the FNPF Investment Committee dated 30 November 2005 noted that: “Committee also was informed of the concern by some contractors in the market who regarded the tender process as a mere formality due to Tappoo Holdings association with NeoCorp, who they believe were earmarked for the project before the tender process was called. Management however assured Committee that all processes with regard to the tender were transparent and that NeoCorp was given the tender on the basis that it was the lowest.”

Tappoos resist tender process to build Tappoocity

It appeared to E & Y that any attempt to keep the process transparent and free of bias was met with resistance by Tappoo, based upon an analysis of the email exchange below.

Mar sent an email to Kanti Tappoo and Vinod Tappoo titled “Tappoos City project” on 3 October 2005 in which he noted: “I just wanted to briefly update you on the project and say that the project consultants meetings are progressing very well…The meetings so far have been held in the absence of a Tappoos rep as we want to show transparency during this stage of tendering process.”

On 5 October 2005 Vinod Tappoo replied to Mar’s e-mail in which he stated: “You will appreciate that Tappoos cannot be left out in these crucial decision making process for “transparency reasons” in view of the fact that the real conflict of interest lies not with Tappoos but with FNPF because, as you well know, the rent paid by Tappoos will be based on final total cost of the project. A cost increase, therefore, means increased rental for Tappoos and direct gain to FNPF through the JV. You may want to refer to the minutes of the last Board Meeting. Under these circumstances we trust that you will jointly make all decisions on the clear appreciation of those issues.”

Mar in turn responded by email on 5 October 2005 to Vinod Tappoo, stating: “Totally agree Vinod. It is just the Tender Phase that requires me to police carefully but I truly respect the importance of the bottom line i.e. project cost and this will naturally require Tappoos input.”

On One company file they gave their nationalities as Fiji Islanders. On another they gave their nationalities as Australians. Both of the two companies, Penina Limited and Neo Fiji Ltd, were involved in the construction of the multi-million dollar Tappoocity, a joint venture between the Fiji National Provident Fund and Tappoo Limited through Penina Investments Limited, in the heart of Suva.

In one of the earlier series, we promised to investigate those behind Neo Fiji Ltd. What began as a routine inspection of company files in the Registrar of Companies has revealed other anomalies - anomalies that are not contained in the confidential Ernst and Young Report of 2007.

Penina Ltd

Particulars of Directors and Secretaries: Kantilal Tapoo f/n Tappoo Kanji, Fiji Islander; Vinod Tappoo f/n Tappoo Kanji, Fiji Islander; Suresh Tappoo f/n Tappoo Kanji (Alternate to Kantilal Tappoo), Fiji Islander; Krishna Murti f/n Guruwaiya (Alternate to Vinod Tappoo); Fiji Islander; Avinesh Lal, Fiji Islander, representing FNFP and Howard Politiini, Fiji Islander, also representing FNPF. The Tappoos and Murti gave their postal address as c/- Tappoo Holdings Ltd, P O Box 46, Sigatoka. The Tappoo business empire was started by Tappoo Kanji in 1941.

Neo Fiji Ltd

On 28 October 2004, the following persons were listed as Directors of Neo Fiji: Suresh Tappoo f/n Tappoo Kanji, Australian Citizen, P. O. Box 1105, Nadi, Businessman; Vinod Tappoo f/n Tappoo Kanji, Australian Citizen, P. O. Box 953, Suva, Businessman; Krishna Murti f/n Gurwaiya, Australian Citizen; Dr Ronald Neo, Singapore Citizen, P. O. Box 953, Businessman; and Karen Neo, Singapore Citizen, P. O. Box 953, Businesswoman. Karen Neo was also listed as Secretary. The Particulars of Directors and Secretary were signed off by Suresh (Lal) Tappoo.

Another Return to the Registrar of Companies (ROC) showed that Ronald and Karen Neo had resigned from the company on 12 August 2005 but Murti had continued as Company Director; he was also listed as Director, Summers Industries Limited, Tappoo Limited, and Tappoo Investments Limited. As noted earlier, in early 2005, Neo Fiji Ltd became a fully-owned subsidiary of Tappoos for the purposes of bidding for the construction contract for Tappoocity. Neo was awarded the contract on 25 November 2005 and commenced on site in late March 2006.

In its Annual Return for 2009 to the ROC, filed on 26 May 2010, Vinod Tappoo is listed as Australian Citizen, P O Box 46, Sigatoka, Solicitor/Corporate Director; Director, Duty Free Traders (Fiji) Ltd; Kia Motors Ltd, Tappoo Nominees Ltd, Tappoo Holdings Ltd, Tappoo Investments Ltd, Tappoo Ltd. Suresh Tappoo is listed as Australian Citizen, P O Box 46, Sigatoka, Corporate Director; Director, Eddie Hin beverages Ltd, Kia Motors Ltd, Tappoo Holdings Ltd, Tappoo Investments Ltd, Tappoo Ltd and Tappoo Nominees Ltd.Krishna Murti is listed as Australian Citizen, P O Box 46, Sigatoka, Company Director; Director, Kia Motors Ltd, Tappoo Investments Ltd and Tappoo Ltd.

We might also recall that in Bright Star Investments Ltd, which bought the illegal A-G Aiyaz Khaiyum’s Berry Road property, Suresh Tappoo gave his nationality in the 2005 BSIL report to the ROC as Australian. And yet, curiously, when they filed the Annual Report for Penina Ltd for 2008 on 21 January 2010, signed off by David Hanfakaga Ltd, Vinod and Suresh Tappoo and Murti have all listed their nationalities as Fiji Islanders.

Are they holding dual citizenships under Khaiyum’s Citizenship of Fiji Decree 2009, which came into force, with fees, in July 2009? The major citizenship policy change introduced by the Citizenship of Fiji Decree 2009 is the policy on dual/multiple citizenship both for registration and naturalization cases. Likewise, a new citizenship application form together with the new citizenship application fees was also being introduced.

The implementation of the citizenship of Fiji Decree No 23 effectively means that former citizens who live abroad and have acquired the citizenship of their adopted countries may regain their Fiji citizenship. This is possible under the meaning of Section 8(6) of the decree. Provided the applicants satisfactorily meet the requirements stipulated under the Section 8 of the citizenship regulations 2009: “Those wishing to be naturalised as a Fiji citizen would need to have been lawfully present in Fiji for a total of five of the 10 years immediately before the application for naturalisation is made as at Section 11 (2) of the Citizenship of Fiji Decree.”

Application by registration by a former citizen under section 8(7) of the Decree costs $3375. This includes, application fee, making oath of affirmation of allegiance, grant of certificate and application for passport. Application for naturalisation under section 11 of the Decree costs $5625. This includes application fee, making oath of affirmation of allegiance, grant of certificate and application for passport. Grant of certificates for bother statuses costs $120 each.

Whether the trio are Fiji or Australian citizens is another question, in Shakespearean language, “To be, or not to be”. In its conclusion, Ernst and Young, even without noticing the anomalies, noted that Neo Fiji Ltd was awarded the construction contract principally because it tendered the lowest price of $28,507,489.91. However, this contract price was subsequently revised within six months to $34,428,995.10. Tappoos was the building contractor of Tappocity (via its subsidiary company Neo Fiji) and also tenant (via its retailing and trading arm), and a shareholder with the FNPF in Penina Ltd.

The confidential E & R Report of 2007 concluded that the independence in the appointment of Neo Fiji Ltd as construction contractor appeared questionable. It was of even greater concern, however, that Neo Fiji Ltd was allowed to retain the contract after subsequently revising its costs estimate some six months after winning the contract.

Neo Fiji, the construction, interior decorating and finishing subsidiary of the Tappoo Group, also completed the construction of the new building for the new Great Council of Chiefs as well as the new FIRCA headquarters buildings in Suva.

Despite ups and downs, with Cyclone Mick, ripping off some roof panels in December 2009, the state of the art shopping complex finally opened to the public in 2010. Speaking to The Fiji Sun on the day TappooCity opened, one of the bosses wept. He was asked how the family did it. They date back a long time and their sweat has achieved. “The founder instilled in us the firm belief that there is no substitute for hard work.”

9 Comments

<<Previous

HALLELUJAH TO FIJI FIRST PARTY WIN IN THE SEPTEMBER ELECTION

Fijileaks to RAJ: You must resign over Charlie Hebdo killings comment!"The killing of Charlie Hebdo journalists result of unfettered Freedom of Speech" - Raj on Fiji TV, in contrast to solidarity shown by many in Fiji:

Fijileaks to Raj: RESIGN AS MIDA CHAIRMAN FOR SUGGESTING THAT GUNNED DOWN PARIS JOURNALISTS WERE VICTIMS OF UNFETTERED FREE SPEECH; YOU SHOULD BE BANNED FOR LIFE FROM ENTERING FRANCE and the FRENCH EMBASSY IN FIJI!

Ms Tave Tofinga to be acting Director of Finance at FNU:

The former FNU's Finance Manager Projects Andrew Moti Singh's complaints against Chand/Prasad to FICAC, and a copy to Bainimarama:

Basically, Prasad wanted Fijileaks to get a comment from guess who- Yes, Ganesh Chand- a principal suspect in FICAC's long-dragging out investigation into alleged fraud, corruption, nepotism etc etc etc!

FNU KAMA SUTRA CLUB: Narendra Prasad was allegedly caught red-handed by his wife, with his pants down at a University of the South Pacific party bash!

From Fiji Law Society to Interim Regime's then Lickspittle and Chief Registrar of the Fiji High Court, Major Ana Rokomokoti, 2009, who had forcibly entered the Fiji Law Society Office and removed files and records as regime took over all lawyer regulatory functions:

“I have reason to believe that this convention will be contrary to the provisions of the Public Emergency Regulations 2009" - Commissioner of Police; but see cartoon below of Fiji's then Interim Attorney-General secretly registering FFP domain name and e-mail account, contrary to his own PER 2009

Fijileaks Editor: We will resume the publication of extracts from Andrew Singh's documents to FICAC regarding the Fiji National University

KAMA SUTRA HIGH FEVER: We have a file from PSC against another Indo-Fijian who was allegedly caught red-handed having sex with a top Government civil servant in his office; PSC is yet to act, a year on!

SEXGATE: The Minister, the Taxi Driver Husband and the wife-TEA LADY

UPDATE: Chaudhry says he is back online - on his FACEBOOK!

Archives

Fijileaks to RAJ: You must resign over Charlie Hebdo killings comment!
"The killing of Charlie Hebdo journalists result of unfettered Freedom of Speech" - Raj on Fiji TV, in contrast to solidarity shown by many in Fiji: