|
3 Comments
 Fijileaks Update: Our sources in North Carolina have confirmed that it is the same James Johnson. We challenge Vice-Chancellor Rajesh Chandra, and Johnson, to produce evidence from UNCW that Johnson was CLEARED. Johnson joined USP in 2013, two years after he was fired from his position at UNCW in 2011; Johnson was also suspended for 30 days and given a Final Warning letter in 2005 for allegedly touching another student inappropriately "UNCW [University of North Carolina, Wilmington] says it found clear and convincing evidence that Johnson inappropriately touched and made unwelcome advances toward a number of his female students. And this appears to be a pattern of behavior. While Johnson's termination stemmed from incidents that happened in 2011, Johnson was suspended for 30 days and given a Final Warning letter in 2005 for allegedly touching another student inappropriately. This isn't the first time a college professor has been fired for inappropriate conduct with a student. But you may be surprised to hear that Professor Johnson received his full pay for almost 8 months after UNCW's provost recommend he be fired." - 2012 Report  Dr James Johnson has suddenly blocked all Fijileaks e-mails to him, including the last one where we put to him: |
 |  |
A UNCW Professor fired for inappropriate conduct with students drew full pay for 8 months after Provost recommended his termination.
One of the most interesting cases involved a professor at UNCW. James Johnson was a long-time psychology professor there before being fired in July. According to his termination letter, he was terminated for inappropriate conduct with students.
UNCW says it found clear and convincing evidence that Johnson inappropriately touched and made unwelcome advances toward a number of his female students. And this appears to be a pattern of behavior.
While Johnson's termination stemmed from incidents that happened in 2011, Johnson was suspended for 30 days and given a Final Warning letter in 2005 for allegedly touching another student inappropriately.
This isn't the first time a college professor has been fired for inappropriate conduct with a student. But you may be surprised to hear that Professor Johnson received his full pay for almost 8 months after UNCW's provost recommend he be fired.
UNCW officials declined our request for an interview to explain why. But they did forward us a link to the UNC system policy manual. It explains that tenured faculty are entitled to full pay and due process during a suspension.
What's not clear is why that suspension dragged on for so long for a state employee making $88,000 a year. We were able to reach Johnson and his attorney for comment late Monday afternoon. Johnson denies any wrong doing.
He is appealing his termination to the Board of Governors. Johnson also says that a faculty review panel found that UNCW had not provided clear and convincing evidence of misconduct that would justify termination.
However, the chancellor chose to follow the provosts recommendation that Johnson be fired.
As you can see, the official e-mail address of Dr James Johnson on the USP official site is now blocked to Fijileaks
Fijileaks: As the whole world knows, the Vice-Chancellor Rajesh Chandra does not respond to our questions and the Education Minister - THE TOPPER - Mahendra Reddy is the same; now he is busy attending the Suva Magistrates Court after he was told that there is a case for him to answer on charges of abuse of office; he had also blocked Fijileaks from being read by students and staff at the Fiji National University. We call on Dr James Johnson to respond to us - to admit or deny whether its HIM in above story from 2012. And if its him, the USP Staff and Student Associations should DEMAND that Rajesh Chandra explain whether USP had carried out a thorough background check on a professor who was accused and later fired for allegedly touching FEMALE STUDENTS inappropriately! There is no need to play psychological game with us, and we would be happy to publish a reply from Dr James Johnson on the identity of the professor in question in the above story - we are merely after the truth since USP states that most recently, Johnson is the lead investigator of a $293,000 research project funded by Fiji Department of Women, the Australian High Commission, and UNWomen.
What is the topic of the Johnson-led research project?
Fijileaks: [email protected]
Fijileaks: Dr James Johnson has used the same profile photos in the UNCW and USP official sites (which seem to be a younger version of him); if you have seen this Dr James Johnson in the photo below at USP please drop an anonymous e-mail to [email protected]
UNCW Newsletter: Travis Newkirk successfully defended his final project titled "Commodification of African American Culture and Hip-Hop" onFriday, April 27, 2007 at 1:15 pm in Bear Hall, Room 102. Pictured are Travis, Dr. James Johnson (reader), and Dr. Mike Wentworth (project director).
http://www.wect.com/story/20307337/uncw-professor-fired-for-touching-students-inappropriately
To Frank Bainimarama, then post 2006 coup Prime Minister:
MORGAN at a recent seminar
http://www.fijileaks.com/home/uspgate-one-of-usps-top-historians-tuimalealiifano-suspended-by-vice-chancellor-after-social-psychologist-and-interpersonal-conflict-lecturer-james-johnson-claims-he-was-shouted-at-and-called-gutless
Pacific Researchers N Academics
Follow · September 19 ·
From an Academic:
"Attack on Academic Freedom at USP Continues
IN a worrying trend noticed over the past 6 or so years, USP has been purging academic freedom The case of termination of employment of Professor Wadan Narsey is well known. So are the cases of termination of employment of Deputy Vice Chancellor/Pro-VCs Susan Kelly and Dilawar Singh Grewal, and of Professor Biman Prasad.
NOW comes the suspension of a long standing and well regarded Pacific historian Dr. Morgan Tuimaleali'ifano.
Official Reason given: He had used the term "gutless" to his supervisor who was hesitating to raise a requisition for payment to the department teaching staff, who had remained unpaid for over 10 weeks.
EVENTS OF NOTE: It is well known that Dr. Tuimaleali'ifano had organised a highly successful panel discussion a week earlier on "Rewa Vakatokayaca Peace Process", where amongst other speakers were the Opposition Leader and Roko Tui Dreketi, Ro Teimumu Kepa. The discussion was on the formal adoption of Girmitiya descendants as 'Luvedra ni Ratu' (Children of the Chief of Noco). Earlier, Dr. Tuimaleali'ifano had also participated, as part of his research, in a discussion on chiefly titles in Natewa, Vanua Levu.
The suspension is a clear cut case of an attack on academic freedom, under guise of 'disciplinary proceedings'. This must be opposed by all who value academic freedom. Please post, without my name; I hope you understand" — with Morgan Tuimaleali'ifano.
Follow · September 19 ·
From an Academic:
"Attack on Academic Freedom at USP Continues
IN a worrying trend noticed over the past 6 or so years, USP has been purging academic freedom The case of termination of employment of Professor Wadan Narsey is well known. So are the cases of termination of employment of Deputy Vice Chancellor/Pro-VCs Susan Kelly and Dilawar Singh Grewal, and of Professor Biman Prasad.
NOW comes the suspension of a long standing and well regarded Pacific historian Dr. Morgan Tuimaleali'ifano.
Official Reason given: He had used the term "gutless" to his supervisor who was hesitating to raise a requisition for payment to the department teaching staff, who had remained unpaid for over 10 weeks.
EVENTS OF NOTE: It is well known that Dr. Tuimaleali'ifano had organised a highly successful panel discussion a week earlier on "Rewa Vakatokayaca Peace Process", where amongst other speakers were the Opposition Leader and Roko Tui Dreketi, Ro Teimumu Kepa. The discussion was on the formal adoption of Girmitiya descendants as 'Luvedra ni Ratu' (Children of the Chief of Noco). Earlier, Dr. Tuimaleali'ifano had also participated, as part of his research, in a discussion on chiefly titles in Natewa, Vanua Levu.
The suspension is a clear cut case of an attack on academic freedom, under guise of 'disciplinary proceedings'. This must be opposed by all who value academic freedom. Please post, without my name; I hope you understand" — with Morgan Tuimaleali'ifano.
Suva Magistrates Court: The "TOPPER" Education Minister Reddy has case to answer re abuse of office charges he is facing before the court
Fijileaks: Not only have the nurses and other civil servants not getting a pay rise but the dentists as well. Dentists are considered doctors but they've been recently told in a memorandum (Fijileaks is withholding it as it continues further research) that Dentistry is a non-essential service and it is not in demand hence there is no need for dental services in Fiji. They aren't going to increase that pay for dentists. World wide the dentists are one of the highest paid professionals.
In Fiji they're paid $18,277
September 21, 2017
MEDIA RELEASE
Blame yourself, not Civil Servants: NFP
The Attorney General and Minister for Civil Service is ducking for cover by blaming senior civil servants in government ministries for the discriminatory contracts being forced upon civil servants when it is the Civil Service Reform Unit under his control that has subjugated civil servants.
“The Attorney General should stop playing the blame game”. It is the AG and the Civil Service Reform Unit headed by its Director Jane Curran, who recently during the roadshow for teachers, labelled Education Ministry officials as being inferior in intellect by way of her comments of them not understanding English, who are to be solely blamed for the civil service reform debacle”, said National Federation Party Leader Professor Biman Prasad.
Professor Prasad pointed out that almost a month ago he had highlighted that position holders in the civil servants were first appointed to a grade lower than the substantive post they were holding and then given an acting appointment to their substantive position with 95% of the salary for the post.
The NFP Leader said he also highlighted that in the case of teachers it was revealed that those in the service for more than 25 years were put on the same level of salary as degree holders with far less work experience.
“The voices of the aggrieved teachers and civil servants were swept aside. Now in the latest roadshow, the AG made a comment that salaries must be commensurate with experience. He has lost all credibility and civil servants don’t have any faith and trust in this government to redress their grievances”.
“Then he turns around and says salary review is not a charity. He blames health workers for the pathetic state of our hospitals and also blames the Permanent Secretary for Health for failing to ensure workers diligently perform their duties”.
“This is symptomatic of this Government. They blame everyone under the sun but themselves for the cesspool created by their policies and actions. They have lost the plot”.
Professor Prasad said the contracts of civil servants were subjugating them to government and this has no place in a democracy and an NFP Government will revoke them, put civil servants on permanent tenure, increase the retirement age to 60 years and have a fair and just adjustment to salaries of all civil servants.
Authorised by: -
Professor Biman Prasad
NFP Leader
MEDIA RELEASE
Blame yourself, not Civil Servants: NFP
The Attorney General and Minister for Civil Service is ducking for cover by blaming senior civil servants in government ministries for the discriminatory contracts being forced upon civil servants when it is the Civil Service Reform Unit under his control that has subjugated civil servants.
“The Attorney General should stop playing the blame game”. It is the AG and the Civil Service Reform Unit headed by its Director Jane Curran, who recently during the roadshow for teachers, labelled Education Ministry officials as being inferior in intellect by way of her comments of them not understanding English, who are to be solely blamed for the civil service reform debacle”, said National Federation Party Leader Professor Biman Prasad.
Professor Prasad pointed out that almost a month ago he had highlighted that position holders in the civil servants were first appointed to a grade lower than the substantive post they were holding and then given an acting appointment to their substantive position with 95% of the salary for the post.
The NFP Leader said he also highlighted that in the case of teachers it was revealed that those in the service for more than 25 years were put on the same level of salary as degree holders with far less work experience.
“The voices of the aggrieved teachers and civil servants were swept aside. Now in the latest roadshow, the AG made a comment that salaries must be commensurate with experience. He has lost all credibility and civil servants don’t have any faith and trust in this government to redress their grievances”.
“Then he turns around and says salary review is not a charity. He blames health workers for the pathetic state of our hospitals and also blames the Permanent Secretary for Health for failing to ensure workers diligently perform their duties”.
“This is symptomatic of this Government. They blame everyone under the sun but themselves for the cesspool created by their policies and actions. They have lost the plot”.
Professor Prasad said the contracts of civil servants were subjugating them to government and this has no place in a democracy and an NFP Government will revoke them, put civil servants on permanent tenure, increase the retirement age to 60 years and have a fair and just adjustment to salaries of all civil servants.
Authorised by: -
Professor Biman Prasad
NFP Leader
The Fiji Sun, 30 April 2017: We want a pay rise, a dental officer yesterday told the Attorney-General and Minister for Economy, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, during his budget consultations in Labasa. Priyansha Chand, a dental officer at the Labasa Hospital, asked the Minister to review the base salary of graduates from the Fiji National University’s College of Medicine, Nursing and Health Sciences.
“As a young graduate this is my third year of practicing and when I graduated I came in with a salary of $18,277. I studied for five years and spent close to $75,000. It is quite disheartening when you compare our pay to the present high cost of living. We want pay rise, please.” -
Miss Chand to Khaiyum
And look at Khaiyum's salary when he climbed up the greasy backside pole of 2006 coup to become INTERIM Attorney-General and Minister for JUSTICE. He just gave himself big fat salary- to be paid - not by the Ministry of Finance (now under his portfolio) but by AUNTY NUR BANO ALI. Worse, he and his Interim Government ministers hid their salaries from the public, presumably the money came partially from
Ms Chand's family's TAXES who have already financed her dental degree to the tune of $75,000 and she is on an indecent salary of $18,2777
PARTNER IN THE PAY SCAM?: |  |
The above documents vindicate Fijileaks posting in 2014:
Bainimarama: "I swear that no military officer will benefit from my coup"
Fijileaks: Please can someone inform our readers what the hell is THIS FFP Minister screaming about, as if a bee has got into his SULU?
Full story later. But please take this man to St Giles Hospital for check-up
“What is being forced now on civil servants is in flagrant violation of the right to collective bargaining guaranteed under the 2013 Constitution, the Employment Relations Promulgation (ERP) and the agreement reached between the Fiji Trades Union Congress and the government in the Joint Implementation Report following the complaint lodged by the FTUC with the ILO in 2014. Public Sector unions must insist that government comply with these agreements and respect their members’ right to collective bargaining. Failure to take strong action now will seriously jeopardise the rights and welfare of civil servants and render their unions totally ineffective” - Mahendra Chaudhry
Don't buckle to Khaiyum's blackmail: Chaudhry to unions
Labour Leader Mahendra Chaudhry has urged Public Sector unions to take a strong stand against the arm-twisting tactics of Attorney General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum to force civil servants to sign new employment contracts to qualify for pay increments.
“This is sheer blackmail and no self-respecting union should condone it. The Attorney General is also misleading civil servants regarding the process governing salary increases in the past,” says Mr Chaudhry who led the Fiji Public Service Association for 29 years as General Secretary before he resigned in 1999.
Mr Chaudhry was referring to claims by Mr Sayed-Khaiyum, at consultations with civil servants in Nausori on Tuesday, that in the past civil servants had to wait up to 10 years to get salary increments of at least 10%.
“This is #absolutely #wrong. Civil servants, in the past, received annual cost of living adjustments with periodic salary reviews through job evaluation exercises. Grading reviews were an on-going process. If employees felt they had been wrongly graded they could take this up at any time to seek a review.
“Unions enjoyed full collective bargaining rights which effectively protected their members from becoming victims of unilateral action as has become so common under the FF government.
“What is being forced now on civil servants is in flagrant violation of the right to collective bargaining guaranteed under the 2013 Constitution, the Employment Relations Promulgation (ERP) and the agreement reached between the Fiji Trades Union Congress and the government in the Joint Implementation Report following the complaint lodged by the FTUC with the ILO in 2014.
“Public Sector unions must insist that government comply with these agreements and respect their members’ right to collective bargaining.
“Failure to take strong action now will seriously jeopardise the rights and welfare of civil servants and render their unions totally ineffective,” said Mr Chaudhry.
Labour Leader Mahendra Chaudhry has urged Public Sector unions to take a strong stand against the arm-twisting tactics of Attorney General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum to force civil servants to sign new employment contracts to qualify for pay increments.
“This is sheer blackmail and no self-respecting union should condone it. The Attorney General is also misleading civil servants regarding the process governing salary increases in the past,” says Mr Chaudhry who led the Fiji Public Service Association for 29 years as General Secretary before he resigned in 1999.
Mr Chaudhry was referring to claims by Mr Sayed-Khaiyum, at consultations with civil servants in Nausori on Tuesday, that in the past civil servants had to wait up to 10 years to get salary increments of at least 10%.
“This is #absolutely #wrong. Civil servants, in the past, received annual cost of living adjustments with periodic salary reviews through job evaluation exercises. Grading reviews were an on-going process. If employees felt they had been wrongly graded they could take this up at any time to seek a review.
“Unions enjoyed full collective bargaining rights which effectively protected their members from becoming victims of unilateral action as has become so common under the FF government.
“What is being forced now on civil servants is in flagrant violation of the right to collective bargaining guaranteed under the 2013 Constitution, the Employment Relations Promulgation (ERP) and the agreement reached between the Fiji Trades Union Congress and the government in the Joint Implementation Report following the complaint lodged by the FTUC with the ILO in 2014.
“Public Sector unions must insist that government comply with these agreements and respect their members’ right to collective bargaining.
“Failure to take strong action now will seriously jeopardise the rights and welfare of civil servants and render their unions totally ineffective,” said Mr Chaudhry.
 |  |
http://fijivillage.com/news-feature/This-is-not-a-charity---Acting-PM--29r5sk/
He says not everybody should get the same pay rise as increments
will be based on performance
Fijileaks: Does the above statement explain why the former native Fijian Interim Cabinet Ministers were paid less than the Indo-Fijian Ministers (Khaiyum and Dr Neil Sharma) and Frank Bainimarama as
Prime Minister?
 |  |
Nur Bano Ali had been appointed the new Pay Mistress; below salaries for 2010; we are holding back details of salaries from 2011 to 2014
Fijileaks: We have redacted their personal bank account numbers!
Hi, RAM! Blatantly flaunting her donation: Bhatnagar makes a donation to the Naibulu Ram temple committee in Dreketi, Macuata, this week
Fijileaks: The Indo-Fijian voters will determine the next Government!
His comment comes after National Federation Party’s General Secretary, Jagannath Sami had stated during a Talanoa Session that NFP parliamentarians Biman Prasad, Parmod Chand and Prem Singh can be called the Trimurti which are the three Hindu Gods.
Lal says they will discuss this matter in a meeting and see whether any action will be taken.
He says this act has brought disrepute to their religion and is requesting political parties to do away with this.
Jagannath Sami had made these remarks while introducing Prasad, Chand and Singh at the Rishikul Sanatan College and likened them to three Hindu Gods.
When contacted, NFP’s Leader Professor Biman Prasad says Sami had never said that the three NFP parliamentarians are equivalent to God.
He says Sami was just acknowledging the contribution of the three NFP parliamentarians.
Prasad says when people quote from religious scriptures to make a point, it does not mean they are using religion or they are portraying people as Gods. Source: Fijivillage News, 20 September 2017
Fijileaks: We do not hold NFP general secretary Jagannath Sami in high esteem when it comes to him officiating as MOC (Messier of Ceremonies) and some of his comments on other peoples Facebook postings make one question his political judgments.
Lal says they will discuss this matter in a meeting and see whether any action will be taken.
He says this act has brought disrepute to their religion and is requesting political parties to do away with this.
Jagannath Sami had made these remarks while introducing Prasad, Chand and Singh at the Rishikul Sanatan College and likened them to three Hindu Gods.
When contacted, NFP’s Leader Professor Biman Prasad says Sami had never said that the three NFP parliamentarians are equivalent to God.
He says Sami was just acknowledging the contribution of the three NFP parliamentarians.
Prasad says when people quote from religious scriptures to make a point, it does not mean they are using religion or they are portraying people as Gods. Source: Fijivillage News, 20 September 2017
Fijileaks: We do not hold NFP general secretary Jagannath Sami in high esteem when it comes to him officiating as MOC (Messier of Ceremonies) and some of his comments on other peoples Facebook postings make one question his political judgments.
Dear Bhagwan: WHO KILLED PUNA CHAND?
"The Hindus and Muslims are pagans who must be converted to Christianity. It will be a big challenge for us to convert all Indians. Those who do not choose to become Christians can continue to live here but they will probably find that is a difficult place to live in. We are trying to make this place perfect for the Fijian people, and if it is not perfect for others then that is too bad. They will have to go."
The ardent Methodist fundamentalist
Sitiveni Rabuka shortly after the 1987 coups
Naivalurua was at the Australian War College when the 2000 coup happened; he came down to Fiji, went into Parliament, physically manhandled his brother and dragged him out. Later, he supported the coup from outside. He also remains at large for being one of the ten balaclava hooded soldiers who stormed Parliament in 1987 to overthrow Dr Timoci Bavadra and his government - in conspiracy with Sitiveni Rabuka's
"Operation Kidacala (Surprise)".
As for Frank Bainimarama, his own role in the overthrow of the Chaudhry government is shrouded in mystery and allegations of his tacit complicity remain rife, for he had refused to appear and give evidence before the Board of Inquiry into the role of the CRW soldiers in the events of 2000.
We reiterate that the RFMF was not the principal saviour of the Indo-Fijians in 2000; if anything, their duplicitous role and the appointment of Laisenia Qarase and his hardliner nationalists to run an Interim Administration exacerbated the plight, beatings, rape, and violence against Indo-Fijians throughout Fiji.
VICTOR LAL: "Many of my own relatives in Tailevu were beaten up and one of my cousins (despite being a fluent native Fijian speaker was threatened with RAPE if she did not hand over money and jewellery (which she did); later the whole family (including small children and babies) hid in the bushes for several days. There was no sign or appearance of Bainimarama's army to rescue them. The poor cousin of mine later died, cursing Bainimarama and the RFMF until her death. 2000 was not the FIRST TIME. In 1987, many relatives and my own mother hid in the bushes or under the beds from mad dog racist on the loose - SITIVENI RABUKA - now leading SODELPA. Cry, the beloved country'
Fijileaks: What about Indo-Fijian businessmen whom Mahendra Chaudhry and others (including CRW soldiers) accused of financing the 2000 coup; many are today prominent FFP supporters
Also, it is not acceptable for FFP or for that matter, any political party, to claim that it is the only party that can guarantee the safety and security of Indo-Fijians (and Fiji); the implication is that that party is the only one which can rely on the RFMF and the Police to heed its call for intervention. The RFMF and the Police must be above politics but must respond to any government of the day if requested to step in to prevent the breakdown of law and order in the country
"The week before the [2000 coup], that was 24 hours before he [Bainimarama] left for Norway (12 May) I told him that the coup was in a week's time from that day." Lt-Col Viliame Seruvakula to BOI
 |  |
To be continued!
From Fiji Labour Party website, 24 February 2003:
Punjas Lautoka Factory Burnt Down
A Punja and Sons factory was razed by fire on Wednesday night, a day after claims in the High Court in Suva that the company had financed the May 2000 coup.
The Ocean Soaps Company building, which was 50-years old, on Sautamata Street, in the Namoli industrial area, was completely destroyed, causing millions of dollars in damage.
Police force are investigating the cause of the fire, although they have not ruled out foul play. Police could not establish whether the property and its contents were insured.
The premises were well secured with security officers manning the gates on a 24-hour basis. The building was well fenced and workers were doing shift work inside when fire broke out at about 11:30 pm.
Workers on the night shift and the security officer on duty were taken in for questioning.
The Managing Director of Punja and Sons Nitin Punja said they did not have access to the site and as such were not able to access the full extent of damage and did no say anything on the future of workers in the soap factory.
The Company claimed they had been receiving threats after Salesi Tuitagalele, a witness in the treason trial of Josefa Nata and Timoci Silatolu, made allegations linking the company along with C J Patel as financiers of the May 19, 2000 coup.
Public reacted strongly to the allegations and staff of Punja and Sons were continuously sworn at and verbally abused on the street, a day after the allegations were made in Suva’s High Court.
The employees who could not handle the insults went home and changed out of their uniforms. Punja and Sons had advised all their staffs not to wear the company uniforms or carry Punjas logo for their personal safety.
Punjas Lautoka Factory Burnt Down
A Punja and Sons factory was razed by fire on Wednesday night, a day after claims in the High Court in Suva that the company had financed the May 2000 coup.
The Ocean Soaps Company building, which was 50-years old, on Sautamata Street, in the Namoli industrial area, was completely destroyed, causing millions of dollars in damage.
Police force are investigating the cause of the fire, although they have not ruled out foul play. Police could not establish whether the property and its contents were insured.
The premises were well secured with security officers manning the gates on a 24-hour basis. The building was well fenced and workers were doing shift work inside when fire broke out at about 11:30 pm.
Workers on the night shift and the security officer on duty were taken in for questioning.
The Managing Director of Punja and Sons Nitin Punja said they did not have access to the site and as such were not able to access the full extent of damage and did no say anything on the future of workers in the soap factory.
The Company claimed they had been receiving threats after Salesi Tuitagalele, a witness in the treason trial of Josefa Nata and Timoci Silatolu, made allegations linking the company along with C J Patel as financiers of the May 19, 2000 coup.
Public reacted strongly to the allegations and staff of Punja and Sons were continuously sworn at and verbally abused on the street, a day after the allegations were made in Suva’s High Court.
The employees who could not handle the insults went home and changed out of their uniforms. Punja and Sons had advised all their staffs not to wear the company uniforms or carry Punjas logo for their personal safety.
NFP leader Prasad: "There are certain FFP MPs going around telling people that only FFP government can provide security: we say to them to stop fear-mongering and fight next election on ideas and policies"
Fijileaks: The NFP's membership recruitment drive is seeing many native Fijians switching from SODELPA and FFP to NFP for they claim they are tired of race, ethnicity, and indigenous rights debates.
Can NFP repeat the "1987 Bavadra-Baba Its Time For Change" slogan in 2018 election and win over the native Fijian voters? Unsurprisingly, NFP MP Parmod Chand - Bainimarama's 'Little Coward' - got the most thunderous applause at the recent NFP Talanoa Session!
Last week Chand had told Fiji: "I was not hiding under the bus but I know somebody [who] took off through the cassava patch", alluding to Frank Bainimarama. The infamous incident has been a boon for cartoonists:
SODELPA is SILENT as a MOUSE on military because their leader SITIVENI RABUKA has RAPE, VIOLENCE, TREASON and a host of other charges on his CV, and is sheltering under IMMUNITY he granted himself
Watch video of the speeches at the NFP Talanoa Session, 16/9/2017
Fijileaks: In the audience attentively listening to the NFP Talanoa Session is Reverend Akuila Yabaki, who had this to say about Rabuka in 1987:“Every time we shrug when we hear of another midnight raid, the cries of terrorized women and children, then somewhere in Fiji another potential [Klaus] Barbie [The Nazi Butcher of Lyon in France] is getting a start in life.”
Rabuka’s 1987 terror regime: a warning for Fiji
By VICTOR LAL
29 December 2006
“Every time we shrug when we hear of another midnight raid, the cries of terrorized women and children, then somewhere in Fiji another potential [Klaus] Barbie [The Nazi Butcher of Lyon in France] is getting a start in life,” said the former Methodist communications secretary in 1987, the Reverend Akuila Yabaki, now head of the Citizens Constitutional Forum. He was speaking out against the reign of terror and torture practised mostly against the Indo-Fijian community by Sitiveni Rabuka, his military henchmen, prominent chiefs, and the dreaded and racist Fijian taukei foot soldiers following the 1987 coups.
Now, nearly twenty years later, we are beginning to hear the first ripples of ‘torture tactics’ by the military against the pro-democracy supporters. But let us hope and pray that Commodore Frank Bainimarama’s military will not go down the road that Mr Rabuka took his troops, chiefs, and taukeists like Apisai Tora to achieve his objective of ‘Fiji for the taukei Fijians’.
The first casualty was the media when Mr Rabuka launched his coup on 14 May 1987. In an editorial on 15 May, the old Fiji Sun asked: “What right has a third-ranking officer to attack the scared institutions of Parliament? To presume he knows how best this country shall be governed for the good of all? The answer is: NONE. The people must decide their own future: not self-promoting dictators and not a Council appointed by and presided over by Lieutenant-Colonel Rabuka. But was he encouraged by others to act? And if so, who were they?”
We now know who they were, and many of those are still around, in positions of influence and authority. Most of them were prominent paramount chiefs, civil servants, church leaders, lawyers, magistrates, judges, and fallen politicians. They were indigenous Fijians, some of whom, and their offspring, are today hiding from the military in a great game of hide and seek following the 5 December coup. The former governor-general and Mr Rabuka’s paramount chief Ratu Sir Penaia Ganilau, made it easier for Mr Rabuka to crush civil disobedience by warning that the civilian-cum military regime would not hesitate to use emergency powers it had under martial law.
On 15 May 1987, shortly after the Fiji Sun editorial, the Ministry of Information directed the Fiji Times and Fiji Sun to cease publication. The RFMF occupied Radio Fiji. The same day armed soldiers’ ejected staff of both the two newspapers from their offices, and foreign journalists were questioned by the RFMF. In a sickening spectacle, the raid on the Times office was led by one of its own reporters and army reservist E.T. Volavola in full combat gear carrying a rifle and backed up by a squad of troops.
Mr Rabuka announced a Council of Ministers (COM), which was dominated by ex-Alliance Party Ministers (including Ratu Mara who had lost the election to Dr Timoci Bavadra). Mr Rabuka said his military regime was in full control and the people had accepted the coup, and called on the international community to recognize his regime. He said he had abrogated the Constitution and the regime would govern Fiji by decree. He brushed aside the demands of the Council of Churches “in the name of Christianity” to release the MPs he had kidnapped and was holding as hostages, and “surrender to the sovereign authority of the land”, and restore “our duly elected government”.
He instead moved into deposed Prime Minister Dr Bavadra’s office. But when the Fiji Sun questioned Mr Rabuka’s right to occupy high office, he threw the general manager and one of the directors, who was also President of the Fiji Law Society, in the same prison cell as that occupied by Dr Bavadra. The Sun was singled out for severe maltreatment. Sadly, most of the harassment and intimidation was carried out against the Indo-Fijian journalists, for after all, Mr Rabuka had executed the coup to give Fijians the control of Fiji.
Some Fijian journalists, therefore, switched sides, and became Mr Rabuka’s propagandists, reporting on their Indo-Fijian colleagues and their families. In the end, the Fiji Times agreed to operate under partial military censorship, while the old Fiji Sun was forced to cease operations in the country after it published allegations that Mr Rabuka had bought a house in Suva favoured by wealthy Indo-Fijians and expatriates, on a 100% mortgage from a prominent Alliance politician. In the end, some of Fiji’s best Indo-Fijian journalists were forced to emigrate or seek political asylum abroad. Some of us were not only on Mr Rabuka’s hit list but even had our passports confiscated, ending up overnight from being citizens to wandering international refugees.
The next group that Mr Rabuka and his cronies targeted were his political opponents. Shortly before the coup the taukeists firebombed the law offices of Jai Ram Reddy, now an International Criminal Court judge. The late Sir Vijay Singh was detained and his passport seized, prompting him to ask: “What kind of normalcy is [Ganilau] thinking about when things like this happen.”
Dr Bavadra’s spokesman and current Suva lawyer Richard Naidu was arrested and detained on different occasions. He was chased and beaten up by Taukeists, and finally had his Fiji nationality revoked, and ordered to leave the country for New Zealand. Another legal adviser of Dr Bavadra, John Cameron, had his work permit withdrawn after he filed civil suit against dissolution of Parliament, and had also filed claim with the Supreme Court on behalf of a client harassed by the RFMF, seeking a declaration that State of Emergency and 1987 Emergency Regulations were unconstitutional.
Among judges arrested included Justices Kishore Govind and Rooney, including Chief Magistrate Howard Morrison. Even the Police Commissioner, an Indo-Fijian Pramesh Raman, whose job Mr Rabuka had applied a week before the coup, was taken into custody. Several Indo-Fijian lawyers and academics were also taken into custody, mostly on legal advice of some Fijian lawyers.
Although the vast majority of victims were Indo-Fijians, some prominent Fijians like Amelia Rokotuivanua and Dr Steven Ratuva came in for rough treatment. The two were “lectured” by Lieutenant Pio Wong on how to be “true Fijians” and Dr Ratuva had spells in detention, and at one point the military allegedly tried to poison him with the prepared food it had brought to his house. In 1986 he had claimed in a paper that the RFMF’s only function lay in internal repression or as a conduit for chiefly advancement. He had also suggested that “intermarriages between the sons and daughters of chiefs (including the chiefly officers in the army) helps to consolidate the chiefly comprador clique which ensures the perpetuation of nepotism and inequality in Fijian society”.
On 25 September Mr Rabuka carried out his second coup. Violence and intimidation was encouraged, and a group of escaped prisoners were escorted by the military to march to the Government House to demand pardons. When the GCC refused to recognise Mr Rabuka as president, he declared Fiji a republic, declared himself the head of state and no longer recognised the GCC as such. However, on 5 December he agreed to hand over power to the new President Ratu Penaia and the Prime Minister Ratu Mara. Mr Rabuka took charge of Home Affairs, the CJ returned to the bench, Sailosi Kepa was recalled as High Commissioner from London to take over as Minister for Justice and A-G, and Berenado Vunibobo became Minister of Trade and Commerce. Dr Bavadra retorted: “It is a military government in a civilian cloak.”
The international community resumed trade and diplomatic links with Fiji. Australia conferred Mr Rabuka legitimacy by announcing that it was recognizing Fiji as a state rather than the government of Fiji. Ratu Penaia granted Mr Rabuka and his close circle of oppressors, questionable amnesty, and the Fijians introduced apartheid against the Indo-Fijians. Ratu Penaia also formally signed new Internal Security Decree, giving army power to shoot to kill anyone found with illegal arms that resisted arrests.
As Minister for Internal Security, Mr Rabuka had extraordinary range of powers, which violated international standards of human rights, including the detention of any person for two years; order restriction of movement, freedom of expression, employment, residence or activity; prohibit the printing, publication, sale, issue, circulation or possession of any written material, and prohibit its communication through worth of mouth etc.
And yet Mr Rabuka was free to publish his book “No Other Way”. But no criticism of his book was permitted, and one USP Indo-Fijian lecturer who dared to criticise it, was detained and severely beaten up. My own critical counter-book Fiji: Coups in Paradise was banished from the bookshelves of Fiji. As Mr Rabuka plunged the economy into a decline, he was offered $50,000 from an Australian publishing company as a retainer for his book and a TV documentary. The RFMF, commenting on brief detentions and harassment said, “Due to the current conditions everyone is suspect until proven innocent”. Mr Rabuka went on to become the Prime Minister and chairman of the Great Council of Chiefs on the bandwagon of nationalist and racist ideology, an ideology which Commodore Bainimarama claims he wants to stamp out once and for all.
If that is so, let us hope that he will not follow in the footsteps of Mr Rabuka, for many of my own family members still bear the scars of Mr Rabuka’s storm troopers on their chests, and so do many other citizens from the 1987 and 2000 coups.
The Indo-Fijians, in 1987, were beaten, forced to stand in sewage pools, and subjected to other forms of humiliating punishments. The vast majority of Fijians remained silent to the oppression and racism in their midst. In fact, many joined in its continuation for the next ten years.
But freedom, as former military strongman Mr Rabuka found out only very recently (after he was successfully defended by the President of the Fiji Law Society, Mr Sharma, on inciting mutiny), is a cherished and inviolable right.
By VICTOR LAL
29 December 2006
“Every time we shrug when we hear of another midnight raid, the cries of terrorized women and children, then somewhere in Fiji another potential [Klaus] Barbie [The Nazi Butcher of Lyon in France] is getting a start in life,” said the former Methodist communications secretary in 1987, the Reverend Akuila Yabaki, now head of the Citizens Constitutional Forum. He was speaking out against the reign of terror and torture practised mostly against the Indo-Fijian community by Sitiveni Rabuka, his military henchmen, prominent chiefs, and the dreaded and racist Fijian taukei foot soldiers following the 1987 coups.
Now, nearly twenty years later, we are beginning to hear the first ripples of ‘torture tactics’ by the military against the pro-democracy supporters. But let us hope and pray that Commodore Frank Bainimarama’s military will not go down the road that Mr Rabuka took his troops, chiefs, and taukeists like Apisai Tora to achieve his objective of ‘Fiji for the taukei Fijians’.
The first casualty was the media when Mr Rabuka launched his coup on 14 May 1987. In an editorial on 15 May, the old Fiji Sun asked: “What right has a third-ranking officer to attack the scared institutions of Parliament? To presume he knows how best this country shall be governed for the good of all? The answer is: NONE. The people must decide their own future: not self-promoting dictators and not a Council appointed by and presided over by Lieutenant-Colonel Rabuka. But was he encouraged by others to act? And if so, who were they?”
We now know who they were, and many of those are still around, in positions of influence and authority. Most of them were prominent paramount chiefs, civil servants, church leaders, lawyers, magistrates, judges, and fallen politicians. They were indigenous Fijians, some of whom, and their offspring, are today hiding from the military in a great game of hide and seek following the 5 December coup. The former governor-general and Mr Rabuka’s paramount chief Ratu Sir Penaia Ganilau, made it easier for Mr Rabuka to crush civil disobedience by warning that the civilian-cum military regime would not hesitate to use emergency powers it had under martial law.
On 15 May 1987, shortly after the Fiji Sun editorial, the Ministry of Information directed the Fiji Times and Fiji Sun to cease publication. The RFMF occupied Radio Fiji. The same day armed soldiers’ ejected staff of both the two newspapers from their offices, and foreign journalists were questioned by the RFMF. In a sickening spectacle, the raid on the Times office was led by one of its own reporters and army reservist E.T. Volavola in full combat gear carrying a rifle and backed up by a squad of troops.
Mr Rabuka announced a Council of Ministers (COM), which was dominated by ex-Alliance Party Ministers (including Ratu Mara who had lost the election to Dr Timoci Bavadra). Mr Rabuka said his military regime was in full control and the people had accepted the coup, and called on the international community to recognize his regime. He said he had abrogated the Constitution and the regime would govern Fiji by decree. He brushed aside the demands of the Council of Churches “in the name of Christianity” to release the MPs he had kidnapped and was holding as hostages, and “surrender to the sovereign authority of the land”, and restore “our duly elected government”.
He instead moved into deposed Prime Minister Dr Bavadra’s office. But when the Fiji Sun questioned Mr Rabuka’s right to occupy high office, he threw the general manager and one of the directors, who was also President of the Fiji Law Society, in the same prison cell as that occupied by Dr Bavadra. The Sun was singled out for severe maltreatment. Sadly, most of the harassment and intimidation was carried out against the Indo-Fijian journalists, for after all, Mr Rabuka had executed the coup to give Fijians the control of Fiji.
Some Fijian journalists, therefore, switched sides, and became Mr Rabuka’s propagandists, reporting on their Indo-Fijian colleagues and their families. In the end, the Fiji Times agreed to operate under partial military censorship, while the old Fiji Sun was forced to cease operations in the country after it published allegations that Mr Rabuka had bought a house in Suva favoured by wealthy Indo-Fijians and expatriates, on a 100% mortgage from a prominent Alliance politician. In the end, some of Fiji’s best Indo-Fijian journalists were forced to emigrate or seek political asylum abroad. Some of us were not only on Mr Rabuka’s hit list but even had our passports confiscated, ending up overnight from being citizens to wandering international refugees.
The next group that Mr Rabuka and his cronies targeted were his political opponents. Shortly before the coup the taukeists firebombed the law offices of Jai Ram Reddy, now an International Criminal Court judge. The late Sir Vijay Singh was detained and his passport seized, prompting him to ask: “What kind of normalcy is [Ganilau] thinking about when things like this happen.”
Dr Bavadra’s spokesman and current Suva lawyer Richard Naidu was arrested and detained on different occasions. He was chased and beaten up by Taukeists, and finally had his Fiji nationality revoked, and ordered to leave the country for New Zealand. Another legal adviser of Dr Bavadra, John Cameron, had his work permit withdrawn after he filed civil suit against dissolution of Parliament, and had also filed claim with the Supreme Court on behalf of a client harassed by the RFMF, seeking a declaration that State of Emergency and 1987 Emergency Regulations were unconstitutional.
Among judges arrested included Justices Kishore Govind and Rooney, including Chief Magistrate Howard Morrison. Even the Police Commissioner, an Indo-Fijian Pramesh Raman, whose job Mr Rabuka had applied a week before the coup, was taken into custody. Several Indo-Fijian lawyers and academics were also taken into custody, mostly on legal advice of some Fijian lawyers.
Although the vast majority of victims were Indo-Fijians, some prominent Fijians like Amelia Rokotuivanua and Dr Steven Ratuva came in for rough treatment. The two were “lectured” by Lieutenant Pio Wong on how to be “true Fijians” and Dr Ratuva had spells in detention, and at one point the military allegedly tried to poison him with the prepared food it had brought to his house. In 1986 he had claimed in a paper that the RFMF’s only function lay in internal repression or as a conduit for chiefly advancement. He had also suggested that “intermarriages between the sons and daughters of chiefs (including the chiefly officers in the army) helps to consolidate the chiefly comprador clique which ensures the perpetuation of nepotism and inequality in Fijian society”.
On 25 September Mr Rabuka carried out his second coup. Violence and intimidation was encouraged, and a group of escaped prisoners were escorted by the military to march to the Government House to demand pardons. When the GCC refused to recognise Mr Rabuka as president, he declared Fiji a republic, declared himself the head of state and no longer recognised the GCC as such. However, on 5 December he agreed to hand over power to the new President Ratu Penaia and the Prime Minister Ratu Mara. Mr Rabuka took charge of Home Affairs, the CJ returned to the bench, Sailosi Kepa was recalled as High Commissioner from London to take over as Minister for Justice and A-G, and Berenado Vunibobo became Minister of Trade and Commerce. Dr Bavadra retorted: “It is a military government in a civilian cloak.”
The international community resumed trade and diplomatic links with Fiji. Australia conferred Mr Rabuka legitimacy by announcing that it was recognizing Fiji as a state rather than the government of Fiji. Ratu Penaia granted Mr Rabuka and his close circle of oppressors, questionable amnesty, and the Fijians introduced apartheid against the Indo-Fijians. Ratu Penaia also formally signed new Internal Security Decree, giving army power to shoot to kill anyone found with illegal arms that resisted arrests.
As Minister for Internal Security, Mr Rabuka had extraordinary range of powers, which violated international standards of human rights, including the detention of any person for two years; order restriction of movement, freedom of expression, employment, residence or activity; prohibit the printing, publication, sale, issue, circulation or possession of any written material, and prohibit its communication through worth of mouth etc.
And yet Mr Rabuka was free to publish his book “No Other Way”. But no criticism of his book was permitted, and one USP Indo-Fijian lecturer who dared to criticise it, was detained and severely beaten up. My own critical counter-book Fiji: Coups in Paradise was banished from the bookshelves of Fiji. As Mr Rabuka plunged the economy into a decline, he was offered $50,000 from an Australian publishing company as a retainer for his book and a TV documentary. The RFMF, commenting on brief detentions and harassment said, “Due to the current conditions everyone is suspect until proven innocent”. Mr Rabuka went on to become the Prime Minister and chairman of the Great Council of Chiefs on the bandwagon of nationalist and racist ideology, an ideology which Commodore Bainimarama claims he wants to stamp out once and for all.
If that is so, let us hope that he will not follow in the footsteps of Mr Rabuka, for many of my own family members still bear the scars of Mr Rabuka’s storm troopers on their chests, and so do many other citizens from the 1987 and 2000 coups.
The Indo-Fijians, in 1987, were beaten, forced to stand in sewage pools, and subjected to other forms of humiliating punishments. The vast majority of Fijians remained silent to the oppression and racism in their midst. In fact, many joined in its continuation for the next ten years.
But freedom, as former military strongman Mr Rabuka found out only very recently (after he was successfully defended by the President of the Fiji Law Society, Mr Sharma, on inciting mutiny), is a cherished and inviolable right.
Or did your UNIT fail miserably to gain prior knowledge? The Intelligence Operatives who were sent to infiltrate Speight group became part of it
Were you part of the plot to remove Aiyaz Khaiyum as Attorney-General? When will you apologize or explain why your Intelligence Unit failed to stop or warn of the George Speight coup in May 2000?
Who was Speight waiting for to takeover from him?
FRANK BAINIMARAMA: "I had abrogated the 1997 Constitution because I was satisfied that people engaged in the events of May 19 [2000 George Speight coup] were of the perception that the document had watered down the interests of indigenous Fijians. Whether or not those perceptions accorded with reality was not my principal consideration. The perceptions were genuinely held by largely unsophisticated Fijians not equipped to adequately comprehend the niceties and technicalities of the [1997] Constitution.” -
The then RFMF Commander Frank Bainimarama in his affidavit before the
Fiji Court of Appeal, February 2001
We would like to remind Ratu Jone Kalouniwai that his Intelligence Unit's abject failure to warn the Chaudhry government of the planned 2000 coup led to the terrible infliction of violence on the Indo-Fijians as chronicled by Father John McEvoy and his team, July 2000:
LETTER TO EDITOR: FIJI LOOTINGS AND BURNINGS TAILEVU PROVINCE
Submitted by admin on Thu, 07/27/2000 - 00:00LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Wednesday, July 26, 2000
FIJI LOOTINGS AND BURNINGS TAILEVU PROVINCE
To Whom It May Concern:
The Looting and Burnings in Dawasamu, Waidalice, Namoli and Delasui areas of Tailevu Province - From July 8 to July 20, 2000
The following is an attempt to document some of the atrocities committed against Indian cattle, pig and vegetable farmers in the Namoli, Waidalice, Delasui and Dawasamu areas of Tailevu Province after the take-over of Korovou Town, Tailevu, on Saturday, July 8, 2000, by Speight’s supporters in the area. During the 12 days that followed this takeover, orchestrated crimes were inflicted on a terrified and helpless population living on their isolated farms.
Having documented some cases of looting and break-ins at Muaniweni, Naitasiri, after the May 19 Coup, various groups, religious and others, encouraged me to do similar reports on the Tailevu happenings. We undertook this on Monday, June 24. Earlier attempts of visits were advised against and deemed imprudent. Even on Monday, people in Korovou were not sure if it were safe for us to go to Dawasamu. However, having come thus far the team decided to persevere and travel on.
The team for the day was Radha Krishnan, Eli Daulato, a well-known teacher from the area, Sr. Xavier SOLN and myself.
Dawasamu is reached by traveling northeast form Suva on the Kings Road to Korovou (40 km) on to Natovi on the Lodoni Road (20 km) and on the Dawasamu Road for yet another 15 kilometers.
Anand Singh: We first stopped at the pig and cattle farm of Anand Singh from the Waidalice area about 6 km from the town of Korovou and into the left about 2 km from the main road. Anand, his wife Ishra Devi, daughter Mala - a Form 6 student at Fulton College and a son live here on a very well-run pig and cattle farm of about 213 acres lease land - the lease has expired about a year ago. The family has farmed here for the past 25 years. At the present time they are trying to sell the farm and the stock.
During that week of the Korovou takeover (July 8 - July 20) the Indian families along the main road came to shelter in his house and later on, as reports of looting and stealing got worse and when the rebels but up a road block at the Waidalice bridge on the main road leading towards Korovou, these people moved further into the hills and lived with Fijian families. Anand’s wife and daughter moved to Suva. He hid his vehicles further back from his house as reports came in of farmers who had their twin cabs and other vehicles stolen.
Due to good leadership and the erecting of a roadblock on the road leading to his farm with the help of his Fijian neighbors (all of whom are originally from Motoriki in Ovalau) he protected his two vehicles and perhaps his house. When the rebels took over the place they wanted vehicles for transport and pigs and cattle to feed their gang.
The rebels eventually approached Anand and told him if he gave a pig they would not burn his house. It was his turn to give a pig since a neighboring farmer had given a cow. Anand gave them a pig while another neighbor gave them 2 cows. Isolation was the enemy and because the farms were far apart it was impossible to protect one another. Of course the rebels holding the town of Korovou were also holding both police and soldiers hostage in the police station all during this time. They had taken the soldiers weapons and were patrolling their checkpoints and town with these.
Namoli Settlement: In nearby Namoli settlement 5/6 dairy farmers were attacked and their homes were looted and robbed. One case it was particularly bad -- an elderly couple was attacked from 9:00 pm in the night until 1:00 am in the morning. The woman suffered broken ribs and was badly bruised all over. (I met this couple receiving counseling at the Women’s Crisis Centre in Suva on Friday July 21). Another man whose house was attacked in Namoli has died since.
Although the community here has a burial ground the other side of Korovou town, his family took his body, for safety reasons, to be buried in Suva. We met the funeral procession as we traveled to Korovou on that Monday morning.
Jaswant Singh – Veilolo: Jaswant Singh, his wife, 4 children, mother and his sister Kamlesh, schoolteacher at Natovi Catholic School - living in Veilolo, 5 km further on from Natovi jetty on the Dawasamu Road. Their farm is yet another well run pineapple and vegetable farm. About 40 youths from Lawaki village protected this house from being burned and looted for the 2 weeks duration of the troubles in the area. Indian houses around were either looted or burned. The rebels came and demanded the keys of their truck that the family used to take pineapples to market. However, when they saw the number of the Fijian youth they departed.
In Lawaki Settlement 8/7/2000, Kamlesh Singh reports: The day of the roadblock the whole settlement was gathered together for a wedding. We heard of several looting cases in parts of Tailevu. We also heard that vehicles were being seized. About 2:00 pm, two truckloads of people (mostly outsiders to us) stopped at one of the homes. Inside one of the trucks two policemen were tied and some soldiers also. Some men got off put a knife to an Indian farmer’s throat and demanded the keys to his vehicle. He was threatened that his home would be burned down. They took his pick-up van. After half an hour they did the same at another home and took another pick-up van.
Other farmers once alerted of what was happening hid their vehicles out of sight from the main road. The nearby villagers came in great numbers and stayed with families. Those from Lawaki village stayed in my home and are still here at the present time. Those from Burelevu village stayed with other families. All the women slept in the home where the wedding was supposed to take place for one and a half weeks.
Only one home in Lawaki was looted. It seemed they were just about to set it on fire when the boys looking after our property discovered it and chased them away. This house was broken up, doors and windows were smashed, furniture was wrecked and groceries scattered all over the floor.
On Sunday night 9/7/2000, 3 men came home and asked for our vehicle. The Fijian men who stayed home overnight handled them. They went away, probably scared when they saw the number of men in our house.
The two vehicles that were seized were returned. The boys from Namena village went and demanded the return of the vehicles from Rakiraki. (The Chief of Namena is the Ratu (Chief) of the Tikina (Rakiraki).
In the Nasoni Area: From Veilolo to Dawasamu it is reckoned that some 20 Indian houses in all were looted, ransacked and badly damaged and one completely burnt down.
Houses Burnt
Vinesh Prasad, his wife and their two children (1 and 3 years old), his parents Rajend Prasad and Kesar Mati, his cousin Ritesh, lived here in a nice four bedroom house in Veicorocoro, some 3 km from Veilolo.
The Facts
At about 8.00 pm on Sunday night July 9, 2000 a group of Fijian youth numbering about 20 in all arrived in their church cloths. Some 7 of them entered the house while the remainder stayed outside. They intimidated the family, punched some of the family in the side and held a knife to the neck of Ritesh (cousin). They robbed and ransacked the entire house and took everything they could, money, jewelry, TV and deck electric tools and carpentry tools. Vinesh says that he thinks that this group was from the village of Qelekuro.
Because of this robbery most of the family moved elsewhere. The parents went to Ba. His wife and two children went to Rakiraki. Vinesh himself moved in with a neighboring Fijian family on the opposite side of the road.
On the following Sunday night 16 July, at about 1:00 am, Vinesh and the Fijian family were awakened with the sound of a huge explosion as the house went up in flames and within minutes the entire 4 bedroom house, estimated cost $50,000.00, was gutted and soon lay in a heap of ashes. Even the nearby lemon and mango trees were burned.
When we visited this area at about 3.00 pm on Monday, Vinesh, in his mid-twenties, was working in the nearby field. When he saw us approaching his burnout family house, he came to chat with us and to tell us his story. It was a most emotional meeting between himself and Eli Daulato. She was his teacher at Natovi Catholic School some years ago. They were both wanting for words. As for Vinesh, he said that he was glad that his family was safe.
Bhagat Ram: No. in family 5. This was the first house in Dawasamu to be burnt. This was a very large concrete house with tiled floor. This family has now moved to Suva.
Kenal Dhasi Singh: No. in family 3. House burned. This family has moved to his brother’s house, living in another part of Dawasamu.
Shiu Ram’s very large 6-bedroom house and garage was burned on Thursday night July 13, at about 10:00 pm. His car and three generators were also burned in the inferno. This burning followed the usual pattern used for burning houses in the area. Bottles of petrol was set alight and lobbed through the window, which on impact would explode and quickly cause the fire to spread quickly. A week before this they attacked the house with stones. They poured petrol over two cows and burned them -- they died. They also injured two other cattles by cutting their legs with a cane knife. They then smashed the window screen glass of their two trucks.
One Fijian and five Indian men work for Shiu on his vegetable farm. Since the initial attack they are living with Fijian families. Kamal Prasad, his wife and their daughter Rajnita Wati - a Form 6 student at Queen Victoria School were living in the house the night it was burned. They fled to the nearby village. Rajnita lost everything she needs for school in the fire, cloths, books, uniforms and bags etc. Shiu Ram was in Suva at the time. He is still there but he has returned to have a look a few times. He is shocked at the sight. His wife was in Australia for a daughter’s wedding even before the Coup May 19 took place.
Jadish Prasad - Naivinitavi Settlement: His father and Shiu Ram are bothers. When the thugs arrived at his house they entered and gathered up cloths and set fire to them inside as a threat. Then they demanded $500.00 but Jadish had only $250.00. He gave them this and they departed.
The above is just an effort to highlight a few cases in this area and to show the extent of damage that can be done in a short time to individuals and families by thugs and lawless men. We meet only a few people affected and in pain as a result of the present political situation. We have done this for the benefit of any group or organization -- church or political, national or international -- that may want to know or want to help out in some way.
Thank You.
(Fr) John McEvoy Columban Fathers P.O. Box 2364 Government Buildings Suva, FIJI Tel: 679-308 290 Fax: 679-308 292 Email: [email protected] Mobile: 953800 Nasese, Suva, FIJI ISLANDS
Submitted by admin on Thu, 07/27/2000 - 00:00LETTER TO THE EDITOR
Wednesday, July 26, 2000
FIJI LOOTINGS AND BURNINGS TAILEVU PROVINCE
To Whom It May Concern:
The Looting and Burnings in Dawasamu, Waidalice, Namoli and Delasui areas of Tailevu Province - From July 8 to July 20, 2000
The following is an attempt to document some of the atrocities committed against Indian cattle, pig and vegetable farmers in the Namoli, Waidalice, Delasui and Dawasamu areas of Tailevu Province after the take-over of Korovou Town, Tailevu, on Saturday, July 8, 2000, by Speight’s supporters in the area. During the 12 days that followed this takeover, orchestrated crimes were inflicted on a terrified and helpless population living on their isolated farms.
Having documented some cases of looting and break-ins at Muaniweni, Naitasiri, after the May 19 Coup, various groups, religious and others, encouraged me to do similar reports on the Tailevu happenings. We undertook this on Monday, June 24. Earlier attempts of visits were advised against and deemed imprudent. Even on Monday, people in Korovou were not sure if it were safe for us to go to Dawasamu. However, having come thus far the team decided to persevere and travel on.
The team for the day was Radha Krishnan, Eli Daulato, a well-known teacher from the area, Sr. Xavier SOLN and myself.
Dawasamu is reached by traveling northeast form Suva on the Kings Road to Korovou (40 km) on to Natovi on the Lodoni Road (20 km) and on the Dawasamu Road for yet another 15 kilometers.
Anand Singh: We first stopped at the pig and cattle farm of Anand Singh from the Waidalice area about 6 km from the town of Korovou and into the left about 2 km from the main road. Anand, his wife Ishra Devi, daughter Mala - a Form 6 student at Fulton College and a son live here on a very well-run pig and cattle farm of about 213 acres lease land - the lease has expired about a year ago. The family has farmed here for the past 25 years. At the present time they are trying to sell the farm and the stock.
During that week of the Korovou takeover (July 8 - July 20) the Indian families along the main road came to shelter in his house and later on, as reports of looting and stealing got worse and when the rebels but up a road block at the Waidalice bridge on the main road leading towards Korovou, these people moved further into the hills and lived with Fijian families. Anand’s wife and daughter moved to Suva. He hid his vehicles further back from his house as reports came in of farmers who had their twin cabs and other vehicles stolen.
Due to good leadership and the erecting of a roadblock on the road leading to his farm with the help of his Fijian neighbors (all of whom are originally from Motoriki in Ovalau) he protected his two vehicles and perhaps his house. When the rebels took over the place they wanted vehicles for transport and pigs and cattle to feed their gang.
The rebels eventually approached Anand and told him if he gave a pig they would not burn his house. It was his turn to give a pig since a neighboring farmer had given a cow. Anand gave them a pig while another neighbor gave them 2 cows. Isolation was the enemy and because the farms were far apart it was impossible to protect one another. Of course the rebels holding the town of Korovou were also holding both police and soldiers hostage in the police station all during this time. They had taken the soldiers weapons and were patrolling their checkpoints and town with these.
Namoli Settlement: In nearby Namoli settlement 5/6 dairy farmers were attacked and their homes were looted and robbed. One case it was particularly bad -- an elderly couple was attacked from 9:00 pm in the night until 1:00 am in the morning. The woman suffered broken ribs and was badly bruised all over. (I met this couple receiving counseling at the Women’s Crisis Centre in Suva on Friday July 21). Another man whose house was attacked in Namoli has died since.
Although the community here has a burial ground the other side of Korovou town, his family took his body, for safety reasons, to be buried in Suva. We met the funeral procession as we traveled to Korovou on that Monday morning.
Jaswant Singh – Veilolo: Jaswant Singh, his wife, 4 children, mother and his sister Kamlesh, schoolteacher at Natovi Catholic School - living in Veilolo, 5 km further on from Natovi jetty on the Dawasamu Road. Their farm is yet another well run pineapple and vegetable farm. About 40 youths from Lawaki village protected this house from being burned and looted for the 2 weeks duration of the troubles in the area. Indian houses around were either looted or burned. The rebels came and demanded the keys of their truck that the family used to take pineapples to market. However, when they saw the number of the Fijian youth they departed.
In Lawaki Settlement 8/7/2000, Kamlesh Singh reports: The day of the roadblock the whole settlement was gathered together for a wedding. We heard of several looting cases in parts of Tailevu. We also heard that vehicles were being seized. About 2:00 pm, two truckloads of people (mostly outsiders to us) stopped at one of the homes. Inside one of the trucks two policemen were tied and some soldiers also. Some men got off put a knife to an Indian farmer’s throat and demanded the keys to his vehicle. He was threatened that his home would be burned down. They took his pick-up van. After half an hour they did the same at another home and took another pick-up van.
Other farmers once alerted of what was happening hid their vehicles out of sight from the main road. The nearby villagers came in great numbers and stayed with families. Those from Lawaki village stayed in my home and are still here at the present time. Those from Burelevu village stayed with other families. All the women slept in the home where the wedding was supposed to take place for one and a half weeks.
Only one home in Lawaki was looted. It seemed they were just about to set it on fire when the boys looking after our property discovered it and chased them away. This house was broken up, doors and windows were smashed, furniture was wrecked and groceries scattered all over the floor.
On Sunday night 9/7/2000, 3 men came home and asked for our vehicle. The Fijian men who stayed home overnight handled them. They went away, probably scared when they saw the number of men in our house.
The two vehicles that were seized were returned. The boys from Namena village went and demanded the return of the vehicles from Rakiraki. (The Chief of Namena is the Ratu (Chief) of the Tikina (Rakiraki).
In the Nasoni Area: From Veilolo to Dawasamu it is reckoned that some 20 Indian houses in all were looted, ransacked and badly damaged and one completely burnt down.
Houses Burnt
Vinesh Prasad, his wife and their two children (1 and 3 years old), his parents Rajend Prasad and Kesar Mati, his cousin Ritesh, lived here in a nice four bedroom house in Veicorocoro, some 3 km from Veilolo.
The Facts
At about 8.00 pm on Sunday night July 9, 2000 a group of Fijian youth numbering about 20 in all arrived in their church cloths. Some 7 of them entered the house while the remainder stayed outside. They intimidated the family, punched some of the family in the side and held a knife to the neck of Ritesh (cousin). They robbed and ransacked the entire house and took everything they could, money, jewelry, TV and deck electric tools and carpentry tools. Vinesh says that he thinks that this group was from the village of Qelekuro.
Because of this robbery most of the family moved elsewhere. The parents went to Ba. His wife and two children went to Rakiraki. Vinesh himself moved in with a neighboring Fijian family on the opposite side of the road.
On the following Sunday night 16 July, at about 1:00 am, Vinesh and the Fijian family were awakened with the sound of a huge explosion as the house went up in flames and within minutes the entire 4 bedroom house, estimated cost $50,000.00, was gutted and soon lay in a heap of ashes. Even the nearby lemon and mango trees were burned.
When we visited this area at about 3.00 pm on Monday, Vinesh, in his mid-twenties, was working in the nearby field. When he saw us approaching his burnout family house, he came to chat with us and to tell us his story. It was a most emotional meeting between himself and Eli Daulato. She was his teacher at Natovi Catholic School some years ago. They were both wanting for words. As for Vinesh, he said that he was glad that his family was safe.
Bhagat Ram: No. in family 5. This was the first house in Dawasamu to be burnt. This was a very large concrete house with tiled floor. This family has now moved to Suva.
Kenal Dhasi Singh: No. in family 3. House burned. This family has moved to his brother’s house, living in another part of Dawasamu.
Shiu Ram’s very large 6-bedroom house and garage was burned on Thursday night July 13, at about 10:00 pm. His car and three generators were also burned in the inferno. This burning followed the usual pattern used for burning houses in the area. Bottles of petrol was set alight and lobbed through the window, which on impact would explode and quickly cause the fire to spread quickly. A week before this they attacked the house with stones. They poured petrol over two cows and burned them -- they died. They also injured two other cattles by cutting their legs with a cane knife. They then smashed the window screen glass of their two trucks.
One Fijian and five Indian men work for Shiu on his vegetable farm. Since the initial attack they are living with Fijian families. Kamal Prasad, his wife and their daughter Rajnita Wati - a Form 6 student at Queen Victoria School were living in the house the night it was burned. They fled to the nearby village. Rajnita lost everything she needs for school in the fire, cloths, books, uniforms and bags etc. Shiu Ram was in Suva at the time. He is still there but he has returned to have a look a few times. He is shocked at the sight. His wife was in Australia for a daughter’s wedding even before the Coup May 19 took place.
Jadish Prasad - Naivinitavi Settlement: His father and Shiu Ram are bothers. When the thugs arrived at his house they entered and gathered up cloths and set fire to them inside as a threat. Then they demanded $500.00 but Jadish had only $250.00. He gave them this and they departed.
The above is just an effort to highlight a few cases in this area and to show the extent of damage that can be done in a short time to individuals and families by thugs and lawless men. We meet only a few people affected and in pain as a result of the present political situation. We have done this for the benefit of any group or organization -- church or political, national or international -- that may want to know or want to help out in some way.
Thank You.
(Fr) John McEvoy Columban Fathers P.O. Box 2364 Government Buildings Suva, FIJI Tel: 679-308 290 Fax: 679-308 292 Email: [email protected] Mobile: 953800 Nasese, Suva, FIJI ISLANDS
From The Fiji Sun, 17 September 2017:
Shakuntala Wati remembers vividly the pain of watching helplessly as everything her family had worked hard for go up in flames at the height of the 2000 coup.
Ms Wati, 60, said a group of fearsome men, supporters of George Speight’s coup, first stoned the house before they fire-bombed it at Dawasamu, Tailevu.
She, her husband and seven-year-old son fled with just the clothes they were wearing. The next minute their carrier and tractor were engulfed in flames.
Her account of that tragic event is one of the untold stories of the horrors of the coup that deposed Mahendra Chaudhry, the first Indo-Fijian prime minister. The coup was carried out to seek iTaukei political supremacy. She decided to tell her story to back the Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama and Colonel Ratu Jone Kalouniwai about the role of the military in restoring order. Mr Bainimarama and Colonel Ratu Jone have criticised National Federation Party MP Parmod Chand in Parliament for blaming Mr Bainimarama and the military for the coup. The coup unleashed a spate of violence in parts of the country including Dawasamu, by supporters.
Ms Wati, who now lives in Calia, Navua, said she stood under a tree with her son, while her house burned to ashes.
It was around 7.30pm on Wednesday evening on July 12, 2000, when Ms Wati was having dinner with her husband, the late Kewal Singh who was 61 then, and son Shelvin Chand when three iTaukei men walked into their home and demanded yaqona and money.
“My husband said to the men that we do not have the yaqona and any money on hand. They said to us to give them the money and they will be protected. But we did not have anything to give except for the food I had cooked that evening.
“After they were done with the dinner, they went out and a few minutes later, stones were thrown at our house. My husband ran outside to see what happened but by then a group of men came and threw something that caught fire in our house.
“I quickly grabbed my son and held onto him tight to save him and ran outside the house. I still do not remember if I ran downstairs or I jumped. I just had in my mind to save our lives.
“As I stood under the tree with my son next to me, I watched our house, tractor and carrier which were our source of income burn to ashes.
“When we went to the Police post, we saw a group of men drinking yaqona and Police officers standing there but they could not help us.
“Two days before our house burned, my husband’s brother’s house was also burned. After the incident at our house, the place we got shelter at was burned two weeks later.
“We were left with nothing, not even a single coin to spend. We only had what we were wearing.
“When we moved from Dawasamu, I have been too scared to go back even for a visit to see the place where we used to stay,” Ms Wati said.
She said after the incident, her husband had run around places to get help but nothing was done for them.
“I do not know where he went, but he had gone to get help for us, especially our son, but we never got any responses back from anyone,” she said.
“After we moved to Navua, we heard the Republic of Fiji Military officers had gone to Dawasamu to control the situation there as it was getting worse day by day.
“Till this day, it has been 17 years but the incident haunts me. I still have that as a memory of how our lives took a huge turn around and left us with nothing.
“Since then, I have had very high blood pressure but the memory never goes away. It never will.”
Ms Wati, 60, said a group of fearsome men, supporters of George Speight’s coup, first stoned the house before they fire-bombed it at Dawasamu, Tailevu.
She, her husband and seven-year-old son fled with just the clothes they were wearing. The next minute their carrier and tractor were engulfed in flames.
Her account of that tragic event is one of the untold stories of the horrors of the coup that deposed Mahendra Chaudhry, the first Indo-Fijian prime minister. The coup was carried out to seek iTaukei political supremacy. She decided to tell her story to back the Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama and Colonel Ratu Jone Kalouniwai about the role of the military in restoring order. Mr Bainimarama and Colonel Ratu Jone have criticised National Federation Party MP Parmod Chand in Parliament for blaming Mr Bainimarama and the military for the coup. The coup unleashed a spate of violence in parts of the country including Dawasamu, by supporters.
Ms Wati, who now lives in Calia, Navua, said she stood under a tree with her son, while her house burned to ashes.
It was around 7.30pm on Wednesday evening on July 12, 2000, when Ms Wati was having dinner with her husband, the late Kewal Singh who was 61 then, and son Shelvin Chand when three iTaukei men walked into their home and demanded yaqona and money.
“My husband said to the men that we do not have the yaqona and any money on hand. They said to us to give them the money and they will be protected. But we did not have anything to give except for the food I had cooked that evening.
“After they were done with the dinner, they went out and a few minutes later, stones were thrown at our house. My husband ran outside to see what happened but by then a group of men came and threw something that caught fire in our house.
“I quickly grabbed my son and held onto him tight to save him and ran outside the house. I still do not remember if I ran downstairs or I jumped. I just had in my mind to save our lives.
“As I stood under the tree with my son next to me, I watched our house, tractor and carrier which were our source of income burn to ashes.
“When we went to the Police post, we saw a group of men drinking yaqona and Police officers standing there but they could not help us.
“Two days before our house burned, my husband’s brother’s house was also burned. After the incident at our house, the place we got shelter at was burned two weeks later.
“We were left with nothing, not even a single coin to spend. We only had what we were wearing.
“When we moved from Dawasamu, I have been too scared to go back even for a visit to see the place where we used to stay,” Ms Wati said.
She said after the incident, her husband had run around places to get help but nothing was done for them.
“I do not know where he went, but he had gone to get help for us, especially our son, but we never got any responses back from anyone,” she said.
“After we moved to Navua, we heard the Republic of Fiji Military officers had gone to Dawasamu to control the situation there as it was getting worse day by day.
“Till this day, it has been 17 years but the incident haunts me. I still have that as a memory of how our lives took a huge turn around and left us with nothing.
“Since then, I have had very high blood pressure but the memory never goes away. It never will.”
The acts of both usurpers can only be justified if it can be shown that the measures respectively taken by them were dictated by the necessity to save the State from chaos and disintegration and were in the best interests of the State and its inhabitants.
In other words, their acts could only be justifiable on the basis of the Doctrine of State Necessity, a difficult and not too well known branch of the law.
The Doctrine of State Necessity is based on the application of three well-known maxims, namely,
(1) that which is otherwise unlawful, necessity makes lawful;
(2) that the safety of the people is the supreme law:
(3) and the safety of the State is the supreme law.
These maxims, which have been generally relied on to justify the acquisition of private property by the executive for the defence of the State in times of war, have also been accepted as being applicable to other instances of national emergency which threaten the security of the State.
Applying the conditions set out in the above passages on the Doctrine of State Necessity to the acts of Ratu Mara and the Interim Military rulers it will be seen that none of them have satisfied the conditions laid down, and are clearly in breach of the doctrine.
The inclusion of George Speight, his supporters, and the gunmen, in any new interim administration, would also be unsustainable on the basis of the Doctrine of State Necessity and therefore illegal and unconstitutional.
The most useful guidelines set out as a prerequisite for the operation of interim administration or martial law administration, when the law of necessity is pleaded as justification for the usurper's actions, can be found in the following words of the British constitutional lawyer Leslie Wolf-Phillips.
Analysing the military takeover of Pakistan by General Zia -ul-Haag in 1977, Wolf-Phillips wrote:
'The law of necessity is a law for caretakers not for landlords. In the case of present-day Pakistan it is the future elected representatives of the people who are the landlords and it is the duty of the caretakers to take care; to continue the metaphor within the judgment of the Supreme Court, the care takers should promote the good of the people, ensure good order in the neighbourhood of the property, keep to the condition of the deeds as to the use of the property, bring the property to a habitable condition as soon as possible, and hand it over to those who own it. The caretakers are not entitled to make radical changes in the structure, introduce restrictive covenants, keep the landlords waiting because the caretakers are not satisfied with the furniture and the decor, and impose conditions on the landlords for return to use of their own property'.
In a similar vein is the following oft-quoted passage from Raymond Odent's Contentiedux Administraif (1961) which was alluded to by Wolf-Phillip's study entitled 'Constitutional Legitimacy:
A Study of the Doctrine of Necessity', published in Third World Quarterly journal in October 1979:
'First, it is necessary that the circumstances in terms of time and place, have an undeniable and patently exceptional character: secondly, it is necessary that the authority which has normal competence in the matter has not got the physical or juridical possibility to intervene and, consequently, to take proper steps to avert the circumstances. The third condition refers to the end to be achieved; this end must be of such importance that if it were not achieved, one of the fundamental tasks of the public powers could not be accomplished - Besides, decisions taken within the frame of the theory of exceptional powers in an emergency must be of such a nature as to satisfy two conditions: first, these decisions must be very precisely proportionate to the aim to be achieved, and secondly, in the case of decisions concerning regulations, they must be limited in time for the duration of the exceptional circumstances.'
As it turns out, the democratically elected government of Mahendra Chaudhry has been dismissed, the 1997 Constitution abolished, and there are talks of possible immunities for the hostage-takers, including George Speight, the principal 'revolutionary' in the crisis.
If the interim government, and its 'revolutionary elements' introduce an entirely new racist Constitution, all the legislative and administrative measures taken by them, may be open to legal challenge by Mahendra Chaudhry and his government on basis that there was no civil or State necessity.
In the famous Asma Jilani case in Pakistan (1972), Hamoodur Rahman, Chief Justice, in considering President Ayub Khan's action in handing over the presidency of Pakistan to the Armed Forces, asserted that General Ayub Khan had no such power and that, accordingly, the assumption of office by Agha Mohammed Yahya Khan as Chief Martial Law Administrator and later as President was unconstitutional: being an act of usurpation.
In that case, the Court also considered the application of the doctrine of the international lawyer Hans Kelsen, viz, that 'any abrupt political change not within the contemplation of the Constitution constitutes a revolution, no matter how temporary or transitory the change, if no one has taken any steps to oppose it'.
The learned Chief Justice expressed his entire disapproval with this doctrine in the following words:
'With the utmost respect, therefore, I would agree with the criticism that the learned Chief Justice (Muhammed Munir) not only misapplied the doctrine of Hans Kelsen, but also fell into error that it was a generally accepted doctrine of modern jurisprudence? The principle enunciated by him is wholly unsustainable and I am duty bound to say that it cannot be treated as good law either on the principle of stare decisis or even otherwise.'
The Chief Justice then came to a conclusion which would perhaps be the way to solve Fiji's problems in due course: 'I too am of the opinion that recourse has to be taken to the Doctrine of Necessity where the ignoring of it would result in disastrous consequences to the body politic and upset the social order itself but I respectfully beg to disagree with the view that it is a doctrine for validating the illegal acts of usurpers? I would call this a principle of condonation and not legitimisation.'
The Doctrine of Necessity, it seems, however, cannot be satisfied in the current Fijian crisis because the actions of Speight, his advisors, and his gunmen are purely of a criminal nature (treason), and who should be prosecuted for treason, hostage-taking, kidnapping, blackmail, and incitement to violence and murder (the innocent policeman).
Moreover, the Fijian State as a whole had never been on the brink of civil war or facing widespread violence and revolution. It was only the capital Suva that had been plunged into chaos by a bunch of hoodlums following the illegal seizure of Parliament. What the Fijian military and the President ought to have done in this instance was to declare 'Parliament' a no-go zone' and treated the whole crisis as a hostage situation. It thus follows that the invocation of Doctrine of Necessity was never an issue in the whole sordid affair.
In other words, at no time was the Fijian State on a brink of total collapse.
In 1987, the late Ratu Sir Penaia Ganilau, said he had dismissed the Bavadra government because he was unable to restore Parliament and that it was his responsibility to take into account the 'practical realities of the situation and the social structure of Fiji'. He also proposed to exercise the prerogative of mercy in favour of Sitiveni Rabuka and others 'implicated in the illegal seizure of power' because 'no useful purpose would be served by vindictiveness which might hinder the complete restoration of legitimacy'.
Dr Bavadra and his ministers were released although he declared those involved in the coup were guilty of treason. They also challenged the legality of the dissolution of Parliament 'in that it was not done on the advice of the Prime Minister as required by the Constitution'.
In this particular instance, it seems that the military rulers are treading a similar path by planning to pardon Speight and his gunmen. The whole act, besides being illegal, is also setting a dangerous precedent for the seizure and overthrow of future Fijian governments by any disgruntled 'Tom, Dick and Mary'.
The actions of the late President Ganilau, then governor-general, insofar as the Constitution was concerned in dissolving Parliament, is widely acknowledged by legal experts, to have been illegal, and a similar judgment could be reserved for the actions of President Ratu Mara in the current crisis.
The contrived situation created by the President appointing a minister to be acting PM on condition that he advises dismissal of the whole cabinet. The outcome did not address the hostage crisis at hand and could not be said to have been necessary for that purpose.
The President is supposed to have ceded or assigned executive authority to the Army and has himself stepped aside or stepped down. I don't' think he can step aside and allow the Army Commander to take over his authority. And if he does, then the Vice President should take over. Any such move is also unrelated to dealing with the hostage crisis.
Having obtained 'executive authority' and therefore purporting to act lawfully under ostensibly delegated power to focus on the hostage issue, any attempt to abrogate the constitution would seem to be also beyond the pale of the necessity doctrine.
The imposition of martial law, the abrogation of the multi-racial 1997 Fiji Constitution and the possible pardoning of Speight and his henchmen for their actions, which has thrown the capital Suva into turmoil, does not fit squarely with the Doctrine of State Necessity.
The essence of the doctrine is that if an action that is illegal was taken to safeguard the security of the state or the welfare of its citizens when no lawful course was possible, the necessity of the case excuses the illegality.
The Doctrine of Necessity requires that the old constitutional order be respected as far as possible, with the only minimum deviations from it necessary for the exigencies of the situation being permitted.
It now seems that the new administration appears to have committed itself to the aim of Speight and his gunmen - the establishment of Fijian supremacy - which in principle violates all international legal conventions.
Similarly, there would appear to be little social or legal justification for the general amnesty of Speight and his collaborators. It is now quite clear that Rabuka's amnesty of 1987 may well have encouraged Speight, the militant Taukei movement, and their collaborators to wreak havoc and lawlessness in the name of Fijian nationalism.
In Rabuka's case, the exercise of the 'prerogative of mercy' was only possible after a conviction but Ratu Penaia's explanation was that no purpose would be served by vindictiveness, which might hinder the complete restoration of legitimacy.
It seems that Speight is being allowed to follow in Rabuka's footsteps, instead of being marched into a court of law to determine the legitimacy of his actions in the dismissal of a democratically elected Chaudhry government, the 'suspension of Ratu Mara's presidency, the abrogation of the multi-racial 1997 Constitution of Fiji, and the violence and thuggery of his hoodlums.
The only necessity, it seems, was for the military and the police, to solve an ugly hostage crisis, which had donned the mantle of Fijian nationalism in the heart of the capital and the seat of power in Fiji.
The military and the Fijian establishment, it is obvious, did not contemplate the second test of the Doctrine of Necessity: there must be no other course of action reasonably available.
Instead, they are going along with the demands of a gunman - Speight - in the guise of the Doctrine of State Necessity, to implement 'apartheid in paradise' in Fiji.
In other words, their acts could only be justifiable on the basis of the Doctrine of State Necessity, a difficult and not too well known branch of the law.
The Doctrine of State Necessity is based on the application of three well-known maxims, namely,
(1) that which is otherwise unlawful, necessity makes lawful;
(2) that the safety of the people is the supreme law:
(3) and the safety of the State is the supreme law.
These maxims, which have been generally relied on to justify the acquisition of private property by the executive for the defence of the State in times of war, have also been accepted as being applicable to other instances of national emergency which threaten the security of the State.
Applying the conditions set out in the above passages on the Doctrine of State Necessity to the acts of Ratu Mara and the Interim Military rulers it will be seen that none of them have satisfied the conditions laid down, and are clearly in breach of the doctrine.
The inclusion of George Speight, his supporters, and the gunmen, in any new interim administration, would also be unsustainable on the basis of the Doctrine of State Necessity and therefore illegal and unconstitutional.
The most useful guidelines set out as a prerequisite for the operation of interim administration or martial law administration, when the law of necessity is pleaded as justification for the usurper's actions, can be found in the following words of the British constitutional lawyer Leslie Wolf-Phillips.
Analysing the military takeover of Pakistan by General Zia -ul-Haag in 1977, Wolf-Phillips wrote:
'The law of necessity is a law for caretakers not for landlords. In the case of present-day Pakistan it is the future elected representatives of the people who are the landlords and it is the duty of the caretakers to take care; to continue the metaphor within the judgment of the Supreme Court, the care takers should promote the good of the people, ensure good order in the neighbourhood of the property, keep to the condition of the deeds as to the use of the property, bring the property to a habitable condition as soon as possible, and hand it over to those who own it. The caretakers are not entitled to make radical changes in the structure, introduce restrictive covenants, keep the landlords waiting because the caretakers are not satisfied with the furniture and the decor, and impose conditions on the landlords for return to use of their own property'.
In a similar vein is the following oft-quoted passage from Raymond Odent's Contentiedux Administraif (1961) which was alluded to by Wolf-Phillip's study entitled 'Constitutional Legitimacy:
A Study of the Doctrine of Necessity', published in Third World Quarterly journal in October 1979:
'First, it is necessary that the circumstances in terms of time and place, have an undeniable and patently exceptional character: secondly, it is necessary that the authority which has normal competence in the matter has not got the physical or juridical possibility to intervene and, consequently, to take proper steps to avert the circumstances. The third condition refers to the end to be achieved; this end must be of such importance that if it were not achieved, one of the fundamental tasks of the public powers could not be accomplished - Besides, decisions taken within the frame of the theory of exceptional powers in an emergency must be of such a nature as to satisfy two conditions: first, these decisions must be very precisely proportionate to the aim to be achieved, and secondly, in the case of decisions concerning regulations, they must be limited in time for the duration of the exceptional circumstances.'
As it turns out, the democratically elected government of Mahendra Chaudhry has been dismissed, the 1997 Constitution abolished, and there are talks of possible immunities for the hostage-takers, including George Speight, the principal 'revolutionary' in the crisis.
If the interim government, and its 'revolutionary elements' introduce an entirely new racist Constitution, all the legislative and administrative measures taken by them, may be open to legal challenge by Mahendra Chaudhry and his government on basis that there was no civil or State necessity.
In the famous Asma Jilani case in Pakistan (1972), Hamoodur Rahman, Chief Justice, in considering President Ayub Khan's action in handing over the presidency of Pakistan to the Armed Forces, asserted that General Ayub Khan had no such power and that, accordingly, the assumption of office by Agha Mohammed Yahya Khan as Chief Martial Law Administrator and later as President was unconstitutional: being an act of usurpation.
In that case, the Court also considered the application of the doctrine of the international lawyer Hans Kelsen, viz, that 'any abrupt political change not within the contemplation of the Constitution constitutes a revolution, no matter how temporary or transitory the change, if no one has taken any steps to oppose it'.
The learned Chief Justice expressed his entire disapproval with this doctrine in the following words:
'With the utmost respect, therefore, I would agree with the criticism that the learned Chief Justice (Muhammed Munir) not only misapplied the doctrine of Hans Kelsen, but also fell into error that it was a generally accepted doctrine of modern jurisprudence? The principle enunciated by him is wholly unsustainable and I am duty bound to say that it cannot be treated as good law either on the principle of stare decisis or even otherwise.'
The Chief Justice then came to a conclusion which would perhaps be the way to solve Fiji's problems in due course: 'I too am of the opinion that recourse has to be taken to the Doctrine of Necessity where the ignoring of it would result in disastrous consequences to the body politic and upset the social order itself but I respectfully beg to disagree with the view that it is a doctrine for validating the illegal acts of usurpers? I would call this a principle of condonation and not legitimisation.'
The Doctrine of Necessity, it seems, however, cannot be satisfied in the current Fijian crisis because the actions of Speight, his advisors, and his gunmen are purely of a criminal nature (treason), and who should be prosecuted for treason, hostage-taking, kidnapping, blackmail, and incitement to violence and murder (the innocent policeman).
Moreover, the Fijian State as a whole had never been on the brink of civil war or facing widespread violence and revolution. It was only the capital Suva that had been plunged into chaos by a bunch of hoodlums following the illegal seizure of Parliament. What the Fijian military and the President ought to have done in this instance was to declare 'Parliament' a no-go zone' and treated the whole crisis as a hostage situation. It thus follows that the invocation of Doctrine of Necessity was never an issue in the whole sordid affair.
In other words, at no time was the Fijian State on a brink of total collapse.
In 1987, the late Ratu Sir Penaia Ganilau, said he had dismissed the Bavadra government because he was unable to restore Parliament and that it was his responsibility to take into account the 'practical realities of the situation and the social structure of Fiji'. He also proposed to exercise the prerogative of mercy in favour of Sitiveni Rabuka and others 'implicated in the illegal seizure of power' because 'no useful purpose would be served by vindictiveness which might hinder the complete restoration of legitimacy'.
Dr Bavadra and his ministers were released although he declared those involved in the coup were guilty of treason. They also challenged the legality of the dissolution of Parliament 'in that it was not done on the advice of the Prime Minister as required by the Constitution'.
In this particular instance, it seems that the military rulers are treading a similar path by planning to pardon Speight and his gunmen. The whole act, besides being illegal, is also setting a dangerous precedent for the seizure and overthrow of future Fijian governments by any disgruntled 'Tom, Dick and Mary'.
The actions of the late President Ganilau, then governor-general, insofar as the Constitution was concerned in dissolving Parliament, is widely acknowledged by legal experts, to have been illegal, and a similar judgment could be reserved for the actions of President Ratu Mara in the current crisis.
The contrived situation created by the President appointing a minister to be acting PM on condition that he advises dismissal of the whole cabinet. The outcome did not address the hostage crisis at hand and could not be said to have been necessary for that purpose.
The President is supposed to have ceded or assigned executive authority to the Army and has himself stepped aside or stepped down. I don't' think he can step aside and allow the Army Commander to take over his authority. And if he does, then the Vice President should take over. Any such move is also unrelated to dealing with the hostage crisis.
Having obtained 'executive authority' and therefore purporting to act lawfully under ostensibly delegated power to focus on the hostage issue, any attempt to abrogate the constitution would seem to be also beyond the pale of the necessity doctrine.
The imposition of martial law, the abrogation of the multi-racial 1997 Fiji Constitution and the possible pardoning of Speight and his henchmen for their actions, which has thrown the capital Suva into turmoil, does not fit squarely with the Doctrine of State Necessity.
The essence of the doctrine is that if an action that is illegal was taken to safeguard the security of the state or the welfare of its citizens when no lawful course was possible, the necessity of the case excuses the illegality.
The Doctrine of Necessity requires that the old constitutional order be respected as far as possible, with the only minimum deviations from it necessary for the exigencies of the situation being permitted.
It now seems that the new administration appears to have committed itself to the aim of Speight and his gunmen - the establishment of Fijian supremacy - which in principle violates all international legal conventions.
Similarly, there would appear to be little social or legal justification for the general amnesty of Speight and his collaborators. It is now quite clear that Rabuka's amnesty of 1987 may well have encouraged Speight, the militant Taukei movement, and their collaborators to wreak havoc and lawlessness in the name of Fijian nationalism.
In Rabuka's case, the exercise of the 'prerogative of mercy' was only possible after a conviction but Ratu Penaia's explanation was that no purpose would be served by vindictiveness, which might hinder the complete restoration of legitimacy.
It seems that Speight is being allowed to follow in Rabuka's footsteps, instead of being marched into a court of law to determine the legitimacy of his actions in the dismissal of a democratically elected Chaudhry government, the 'suspension of Ratu Mara's presidency, the abrogation of the multi-racial 1997 Constitution of Fiji, and the violence and thuggery of his hoodlums.
The only necessity, it seems, was for the military and the police, to solve an ugly hostage crisis, which had donned the mantle of Fijian nationalism in the heart of the capital and the seat of power in Fiji.
The military and the Fijian establishment, it is obvious, did not contemplate the second test of the Doctrine of Necessity: there must be no other course of action reasonably available.
Instead, they are going along with the demands of a gunman - Speight - in the guise of the Doctrine of State Necessity, to implement 'apartheid in paradise' in Fiji.
 |  |
From Fijileaks Archive, 5 September 2014
One of the two is lying: George Speight or Frank Bainimarama?
George Speight's statement below was smuggled to me for our
(with Russell Hunter) book in progress:
TREASON IN PARADISE:
Frank Bainimarama and the 2006 Coup in Fiji - The Inside Story
 SERVING TIME: Shane Stevens |  |
FRANK BAINIMARAMA: "I had abrogated the 1997 Constitution because I was satisfied that people engaged in the events of May 19 [2000 George Speight coup] were of the perception that the document had watered down the interests of indigenous Fijians. Whether or not those perceptions accorded with reality was not my principal consideration. The perceptions were genuinely held by largely unsophisticated Fijians not equipped to adequately comprehend the niceties and technicalities of the Constitution.” -
The then RFMF Commander Frank Bainimarama in his affidavit before the
Fiji Court of Appeal, February 2001
Contact Email
[email protected]
[email protected]
Archives
July 2025
June 2025
May 2025
April 2025
March 2025
February 2025
January 2025
December 2024
November 2024
October 2024
September 2024
August 2024
July 2024
June 2024
May 2024
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
October 2012
September 2012