 To view the live Funeral Service of Late SATENDRA PRAKASH SINGH |   |
Fijileaks: We will resume our postings after the Funeral Service
*Lorraine Seeto [Senior Manager at the Reserve Bank of Fiji] said the Reserve Bank fully endorses the interim government's efforts to cut spending. Reserve Bank Governor Savenaca Narube is the Chairman of the interim government's Economic Recovery Group (ERG), which recommended |
 Dinger |   |
Lorraine Seeto, Senior Manager at the Reserve Bank of Fiji, told us that despite [Interim Finance Minister Mahendra] Chaudhry's rhetoric, there is no doubt the economic downturn is a direct result of the coup. 2007 would have been a tough year for the economy, she said, even without the coup because of tight foreign reserves and the unexpected decision in late 2006 by Emperor Gold Mine to shut down operations...Seeto said the Reserve Bank fully endorses the interim government's efforts to cut spending. Reserve Bank Governor Savenaca Narube is the Chairman of the interim government's Economic Recovery Group (ERG), which recommended lowering the civil service retirement age, deferring cost of living increases, and cutting salaries. Seeto said the Reserve Bank was a strong opponent of the wage and back-pay package the Qarase government entered into with public sector unions last year, and would be happy to see that agreement rescinded. Seeto questioned how, even with these steps, Chaudhry will be able to keep to a 2% budget deficit, as he has promised. Given the tricks a pro like Chaudhry can play with budgets, she doubts the March budget presentation will make things much clearer."
The former US Ambassador to Fiji, Larry Dinger, secret cable to Washington,
22 February 2007
Qarase's $150 Million Bond - Chaudhry's Ace in the Hole? Seeto and
Anqian Huang, Asian Development Bank chief economist for Fiji agreed it is somewhat ironic that one factor keeping the interim government financially afloat is the US$150 million bond the Qarase government floated in Singapore last September [2006]. Huang told us the reserve situation is even worse than Seeto described. He pointed out that in early 2006 the Reserve Bank changed its definition of "reserves" to include offshore assets held by non-bank financial institutions. Under the new definition, reserves immediately increased by about FJ$270 million. Huang insisted that the change in definition was not justified, and does not meet international standards.
Chaudhry insisted the gloomy economic outlook was primarily due to the economic policies of the Qarase government.
"The nation knows that we were heading for an economic disaster before December 5," he said. Larry Dinger to Washington, 2007
“The downgrade of Fiji’s credit rating and the IMF’s scathing assessment of the economy confirm the worsening economic and financial crisis that Fiji is facing due to poor leadership. I initiated the first credit rating in Fiji to help fix the price of the first issue of our international bond. Fiji’s bonds were rated then as “non-investment” grade. During this government’s tenure, Fiji’s has dropped to “highly speculative investment...The irony is that we have been saying precisely the same thing for many years. But Government has not
listened. Instead, they have insisted that the economy and finance were in order. Now that the IMF and the rating agencies have told them that we are in crisis, will they listen? Based on its past track record, I doubt that the Government will listen. There is a very high likelihood that these warnings by the international experts will be discarded as we move towards the 2022 elections. I therefore urge the international communities and multilateral institutions to be extra vigilant to prevent this Government from sacrificing our future for its political survival. It has shown in past elections that financial prudence is subservient to its political agenda. If that happens, Fiji is bound to sink deeper into economic crisis and financial ruin.”
Savenaca Narube,
the Leader of Unity Fiji and former Governor of the Reserve Bank of Fiji
Summary
1. (C) Fiji will experience a severe economic downturn in 2007 as an after-effect of the December 2006 coup. Foreign reserves are very low (perhaps much lower than they appear in the Reserve Bank's end-of-year accounts), exports are flat, and levels of new investment are expected to be minimal. The major hope for the economy is a rapid tourism rebound, but tourism leaders tell us they expect a significant drop in revenue caused by lower visitor levels and deep discounts.
Fiji Reserve Bank officials tell us they are determined to avoid a devaluation or other drastic action that would reverberate throughout the economy. How the interim government deals with the economy will play a big role in determining the level of discontent in Fiji over the coming months and will have a direct impact on the stability of the current regime.
Chaudhry Says GDP Will Fall 2-4% in 2007
2. (C) As noted reftel, Interim Minister of Finance Mahendra Chaudhry went public earlier this month with an estimate that Fiji's economy will contract 2-4% in 2007. Chaudhry insisted the gloomy economic outlook was primarily due to the economic policies of the Qarase government.
"The nation knows that we were heading for an economic disaster before December 5," he said.
Lorraine Seeto, Senior Manager at the Reserve Bank of Fiji, told us that despite Chaudhry's rhetoric, there is no doubt the economic downturn is a direct result of the coup. 2007 would have been a tough year for the economy, she said, even without the coup because of tight foreign reserves and the unexpected decision in late 2006 by Emperor Gold Mine to shut down operations.
Exports, which fell about 5% in 2006 from 2005 levels (primarily due to textile declines), have shown few signs of picking back up. Nevertheless, the Reserve Bank projects that the economy would have grown 1-2% if the coup had not taken place. The coup has had a direct negative impact on tourism, investment, and consumption, Seeto said, above and beyond other factors.
3. (C) Seeto thinks the GDP forecast announced by Chaudhry might be too pessimistic. She believes GDP will drop about 2%. Seeto admitted, however, that some optimistic assumptions are built into her forecast, In mid-December the Reserve Bank's best estimate was that GDP would drop up to 10% in 2007. A projected rebound in tourism led the Bank to improve its forecast. Seeto admitted that other optimistic assumptions are built into the GDP forecast, including the assumption that EU funds to assist Fiji's sugar industry will not be cut off (Fiji and the EU are expected to hold consultations on EU aid in Brussels in March or April).
Anqian Huang, Asian Development Bank chief economist for Fiji, told us he believes the minus 2-4% GDP forecast is reasonable. Closing the Emperor Gold Mine will hurt (losing about FJ$50 million in exports), but other export sectors, such as agriculture, sugar, and mineral water, should not be affected by the coup, thus keeping the GDP downturn from turning into a free fall.
Financial Reserves on the Brink
4. (C) While the GDP numbers are worrying, Seeto and Huang both said their biggest concern is Fiji's low financial reserve level. The Reserve Bank's end of 2006 report puts reserves at FJ$832 million (US$492 million), or about 3.3 months of imports, up from 2.5 months of imports in mid-2006. Seeto said the numbers are misleading because they include US$150 million (FJ$250 million) in proceeds from a bond issued by the Qarase government on international markets last September and FJ$60 million in deferred fuel payments. If those two elements are deducted, Fiji's reserves would only be FJ$520 million, or a little over two months of imports.
5. (C) Huang told us the reserve situation is even worse than Seeto described. He pointed out that in early 2006 the Reserve Bank changed its definition of "reserves" to include offshore assets held by non-bank financial institutions. Under the new definition, reserves immediately increased by about FJ$270 million. Huang insisted that the change in definition was not justified, and does not meet international standards.
Andrew Milford, economist at the Pacific Financial Technical Assistance Center, an IMF-World Bank joint venture, told us the Reserve Bank's action was "borderline," and he was unaware of any other country using a similar definition of reserves. Nevertheless, the IMF had reluctantly agreed to the change, with the stipulation that those funds must be readily accessible to the Reserve Bank. He said the new definition allows the Bank to include offshore assets of the Fiji National Provident Fund (FNPF), Fiji's social security system, in its reserve calculations. Milford said Fiji tapped FNPF overseas funds at least once during the Qarase administration, and is likely to do so again, given the current shaky reserve situation. (Comment: It appears that the majority of Fiji's financial reserves now consist of a) proceeds from the USD$150 million bond offering, and b) offshore holdings of the FNPF. If those two items were deducted, Fiji's reserves would fall to about FJ$250 million, or one month's supply of imports. End comment.)
Qarase's $150 Million Bond - Chaudhry's Ace in the Hole?
6 (C) Seeto and Huang agreed it is somewhat ironic that one factor keeping the interim government financially afloat is the US$150 million bond the Qarase government floated in Singapore last September. The five-year bond was snapped up by investors at 7% interest. Heavy demand for the bond (it was oversubscribed by nearly 700%) pushed its interest rate down from the initial price guidance of 7.25%. Seeto commented that investors, who purchased the bond at a time which Fiji's prospects seemed bright, have not done well. Since the coup, the bond's value has dropped by about 10% from face value. From the Reserve Bank's perspective, however, the timing of the bond offering was perfect. There is no way, said Seeto, that Fiji could now borrow at anything close to a 7% rate.
Huang pointed out that the dismal performance of the Fiji bond over the past three months does not bode well for future Fiji borrowing on international markets. Moreover, in only five years Fiji will have to pay back the money it borrowed. Where will those funds come from?
7. (C) Seeto and Huang noted that, having already used the bond to inflate reserve levels at the end of 2006, Chaudhry is likely to use the bond proceeds to keep the deficit under control in the new budget he will announce in March. Seeto said she doesn't see how Chaudhry can avoid converting the bond proceeds (now denominated in U.S. dollars) into Fiji dollars to help pay bills. If he does this, however, reserve levels will drop sharply. It's a difficult balancing act, one that has received almost no publicity or public scrutiny. Seeto said the only other option is to borrow heavily on the domestic market. She noted that Chaudhry, long a critic of government borrowing from FNPF, is now (privately) a proponent of such borrowing.
What's the Interim Government's Fiscal Situation? The Reserve Bank Doesn't Know
8. (C) Seeto said that, in theory, the Reserve Bank is supposed to have access to all government financial records, including weekly debit and credit receipts. The reports the Bank is now getting, however, are far from complete. Therefore, the Bank has a very limited understanding of the interim government's fiscal situation, and even less information about military spending. Anecdotal reports, however, indicate that the regime is having real trouble paying its bills. Seeto noted that Fiji's tax authority had been unable to process tax refunds in a timely manner and that every ministry she talks to complains about being short of the funds needed to meet their obligations.
(Note: We made several requests to the Ministry of Finance for working level meetings to discuss Fiji's fiscal situation and the budget. All went unanswered. End note.)
Policy Steps to Ease the Financial Crunch
9. (C) Seeto said the Reserve Bank fully endorses the interim government's efforts to cut spending. Reserve Bank Governor Savenaca Narube is the Chairman of the interim government's Economic Recovery Group (ERG), which recommended lowering the civil service retirement age, deferring cost of living increases, and cutting salaries. Seeto said the Reserve Bank was a strong opponent of the wage and back-pay package the Qarase government entered into with public sector unions last year, and would be happy to see that agreement rescinded. Seeto questioned how, even with these steps, Chaudhry will be able to keep to a 2% budget deficit, as he has promised. Given the tricks a pro like Chaudhry can play with budgets, she doubts the March budget presentation will make things much clearer.
How About a Devaluation?
10. (C) Seeto says she gets calls from reporters "almost daily" asking about prospects for a devaluation of the Fiji dollar. A devaluation, she told us, would only be an act of last resort by the Reserve Bank, but could take place if reserve levels were to drop precipitously. Because Fiji is heavily import-dependent, a devaluation - with its resulting higher price for imports - would mean an immediate drop in the standard of living for most Fijians and would especially impact the poor. Seeto thinks the Finance Ministry would be willing to take far more drastic steps to reduce government spending rather than risk a devaluation. The ADB's Huang said he understands why the interim government and Reserve Bank oppose a devaluation, but he insisted that a devaluation is the only action that makes sense from a long-term perspective. With reserves this low and no prospect of an export or investment boom in the near future, a devaluation is the only way to achieve economic equilibrium.
Banking on Tourism is Premature
11 (C) As Seeto noted, any optimism about Fiji's economy stems from the widely-accepted notion that tourism is poised to bounce back. Members of Fiji's private sector Tourism Action Group (TAG), consisting of representatives from hotels, airlines, and tour companies, told the Ambassador February 22 that the interim government has unrealistic expectations about tourism. The next four months are likely to be "quite bad" they said, with many hotels showing occupancy rates in the 20-40% range. Many hotels with higher occupancy have relied on price cuts of 40% or more and are not making any money. Tourism operators are banking on improved occupancy and rates during the peak tourist season, May to October. TAG estimates that if tourism "returns to normal" by May, industry revenue will still be down FJ$120 million (about USD 75 million) from pre-coup projections. They emphasize that forecast is very optimistic - occupancy rates may go up, but rates may not return to pre-coup levels for a long time.
Moreover, several new hotels have opened in the last year, and more are scheduled to open in 2007, making the struggle to make a profit even harder. 12. (C) The TAG group complained that some government departments and a number of academics "have been working overtime churning out numbers" to show that tourism is recovering. If those academics were to plant their feet on the ground and look at things like a businessman, they'd realize things are not so rosy. The TAG members say they are worried that Chaudhry will view tourism as a "cash cow" he can tap into to fund government programs. They see possible new duties on "luxury" goods used in the tourism sector, new taxes on tourists, and additional income and corporate taxes. (Note: On February 13, Fiji's Department of Immigration proposed a new visa/permit fee it said could raise FJ$10 million per year. The interim cabinet has not made a decision on the proposed fee. End note.)
Dixon Seeto, Head of the Fiji Hotel Association and a TAG member, recounted how at a meeting with the interim government he commented that "to take the economy forward, it is not advisable to make everyone poor." He told us the reaction to the comment "by Chaudhry's socialist advisors" was distinctly negative.
Other Industries Worried Too
13. (C) Rajesh Punja, head of the food manufacturer and importer Punjas, also told us he is worried about interim government actions that could harm industry. Punja said various sources tell him that, with money tight and poverty levels rising, Chaudhry will cut import tariffs on food items to placate his main constituency, the poor. This will have the unintended consequence of crippling Fiji's fledgling food manufacturing industry. Punjas has a plan in place to adopt to the change - the company will focus almost exclusively on importing. But in the meantime hundreds of manufacturing jobs will be lost as will an important export industry for Fiji. Punjas sells food products manufactured in Fiji throughout the Pacific. Punja, who insists that he has always had a good relationship with Chaudhry, has asked for meetings with the interim Finance Minister, but has been repeatedly rebuffed.
Comment - A Coming Winter of Discontent?
14. (C) How the interim regime deals with the economy will have a major impact on levels of discontent in Fiji in the coming months and ultimately on the stability of the regime. The interim government inherited a difficult economic hand, exacerbated greatly by the after-effects of the coup. Chaudhry will try very hard to avoid taking steps that directly feed discontent, such as devaluing the Fiji dollar or increasing the VAT. The business community and the civil service have every reason to be concerned Chaudhry will look to them to make up for Fiji's financial shortfall.
Another source that will be increasingly tapped is the FNPF, Fiji's social security system. While Chaudhry may be able to mask Fiji's fundamental financial problems for a while, the regime will be able to live off bond proceeds, loans, and FNPF funds for only so long. Sooner or later, Fiji's average citizen will begin to feel the strong impact the coup has had on the economy. It is not clear at all how the interim government will cope when populist rhetoric confronts pocket book reality. DINGER
1. (C) Fiji will experience a severe economic downturn in 2007 as an after-effect of the December 2006 coup. Foreign reserves are very low (perhaps much lower than they appear in the Reserve Bank's end-of-year accounts), exports are flat, and levels of new investment are expected to be minimal. The major hope for the economy is a rapid tourism rebound, but tourism leaders tell us they expect a significant drop in revenue caused by lower visitor levels and deep discounts.
Fiji Reserve Bank officials tell us they are determined to avoid a devaluation or other drastic action that would reverberate throughout the economy. How the interim government deals with the economy will play a big role in determining the level of discontent in Fiji over the coming months and will have a direct impact on the stability of the current regime.
Chaudhry Says GDP Will Fall 2-4% in 2007
2. (C) As noted reftel, Interim Minister of Finance Mahendra Chaudhry went public earlier this month with an estimate that Fiji's economy will contract 2-4% in 2007. Chaudhry insisted the gloomy economic outlook was primarily due to the economic policies of the Qarase government.
"The nation knows that we were heading for an economic disaster before December 5," he said.
Lorraine Seeto, Senior Manager at the Reserve Bank of Fiji, told us that despite Chaudhry's rhetoric, there is no doubt the economic downturn is a direct result of the coup. 2007 would have been a tough year for the economy, she said, even without the coup because of tight foreign reserves and the unexpected decision in late 2006 by Emperor Gold Mine to shut down operations.
Exports, which fell about 5% in 2006 from 2005 levels (primarily due to textile declines), have shown few signs of picking back up. Nevertheless, the Reserve Bank projects that the economy would have grown 1-2% if the coup had not taken place. The coup has had a direct negative impact on tourism, investment, and consumption, Seeto said, above and beyond other factors.
3. (C) Seeto thinks the GDP forecast announced by Chaudhry might be too pessimistic. She believes GDP will drop about 2%. Seeto admitted, however, that some optimistic assumptions are built into her forecast, In mid-December the Reserve Bank's best estimate was that GDP would drop up to 10% in 2007. A projected rebound in tourism led the Bank to improve its forecast. Seeto admitted that other optimistic assumptions are built into the GDP forecast, including the assumption that EU funds to assist Fiji's sugar industry will not be cut off (Fiji and the EU are expected to hold consultations on EU aid in Brussels in March or April).
Anqian Huang, Asian Development Bank chief economist for Fiji, told us he believes the minus 2-4% GDP forecast is reasonable. Closing the Emperor Gold Mine will hurt (losing about FJ$50 million in exports), but other export sectors, such as agriculture, sugar, and mineral water, should not be affected by the coup, thus keeping the GDP downturn from turning into a free fall.
Financial Reserves on the Brink
4. (C) While the GDP numbers are worrying, Seeto and Huang both said their biggest concern is Fiji's low financial reserve level. The Reserve Bank's end of 2006 report puts reserves at FJ$832 million (US$492 million), or about 3.3 months of imports, up from 2.5 months of imports in mid-2006. Seeto said the numbers are misleading because they include US$150 million (FJ$250 million) in proceeds from a bond issued by the Qarase government on international markets last September and FJ$60 million in deferred fuel payments. If those two elements are deducted, Fiji's reserves would only be FJ$520 million, or a little over two months of imports.
5. (C) Huang told us the reserve situation is even worse than Seeto described. He pointed out that in early 2006 the Reserve Bank changed its definition of "reserves" to include offshore assets held by non-bank financial institutions. Under the new definition, reserves immediately increased by about FJ$270 million. Huang insisted that the change in definition was not justified, and does not meet international standards.
Andrew Milford, economist at the Pacific Financial Technical Assistance Center, an IMF-World Bank joint venture, told us the Reserve Bank's action was "borderline," and he was unaware of any other country using a similar definition of reserves. Nevertheless, the IMF had reluctantly agreed to the change, with the stipulation that those funds must be readily accessible to the Reserve Bank. He said the new definition allows the Bank to include offshore assets of the Fiji National Provident Fund (FNPF), Fiji's social security system, in its reserve calculations. Milford said Fiji tapped FNPF overseas funds at least once during the Qarase administration, and is likely to do so again, given the current shaky reserve situation. (Comment: It appears that the majority of Fiji's financial reserves now consist of a) proceeds from the USD$150 million bond offering, and b) offshore holdings of the FNPF. If those two items were deducted, Fiji's reserves would fall to about FJ$250 million, or one month's supply of imports. End comment.)
Qarase's $150 Million Bond - Chaudhry's Ace in the Hole?
6 (C) Seeto and Huang agreed it is somewhat ironic that one factor keeping the interim government financially afloat is the US$150 million bond the Qarase government floated in Singapore last September. The five-year bond was snapped up by investors at 7% interest. Heavy demand for the bond (it was oversubscribed by nearly 700%) pushed its interest rate down from the initial price guidance of 7.25%. Seeto commented that investors, who purchased the bond at a time which Fiji's prospects seemed bright, have not done well. Since the coup, the bond's value has dropped by about 10% from face value. From the Reserve Bank's perspective, however, the timing of the bond offering was perfect. There is no way, said Seeto, that Fiji could now borrow at anything close to a 7% rate.
Huang pointed out that the dismal performance of the Fiji bond over the past three months does not bode well for future Fiji borrowing on international markets. Moreover, in only five years Fiji will have to pay back the money it borrowed. Where will those funds come from?
7. (C) Seeto and Huang noted that, having already used the bond to inflate reserve levels at the end of 2006, Chaudhry is likely to use the bond proceeds to keep the deficit under control in the new budget he will announce in March. Seeto said she doesn't see how Chaudhry can avoid converting the bond proceeds (now denominated in U.S. dollars) into Fiji dollars to help pay bills. If he does this, however, reserve levels will drop sharply. It's a difficult balancing act, one that has received almost no publicity or public scrutiny. Seeto said the only other option is to borrow heavily on the domestic market. She noted that Chaudhry, long a critic of government borrowing from FNPF, is now (privately) a proponent of such borrowing.
What's the Interim Government's Fiscal Situation? The Reserve Bank Doesn't Know
8. (C) Seeto said that, in theory, the Reserve Bank is supposed to have access to all government financial records, including weekly debit and credit receipts. The reports the Bank is now getting, however, are far from complete. Therefore, the Bank has a very limited understanding of the interim government's fiscal situation, and even less information about military spending. Anecdotal reports, however, indicate that the regime is having real trouble paying its bills. Seeto noted that Fiji's tax authority had been unable to process tax refunds in a timely manner and that every ministry she talks to complains about being short of the funds needed to meet their obligations.
(Note: We made several requests to the Ministry of Finance for working level meetings to discuss Fiji's fiscal situation and the budget. All went unanswered. End note.)
Policy Steps to Ease the Financial Crunch
9. (C) Seeto said the Reserve Bank fully endorses the interim government's efforts to cut spending. Reserve Bank Governor Savenaca Narube is the Chairman of the interim government's Economic Recovery Group (ERG), which recommended lowering the civil service retirement age, deferring cost of living increases, and cutting salaries. Seeto said the Reserve Bank was a strong opponent of the wage and back-pay package the Qarase government entered into with public sector unions last year, and would be happy to see that agreement rescinded. Seeto questioned how, even with these steps, Chaudhry will be able to keep to a 2% budget deficit, as he has promised. Given the tricks a pro like Chaudhry can play with budgets, she doubts the March budget presentation will make things much clearer.
How About a Devaluation?
10. (C) Seeto says she gets calls from reporters "almost daily" asking about prospects for a devaluation of the Fiji dollar. A devaluation, she told us, would only be an act of last resort by the Reserve Bank, but could take place if reserve levels were to drop precipitously. Because Fiji is heavily import-dependent, a devaluation - with its resulting higher price for imports - would mean an immediate drop in the standard of living for most Fijians and would especially impact the poor. Seeto thinks the Finance Ministry would be willing to take far more drastic steps to reduce government spending rather than risk a devaluation. The ADB's Huang said he understands why the interim government and Reserve Bank oppose a devaluation, but he insisted that a devaluation is the only action that makes sense from a long-term perspective. With reserves this low and no prospect of an export or investment boom in the near future, a devaluation is the only way to achieve economic equilibrium.
Banking on Tourism is Premature
11 (C) As Seeto noted, any optimism about Fiji's economy stems from the widely-accepted notion that tourism is poised to bounce back. Members of Fiji's private sector Tourism Action Group (TAG), consisting of representatives from hotels, airlines, and tour companies, told the Ambassador February 22 that the interim government has unrealistic expectations about tourism. The next four months are likely to be "quite bad" they said, with many hotels showing occupancy rates in the 20-40% range. Many hotels with higher occupancy have relied on price cuts of 40% or more and are not making any money. Tourism operators are banking on improved occupancy and rates during the peak tourist season, May to October. TAG estimates that if tourism "returns to normal" by May, industry revenue will still be down FJ$120 million (about USD 75 million) from pre-coup projections. They emphasize that forecast is very optimistic - occupancy rates may go up, but rates may not return to pre-coup levels for a long time.
Moreover, several new hotels have opened in the last year, and more are scheduled to open in 2007, making the struggle to make a profit even harder. 12. (C) The TAG group complained that some government departments and a number of academics "have been working overtime churning out numbers" to show that tourism is recovering. If those academics were to plant their feet on the ground and look at things like a businessman, they'd realize things are not so rosy. The TAG members say they are worried that Chaudhry will view tourism as a "cash cow" he can tap into to fund government programs. They see possible new duties on "luxury" goods used in the tourism sector, new taxes on tourists, and additional income and corporate taxes. (Note: On February 13, Fiji's Department of Immigration proposed a new visa/permit fee it said could raise FJ$10 million per year. The interim cabinet has not made a decision on the proposed fee. End note.)
Dixon Seeto, Head of the Fiji Hotel Association and a TAG member, recounted how at a meeting with the interim government he commented that "to take the economy forward, it is not advisable to make everyone poor." He told us the reaction to the comment "by Chaudhry's socialist advisors" was distinctly negative.
Other Industries Worried Too
13. (C) Rajesh Punja, head of the food manufacturer and importer Punjas, also told us he is worried about interim government actions that could harm industry. Punja said various sources tell him that, with money tight and poverty levels rising, Chaudhry will cut import tariffs on food items to placate his main constituency, the poor. This will have the unintended consequence of crippling Fiji's fledgling food manufacturing industry. Punjas has a plan in place to adopt to the change - the company will focus almost exclusively on importing. But in the meantime hundreds of manufacturing jobs will be lost as will an important export industry for Fiji. Punjas sells food products manufactured in Fiji throughout the Pacific. Punja, who insists that he has always had a good relationship with Chaudhry, has asked for meetings with the interim Finance Minister, but has been repeatedly rebuffed.
Comment - A Coming Winter of Discontent?
14. (C) How the interim regime deals with the economy will have a major impact on levels of discontent in Fiji in the coming months and ultimately on the stability of the regime. The interim government inherited a difficult economic hand, exacerbated greatly by the after-effects of the coup. Chaudhry will try very hard to avoid taking steps that directly feed discontent, such as devaluing the Fiji dollar or increasing the VAT. The business community and the civil service have every reason to be concerned Chaudhry will look to them to make up for Fiji's financial shortfall.
Another source that will be increasingly tapped is the FNPF, Fiji's social security system. While Chaudhry may be able to mask Fiji's fundamental financial problems for a while, the regime will be able to live off bond proceeds, loans, and FNPF funds for only so long. Sooner or later, Fiji's average citizen will begin to feel the strong impact the coup has had on the economy. It is not clear at all how the interim government will cope when populist rhetoric confronts pocket book reality. DINGER
Fijileaks: This smooth talking snake oil salesman can APOLOGISE but he has never been brought to JUSTICE and is hiding behind IMMUNITY. If we were advising Unity Fiji, FLP, and that "SMART ASS PROFESSOR" and NFP leader BIMAN PRASAD, our message would be to hit this COUPIST hard and take him out of the race now, for come election, he will be a distraction, with the other COUPIST Bainimarama and him engaging in slanging match. Just look, we have to rebutt and challenge him when we should be publishing the other parties statements on far more pressing issues than on this racist, tribalist, coupist LIAR and Opportunist.
When he seized power, over 600 regional students fled from USP and Indo-Fijian and anti Rabuka iTaukei Fijian staff were beaten, locked up, and some DEPORTED out of Fiji. And, now, he is laying out his vision for FIJI. His key right-hand men in the new party are former military officers
 |  |
|   |
It was alleged that the above former FMF Lt Colonel Orisi Rabukawaqa's car was used in abduction of Dr Singh while he was on his way to USP
Sadly, the claimant to the title, RATU KALIOVA DAWAI, passed away last September but the case is still before the Fiji High Court. In October 2019, the High Court in Lautoka allowed the late Dawai, a claimant to the Tui Nadi title, to seek a judicial review on the appointment and installation of Ratu Vuniyani Navuniuci to the position. The late Dawai was allowed to challenge the decision of both the iTaukei Lands and Appeals Tribunal, and the iTaukei Lands and Fisheries Commission. The chiefly faction opposed to the Tui Nadi, Ratu Vuniyani Navuniuci, the new president of the People's Alliance Party, told Fijileaks it was highly offensive and insensitive for Sitiveni Rabuka to launch his party in Nawaka, Nadi
 |  |
Dawai v iTaukei Lands and Appeals Tribunal [2019] FJHC 888; HBJ7.2018 (13 September 2019)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
WESTERN DIVISION AT LAUTOKA
CIVIL JURISDICTION
JUDICIAL REVIEW NO. HBJ 7 OF 2018
IN THE MATTER of an application by Ratu Kaliova Dawai of Narewa Village, Nadi, Villager, for Judicial Review.
IN THE MATTER of the iTaukei Lands Act Cap 113 of the Laws of Fiji whereby the iTaukei Lands and Appeals Tribunal have endorsed Ratu Vuniani Navuniuci to be the holder of the title of Tui Nadi purporting to exercise powers under the iTaukei Lands Act
BETWEEN
RATU KALIOVA DAWAI a villager of Narewa Village, Nadi.
APPLICANT
A N D
iTAUKEI LANDS AND APPEALS TRIBUNAL a statutory body set up by law of 87 Queen Elizabeth Drive, Nasese, Suva.
FIRST RESPONDENT
A N D
iTAUKEI LANDS AND FISHERIES COMMISSION a statutory body set up by law of Carnavon Street, Suva.
SECOND RESPONDENT
A N D
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF FIJI of Level 7, Suvavou House, Victoria Parade, Suva.
THIRD RESPONDENT
A N D
RATU VUNIANI NAVUNIUCI of Narewa Village, Nadi.
FOURTH RESPONDENT
Appearances :
Mr I. Fa for the applicant
Ms M. Faktoufon for the 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents
No appearance for the 4th respondents
Date of Hearing : 21 August 2019
Date of Ruling : 13 September 2019
R U L I N G
[on leave to apply for judicial review]
Introduction
[01] This is an application for leave to apply for judicial review.
[02] By his notice of motion summons filed on 31 August 2018 (‘the application’), Ratu Kaliova Dawai, the applicant seeks leave to apply for judicial review of the decisions of the iTaukei Lands and Appeals Tribunal (‘Tribunal’), the respondent dated 1 June 2018 and of the iTaukei Lands and Fisheries Commission, the second respondent dated 5 December 2017 declaring Ratu Vuniani Navuniuci , the respondent to be the rightful Tui Nadi.
[03] The application is supported by an affidavit of the applicant sworn on 31 August 2018, which verifies the facts relied upon.
[04] The application is made in terms of Order 53, Rule 3 (2) of the High Court Rules 1988, as amended (‘HCR’).
[05] The respondent has filed an affidavit of Anasa Tawake, the secretary to the tribunal sworn on 03 January 2019 in response.
[06] The application was initially heard before Mackie J who has left the bench before determination of the same. Therefore, the matter came before me for the limited purpose of hearing and determining the granting of leave to apply for judicial review.
[07] At the hearing before me, the parties made oral submissions, and filed their respective written submissions as well. I am grateful to both counsel and their team for their written submissions, by which I was greatly assisted.
Background
[08] The applicant has given fairly long background facts, but I do not intend to repeat it here. For the present purpose, I would only say that the applicant intends to challenge the first respondent’s decision of 1 June 2018 and the second respondent’s decision of 5 December 2017. Both decisions confirm that Ratu Vuniani Navuniuci , the fourth respondent to be the rightful Tui Nadi.
Relief sought
[09] The applicant seeks the following relief:
[10] The grounds on which the relief are sought include:
(a) That the decision by the first respondent to declare the sixth respondent to be the Tui Nadi pursuant to their ruling of 1 June 2018, was in breach of the rules of natural justice in that amongst other matters the applicant was denied a fair hearing in that the first respondent failed to address the illegality of the proceedings before the second respondent:-
(b) That the decision by the first respondent was a decision that was made on evidence of the customs and traditions of the Vanua of Nadi and of section 17 of the Native Lands Act that was discredited and rejected by the High Court of Fiji in the case of Ratu Isireli Rokomatu Namulo v Josefa Saronicava Waqairatu & 5 Ors; HBJ 0021 OF 1997L;
(c) That the first and second respondents had made a predetermination in arriving at their decisions to declare the fourth respondent to be the Tui Nadi as it was aware that the procedures set out by the High Court in the consent orders of the 24 January 2007, to ensure fairness and compliance with the rules of natural justice was complied with yet refused to comply with these procedures.
(d) That the first respondent in arriving at their decisions had: -
(ii) The Minister is to appoint the Chairman of the Commission which is to be qualified for appointment as a Judge or otherwise suitable by qualification and experience;
(iii) The terms of reference for the Commission is to be determined in accordance with the custom of the vanua of Nadi as to who should be the holder of the title Tui Nadi;
(iv) Each party is to be given natural justice;
(v) Adjourned to 23/2/07 for resolution of the Commissioners.”
(2) Acted in breach of the rules of natural justice by failing to comply with the consent orders of the High Court on the 24 January 2007, which are set out below:
“(i) That each party nominate a member for appointment as Commissioners;
(ii) The Minister is to appoint the Chairperson of the Commission who is to be qualified for appointment as a Judge or otherwise suitable by qualification and experience;
(iii) The terms of reference for the Commission is to be determined in accordance with the custom of the vanua of Nadi as to who should be the holder of the title Tui Nadi;
(iv) Each party is to be given natural justice;
(v) Adjourned to 23/2/07 for resolution of the Commissioners.”
(3) Acted illegally, unlawfully and in an unreasonable manner by failing to comply with the consent order of the High Court of the 24 January 2007, which are set out below:
“(i) That each arty nominate a member for appointment as Commissioners;
(ii) The Minister is to appoint the Chairman of the Commission who is to be qualified for appointment as a Judge or otherwise suitable by qualification and experience;
(iii) The terms of reference for the Commission is to be determined in accordance with the custom of the vanua of Nadi as to who should be the holder of the title Tui Nadi;
(iv) Each party is to be given natural justice;
(v) Adjourned to 23/2/07 for resolution of the Commissioners.”
Notice of Opposition
[11] The first, second and third respondents (collectively ‘the respondents’) oppose the application for leave to apply for judicial review on grounds that:
[12] The relevant law applicable to leave to apply for judicial review is the HCR, O 53, R 3 (2), which provides:
‘Application for leave to apply for judicial review (O 53, R 3)
3 (1) No application for judicial review shall be made unless the leave of the Court has been obtained in accordance with this Rule.
(2) An application for leave must be made upon filing in the Registry-
(a) a notice in Form 32 in Appendix 1 hereunder containing statement of-
(b) an affidavit which verifies the facts relied on.
(3) (a) Copies of the application for leave and the affidavit in support must be served on all persons directly affected by the application.
(b) The Court may determine the application without a hearing and where a hearing is considered necessary the Court shall hear and determine the application inter partes.
(c) Notice of hearing of the application shall be notified in writing to the parties by the Registrar.
(d) Where the Court determines the application without a hearing, the Registrar shall serve a copy of the order of the Court on the applicant.
(4) Without prejudice to its powers under Order 20, Rule 8, the Court hearing an application for leave may allow the relief sought and the grounds thereof to be amended, whether by specifying different or additional grounds or relief or otherwise, on such terms, if any, as it thinks fit.
(5) The Court shall not grant leave unless it considers that the applicant has a sufficient interest in the matter to which the application relates.
(6) Where leave is sought to apply for an order of certiorari to remove for the purpose of its being quashed any judgment, order, conviction or other proceedings which is subject to appeal and a time is limited for the bringing of the appeal, the Court may adjourn the application for leave until the appeal is determined or the time for appealing has expired.
(7) If the Court grants leave, it may impose such terms as to costs and as to giving security as it thinks fit.
(8) Where leave to apply for judicial review is granted, then-
(a) if the relief sought is an order of prohibition or certiorari and the Court so directs, the grant shall operate as a stay of the proceedings to which the application relates until the determination of the application or until the Court otherwise orders;
(b) if any other relief is sought, the Court may at any time grant in the proceedings such interim relief as could be granted in an action begun by writ.
(9) Upon granting leave the Court may, if satisfied that such a course is justified, direct that the grant shall operate either forthwith or conditionally as an entry of motion under Rule 5 (4) and may then proceed to judgment on the application for judicial review or may give such further directions as may be warranted in the circumstances.’
Test for granting leave
[13] To grant leave to apply for judicial review, the court has to be satisfied that:
(a) There is an arguable case for review;
(b) The claimant has a ‘sufficient interest’; and
(c) There has not been ‘undue delay’.
Discussion
[14] The applicant has made this application to obtain leave to apply for judicial review of the tribunal’s decision dated 1 June 2018 on the grounds of breach of rules of natural justice, illegality, unreasonableness and legitimate expectation.
[15] As required in R 3 (2) (i), the applicant has attached a statement of the particulars of the decision in respect of which judicial review is sought. The applicant seeks writ of certiorari (quashing order) quashing the decision of the tribunal dated 1 June 2018.
[16] An application for leave to apply for judicial review may be determined on papers without a hearing and where a hearing is considered necessary, the Court will hear and determine the application inter partes (see O 53, R 3 (3) (b). In this case, the application was heard inter partes.
[17] The application provides name, description and address of the applicant, and provides the particulars of the decision in respect of which judicial review is being sought in compliance with the HCR, O 53, R 3 (2). The formality of the application was not disputed. The application is in order.
[18] The applicant has filed an affidavit, which verifies the facts relied upon. This complies with the requirement of the HCR, O 53, R 3 (2) (b).
[19] Returning to the test for granting leave to apply for judicial review.
Sufficient interest
[20] The court will not grant leave unless it considers that the applicant has a sufficient interest (standing) in the matter to which the application relates (see O 53, R 3 (5)). The requirement of standing indicates that the primary concern of administrative law is not simply to control the performance of public functions but rather to exercise control in the interests of persons affected in particular ways. In administrative law, rules of standing are seen as rules about entitlement to complain of a wrong rather than as part of definition of the wrong.
[21] The question of sufficient interest is to be decided:
[23] The test for deciding whether a claimant has sufficient interest was considered by the House of Lords in R v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte National Federation of Self-Employed and Small Business Ltd [1982] AC 617, where it was held:
‘That not only was standing a ground in itself upon which permission could be granted, it should also be considered at the substantive hearing after the relevant law and facts were examined in full.’
[24] The tribunal’s decision affects the applicant’s status in the village. The decision directly interferes with his personal right to hold the position as Tui Nadi. For the purpose of this application, I am provisionally satisfied that the applicant has sufficient interest in the matter to which the application relates.
The arguable case for review
[25] Another test for granting leave to apply for judicial review is that a claimant must demonstrate to the court upon ‘a quick perusal of the papers’ that there is an arguable case for granting relief (see: R v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte National Federation of Self-Employed and Small Business Ltd (above)).
[26] When considering whether there is an arguable case for granting the relief sought, the court will not go into the matter in depth. The court will only see, upon perusal of the papers, whether there is an arguable prima facie case for granting the relief.
[27] The tribunal’s decision is challenged on the grounds that: (a) breach of the principles of natural justice and fairness, (b) illegality, (c) unreasonableness and (d) legitimate expectation.
[28] It was contended on behalf of the respondent that there is no arguable case for the court to consider granting leave to apply for judicial review.
[29] In Fiji Airline Pilots Associations v. Permanent Secretary for Labour and Industrial Relations [1998] FJCA 14, the Court of Appeal said:
“That the basic principle is that the judge is only required to be satisfied that on the material available and disclosed is what might, on further consideration, turn out to be an arguable cause in favour of granting relief.”
[30] Scutt J in State v Connors, ex parte Shah [2008] FJHC 64 stated:
“...as was said in Sitiveni Ligamamada Rabuka and Commission of Inquiry into the Deed of Settlement Dated 17 September 1993; In re Anthony Stephens v. Attorney-General of Fiji (JR No. 26 of 1993, 4 May 1995):
“This Court is not concerned with a review of the decision which the commission reached at the Inquiry but simply with a review of the manner or process in which the decision was reached. It is the decision-making process employed by the Commission of Inquiry in reaching its decision which is the primary concern of this Court.”
[31] Hon. Justice Callanchini in Ramasi v Native Lands Commission [2015] FJCA 83; ABU 00562012, concluded at paragraph 11 that:
“Therefore in my judgment, whenever a challenge to a decision of the Tribunal is based on a lack of jurisdiction or a denial of natural justice, the High Court has the necessary jurisdiction to consider an application for judicial review under Order 53 of the High Court Rules notwithstanding section 7(5) of the Act. However, in this case the challenge by the Appellant went to the merits of the Tribunal’s decision and for that reason there was no right to apply for judicial review.”
[32] In this matter, the second respondent decided that the forth respondent is entitled to hold the position of Tui Nadi (‘the position’). The applicant appealed that decision to the tribunal. On 1 June 2018, the tribunal after hearing the appeal confirmed the fourth respondent’s decision and dismissed his appeal.
[33] Section 7 (5) of the Act makes the tribunal’s decision final and conclusive and cannot be challenged in a court of law. In view of the ouster clause in that section, the tribunal’s decision may be judicially reviewed on the ground of illegality.
[34] Lord Diplock in Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for Civil Service [1985] AC 374 said that:
‘Illegality arises where a decision-maker who must understand correctly the law that regulates his or her decision-making power and must give effect to it fails to do so.’
[35] Illegality also includes ultra vires and errors of law. An error in relation to a precedent (jurisdictional) fact is also often placed under the illegality heading.
[36] The applicant seeks leave to apply for judicial review of the tribunal’s decision on the ground of illegality among other grounds.
[37] In his affidavit in support, the applicant [at paragraphs 3, 4, 47, 50 and 51] states:
“...
3. THAT the decision of the 1st Respondent of the 1st June 2018 is a decision that is arrived at unlawfully and in breach of the orders of Connors J of the 12th of May 2005 and the consent orders of Connors J of the 24th of January 2007 in the case of Ratu Kaliova Dawai v Native Lands and Fisheries Commission, Ratu Napolioni Dawai, Attorney General of Fiji; Judicial Review No. 4 of 2005.
4. THAT in arriving at its decision of the 1st of June 2018, the 1st Respondent had accepted without reservation the decision of the 2nd Respondent of the 5th of December 2017 arrived at in breach of the process and procedures ordered by consent by Connors J in the case of Ratu Kaliova Dawai v Native Lands & Fisheries Commission, Ratu Napolioni Dawai, Attorney General of Fiji; Judicial Review No. 4 of 2005 to ensure fairness and compliance by the 2nd Respondent with the rules of natural justice.
47. THAT the 1st and 2nd Respondents have all our evidence before them. That the evidence relied upon by the 2nd Respondent to declare Ratu Sailosi Dawai and Ratu Vuniani Navuniuci have already been discontinued by the High Court of Fiji in Ratu Isireli Rokomatu Namulo v Josefa Saronicava Waqairatu & 5 Ors; HBJ 0021 of 1997L.
50. THAT the High Court has recognised from the past conduct of the 2nd Respondent that it is bias in favour of the family of Ratu Napolioni Naulia Dawai, the close blood relative of Ratu Sailosi Dawai and Ratu Vuniuani Navunicui.
51. THAT this bias and unlawful conduct by the 2nd Respondent continues to this day.
...”
[38] It appears that the first and the second respondents have failed to assess the evidence properly.
[39] A failure to assess the evidence properly, resulting in a decision which appears to be unsupported by the evidence, can also be characterised as failure to take account of relevant considerations. This may arise where the court is unable to identify the evidence to support a decision, in which event the decision will be flawed in law (see: AJ (Liberia) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2006] EWCA Civ 1736).
[40] Having had a look at the application, I am satisfied that the application demonstrates that there is an arguable case for granting relief.
Undue delay
[41] The applicant seeks relief by way of writ of certiorari (quashing order) to remove the decisions of the first and the second respondents. In that case, the relevant period is 3 months after the date of the proceeding (see: O 53, R 4 (2)).
[42] The decision to which this application relates was made on 1 June 2018. The applicant has made his leave application on 31 August 2018. The application has been filed within 3 months of the impugned decision. The question of undue delay does not arise.
Conclusion
[43] Having read the application, the supporting affidavit and the affidavit in opposition and having heard and read the submissions advanced by both counsel, I conclude that the applicant has demonstrated an arguable case for judicial review of the decisions of the first and the second respondents. I would accordingly grant leave to apply for judicial review of the decisions of the first and second respondents. The costs of this application shall be in the case.
Stay
[44] Mr Fa of counsel for the applicant submits that the granting of leave should immediately operate as a stay as the illegality created by the unlawfulness of the first and the second respondents’ conduct should be stopped forthwith. If it is, he further submits, allowed to continue then when the decision is eventually reversed, considerable loss and damages will arise to innocent parties who have relied on the unlawful acts on the first and the second respondents will be left without a remedy.
[45] The HCR, O 53, R 3 (8) (a), states:
“(8) Where leave to apply for judicial review is granted, then-
(a) if the relief sought is an order of prohibition or certiorari and the Court so directs, the grant shall operate as a stay of the proceedings to which the application relates until the determination of the application or until the Court otherwise orders;” (Emphasis supplied)
[46] By way of relief, the applicant seeks an order of certiorari to remove the impugned decisions of the first and the second respondents on the ground of illegality among other grounds. I am of the view that it would be appropriate that there should be a stay of the proceedings. I accordingly, acting under R 3 (8) (a), direct the granting of leave must operate as a stay of the proceedings to which the application relates until the determination of the application for judicial review.
[47] The applicant now will make his application for judicial review either by originating motion or originating summons and enter it for hearing within 14 days (see: O 53, R 5 (4)).
The result
M. H. Mohamed Ajmeer
JUDGE
Solicitors:
Fa & Company, Barristers & Solicitors for the applicant
Office of the Solicitor-General for the first to third respondents
IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
WESTERN DIVISION AT LAUTOKA
CIVIL JURISDICTION
JUDICIAL REVIEW NO. HBJ 7 OF 2018
IN THE MATTER of an application by Ratu Kaliova Dawai of Narewa Village, Nadi, Villager, for Judicial Review.
IN THE MATTER of the iTaukei Lands Act Cap 113 of the Laws of Fiji whereby the iTaukei Lands and Appeals Tribunal have endorsed Ratu Vuniani Navuniuci to be the holder of the title of Tui Nadi purporting to exercise powers under the iTaukei Lands Act
BETWEEN
RATU KALIOVA DAWAI a villager of Narewa Village, Nadi.
APPLICANT
A N D
iTAUKEI LANDS AND APPEALS TRIBUNAL a statutory body set up by law of 87 Queen Elizabeth Drive, Nasese, Suva.
FIRST RESPONDENT
A N D
iTAUKEI LANDS AND FISHERIES COMMISSION a statutory body set up by law of Carnavon Street, Suva.
SECOND RESPONDENT
A N D
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF FIJI of Level 7, Suvavou House, Victoria Parade, Suva.
THIRD RESPONDENT
A N D
RATU VUNIANI NAVUNIUCI of Narewa Village, Nadi.
FOURTH RESPONDENT
Appearances :
Mr I. Fa for the applicant
Ms M. Faktoufon for the 1st, 2nd and 3rd respondents
No appearance for the 4th respondents
Date of Hearing : 21 August 2019
Date of Ruling : 13 September 2019
R U L I N G
[on leave to apply for judicial review]
Introduction
[01] This is an application for leave to apply for judicial review.
[02] By his notice of motion summons filed on 31 August 2018 (‘the application’), Ratu Kaliova Dawai, the applicant seeks leave to apply for judicial review of the decisions of the iTaukei Lands and Appeals Tribunal (‘Tribunal’), the respondent dated 1 June 2018 and of the iTaukei Lands and Fisheries Commission, the second respondent dated 5 December 2017 declaring Ratu Vuniani Navuniuci , the respondent to be the rightful Tui Nadi.
[03] The application is supported by an affidavit of the applicant sworn on 31 August 2018, which verifies the facts relied upon.
[04] The application is made in terms of Order 53, Rule 3 (2) of the High Court Rules 1988, as amended (‘HCR’).
[05] The respondent has filed an affidavit of Anasa Tawake, the secretary to the tribunal sworn on 03 January 2019 in response.
[06] The application was initially heard before Mackie J who has left the bench before determination of the same. Therefore, the matter came before me for the limited purpose of hearing and determining the granting of leave to apply for judicial review.
[07] At the hearing before me, the parties made oral submissions, and filed their respective written submissions as well. I am grateful to both counsel and their team for their written submissions, by which I was greatly assisted.
Background
[08] The applicant has given fairly long background facts, but I do not intend to repeat it here. For the present purpose, I would only say that the applicant intends to challenge the first respondent’s decision of 1 June 2018 and the second respondent’s decision of 5 December 2017. Both decisions confirm that Ratu Vuniani Navuniuci , the fourth respondent to be the rightful Tui Nadi.
Relief sought
[09] The applicant seeks the following relief:
- An order for Certiorari to remove into the High Court the said decision of the first respondent dated 1 June 2018, declaring the fourth respondent to be the rightful Tui Nadi and that the same be quashed;
- A declaration that the decision of the first respondent of 1 June 2018, is unlawful, void and of no effect.
- A declaration that the decision of the first respondent of 1 June 2018, declaring the fourth respondent to be the rightful Tui Nadi is unreasonable in the Wednesbury sense and as such the decision is unlawful.
- A declaration that the first respondent had acted in bad faith and in a manner which was unfair to the applicant by proceeding to hear the upholding the decision of the second respondent that the fourth respondent is the holder of the title of Tui Nadi when at the relevant time there was a lawful Order of this Court that was made on the 12 May 2005, that prevented the second respondent from undertaking an inquiry into the rightful holder of the title of the Tui Nadi and a further Order of this Court of the 27 January 2007, that clearly set out the composition of the Commission and also a required terms of reference;
- A declaration that the first respondent’s declaration of the fourth respondent as the rightful holder of the title of Tui Nadi is irregular, void and of no effect.
- An order for damages and costs.
- Such further declaration and other relief as to the Court may seem just.
[10] The grounds on which the relief are sought include:
(a) That the decision by the first respondent to declare the sixth respondent to be the Tui Nadi pursuant to their ruling of 1 June 2018, was in breach of the rules of natural justice in that amongst other matters the applicant was denied a fair hearing in that the first respondent failed to address the illegality of the proceedings before the second respondent:-
- That the second respondent failed to provide a terms of reference for the Commission of Inquiry into the Tui Nadi dispute pursuant to the Orders of the High Court of the 27 January 2007;
- That the second respondent failed to appoint an independent Commission for the Commission of Inquiry of the 22 November 2011, to determine the Tui Nadi dispute in accordance with the orders of the High Court of the 27 January 2007.
- That the second respondent was biased against the applicant in that the first to the third respondents failed to provide the applicant with a terms of reference that the Commission of Inquiry would base its inquiry into, and
- That the second respondents had taken into account as evidence in the inquiry matters which were not placed before it.
- That the first respondent being aware of the above proceeded to accept the second respondent’s decision without addressing the same.
(b) That the decision by the first respondent was a decision that was made on evidence of the customs and traditions of the Vanua of Nadi and of section 17 of the Native Lands Act that was discredited and rejected by the High Court of Fiji in the case of Ratu Isireli Rokomatu Namulo v Josefa Saronicava Waqairatu & 5 Ors; HBJ 0021 OF 1997L;
(c) That the first and second respondents had made a predetermination in arriving at their decisions to declare the fourth respondent to be the Tui Nadi as it was aware that the procedures set out by the High Court in the consent orders of the 24 January 2007, to ensure fairness and compliance with the rules of natural justice was complied with yet refused to comply with these procedures.
(d) That the first respondent in arriving at their decisions had: -
- (1) Taken into account irrelevant considerations and matters, by failing to comply with the consent orders of the High Court of the 24 January 2007 which are set out below:
(ii) The Minister is to appoint the Chairman of the Commission which is to be qualified for appointment as a Judge or otherwise suitable by qualification and experience;
(iii) The terms of reference for the Commission is to be determined in accordance with the custom of the vanua of Nadi as to who should be the holder of the title Tui Nadi;
(iv) Each party is to be given natural justice;
(v) Adjourned to 23/2/07 for resolution of the Commissioners.”
(2) Acted in breach of the rules of natural justice by failing to comply with the consent orders of the High Court on the 24 January 2007, which are set out below:
“(i) That each party nominate a member for appointment as Commissioners;
(ii) The Minister is to appoint the Chairperson of the Commission who is to be qualified for appointment as a Judge or otherwise suitable by qualification and experience;
(iii) The terms of reference for the Commission is to be determined in accordance with the custom of the vanua of Nadi as to who should be the holder of the title Tui Nadi;
(iv) Each party is to be given natural justice;
(v) Adjourned to 23/2/07 for resolution of the Commissioners.”
(3) Acted illegally, unlawfully and in an unreasonable manner by failing to comply with the consent order of the High Court of the 24 January 2007, which are set out below:
“(i) That each arty nominate a member for appointment as Commissioners;
(ii) The Minister is to appoint the Chairman of the Commission who is to be qualified for appointment as a Judge or otherwise suitable by qualification and experience;
(iii) The terms of reference for the Commission is to be determined in accordance with the custom of the vanua of Nadi as to who should be the holder of the title Tui Nadi;
(iv) Each party is to be given natural justice;
(v) Adjourned to 23/2/07 for resolution of the Commissioners.”
Notice of Opposition
[11] The first, second and third respondents (collectively ‘the respondents’) oppose the application for leave to apply for judicial review on grounds that:
- The applicant has no sufficient interest or arguable case in that:
- there is no evidence in the affidavit of Ratu Kaliova Dawai sworn and filed on 31 August 2018, to support the reliefs sought;
- the affidavit evidence focuses on circumstances arising prior to and is not relevant to the present proceeding.
- There is no breach of the rules of natural justice in that:
- there is no affidavit evidence supporting any breach of natural justice;
- the affidavit evidence focuses on arguments relating to merits of the lawful Tui Nadi and not on procedure adopted in the decision making process.
- That this claim is res judicata as the consent orders of 27 January 2007, has been discussed in the following cases:
- contempt proceedings in Dawai v iTaukei Lands & Fisheries Commission [2011] FJHC 795’ HBJ 4.2005L (8 December 2011) by Justice Inoke in refusing leave to apply for an order of committal;
- Dawai v Nasetava [2012] FJLaw Rp 120; HBJ 2 of 2012 (7 November 2012) whereby Justice Nawana dismissed the application for leave for judicial review challenging the appointment of Ratu Sailosi Dawai as Tui Nadi; and
- Dawai v Ratu Sailosi Dawai, HBJ 4 of 2013 whereby Justice Abeygunaratne dismissed the application for leave for judicial review challenging the appointment of Ratu Sailosi Dawai as Tui Nadi.
- There was no appeal against the decision of Justice Inoke immediately after the decision nor had there been any Stay Orders sought against the respondents.
- The applicant had filed an appeal for enlargement of time to appeal the decision of Justice Inoke dated 8 December 2011, in Dawai v Native Lands and Fisheries Commission [2014] FJCA 194; Misc.2.2012 (7 November 2014); which was eventually deemed abandoned.
- The applicant again filed an application for extension of time in civil appeal no ABU 43 of 2018 which is pending before the Court of Appeal.
[12] The relevant law applicable to leave to apply for judicial review is the HCR, O 53, R 3 (2), which provides:
‘Application for leave to apply for judicial review (O 53, R 3)
3 (1) No application for judicial review shall be made unless the leave of the Court has been obtained in accordance with this Rule.
(2) An application for leave must be made upon filing in the Registry-
(a) a notice in Form 32 in Appendix 1 hereunder containing statement of-
- (i) the particulars of the judgment order, decision or other proceeding in respect of which judicial review is being sought;
- (ii) the relief sought and the grounds upon which it is sought;
- (iii) the name and description of the applicant;
- (iv) the name and address of the applicant’s solicitors (if any); and
- (v) the applicant’s address for service;
(b) an affidavit which verifies the facts relied on.
(3) (a) Copies of the application for leave and the affidavit in support must be served on all persons directly affected by the application.
(b) The Court may determine the application without a hearing and where a hearing is considered necessary the Court shall hear and determine the application inter partes.
(c) Notice of hearing of the application shall be notified in writing to the parties by the Registrar.
(d) Where the Court determines the application without a hearing, the Registrar shall serve a copy of the order of the Court on the applicant.
(4) Without prejudice to its powers under Order 20, Rule 8, the Court hearing an application for leave may allow the relief sought and the grounds thereof to be amended, whether by specifying different or additional grounds or relief or otherwise, on such terms, if any, as it thinks fit.
(5) The Court shall not grant leave unless it considers that the applicant has a sufficient interest in the matter to which the application relates.
(6) Where leave is sought to apply for an order of certiorari to remove for the purpose of its being quashed any judgment, order, conviction or other proceedings which is subject to appeal and a time is limited for the bringing of the appeal, the Court may adjourn the application for leave until the appeal is determined or the time for appealing has expired.
(7) If the Court grants leave, it may impose such terms as to costs and as to giving security as it thinks fit.
(8) Where leave to apply for judicial review is granted, then-
(a) if the relief sought is an order of prohibition or certiorari and the Court so directs, the grant shall operate as a stay of the proceedings to which the application relates until the determination of the application or until the Court otherwise orders;
(b) if any other relief is sought, the Court may at any time grant in the proceedings such interim relief as could be granted in an action begun by writ.
(9) Upon granting leave the Court may, if satisfied that such a course is justified, direct that the grant shall operate either forthwith or conditionally as an entry of motion under Rule 5 (4) and may then proceed to judgment on the application for judicial review or may give such further directions as may be warranted in the circumstances.’
Test for granting leave
[13] To grant leave to apply for judicial review, the court has to be satisfied that:
(a) There is an arguable case for review;
(b) The claimant has a ‘sufficient interest’; and
(c) There has not been ‘undue delay’.
Discussion
[14] The applicant has made this application to obtain leave to apply for judicial review of the tribunal’s decision dated 1 June 2018 on the grounds of breach of rules of natural justice, illegality, unreasonableness and legitimate expectation.
[15] As required in R 3 (2) (i), the applicant has attached a statement of the particulars of the decision in respect of which judicial review is sought. The applicant seeks writ of certiorari (quashing order) quashing the decision of the tribunal dated 1 June 2018.
[16] An application for leave to apply for judicial review may be determined on papers without a hearing and where a hearing is considered necessary, the Court will hear and determine the application inter partes (see O 53, R 3 (3) (b). In this case, the application was heard inter partes.
[17] The application provides name, description and address of the applicant, and provides the particulars of the decision in respect of which judicial review is being sought in compliance with the HCR, O 53, R 3 (2). The formality of the application was not disputed. The application is in order.
[18] The applicant has filed an affidavit, which verifies the facts relied upon. This complies with the requirement of the HCR, O 53, R 3 (2) (b).
[19] Returning to the test for granting leave to apply for judicial review.
Sufficient interest
[20] The court will not grant leave unless it considers that the applicant has a sufficient interest (standing) in the matter to which the application relates (see O 53, R 3 (5)). The requirement of standing indicates that the primary concern of administrative law is not simply to control the performance of public functions but rather to exercise control in the interests of persons affected in particular ways. In administrative law, rules of standing are seen as rules about entitlement to complain of a wrong rather than as part of definition of the wrong.
[21] The question of sufficient interest is to be decided:
- In the light of the circumstances of the case before the court (it cannot be decided in advance of litigation).
- It has to be judged in the light of relevant statutory provisions-who is to be allowed to challenge decisions made under the statute?
- It has to be judged in the light of substance of the complainant’s complaint. (In R v Somerset CC, ex p Dixon [1998] Env LR 111, Sedley J said that: ‘provided the claimant had an arguable substantive case, leave should not be refused on the basis of lack of standing unless the claimant was a ‘busybody’ or a ‘troublemaker’.).
- Whether the claimant’s interest is sufficient depends to some extent on the seriousness of the alleged breach of administrative law. Whatever the claimant’s interest, the more serious the breach, the more likely that interest is to be sufficient.
[23] The test for deciding whether a claimant has sufficient interest was considered by the House of Lords in R v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte National Federation of Self-Employed and Small Business Ltd [1982] AC 617, where it was held:
‘That not only was standing a ground in itself upon which permission could be granted, it should also be considered at the substantive hearing after the relevant law and facts were examined in full.’
[24] The tribunal’s decision affects the applicant’s status in the village. The decision directly interferes with his personal right to hold the position as Tui Nadi. For the purpose of this application, I am provisionally satisfied that the applicant has sufficient interest in the matter to which the application relates.
The arguable case for review
[25] Another test for granting leave to apply for judicial review is that a claimant must demonstrate to the court upon ‘a quick perusal of the papers’ that there is an arguable case for granting relief (see: R v Inland Revenue Commissioners, ex parte National Federation of Self-Employed and Small Business Ltd (above)).
[26] When considering whether there is an arguable case for granting the relief sought, the court will not go into the matter in depth. The court will only see, upon perusal of the papers, whether there is an arguable prima facie case for granting the relief.
[27] The tribunal’s decision is challenged on the grounds that: (a) breach of the principles of natural justice and fairness, (b) illegality, (c) unreasonableness and (d) legitimate expectation.
[28] It was contended on behalf of the respondent that there is no arguable case for the court to consider granting leave to apply for judicial review.
[29] In Fiji Airline Pilots Associations v. Permanent Secretary for Labour and Industrial Relations [1998] FJCA 14, the Court of Appeal said:
“That the basic principle is that the judge is only required to be satisfied that on the material available and disclosed is what might, on further consideration, turn out to be an arguable cause in favour of granting relief.”
[30] Scutt J in State v Connors, ex parte Shah [2008] FJHC 64 stated:
“...as was said in Sitiveni Ligamamada Rabuka and Commission of Inquiry into the Deed of Settlement Dated 17 September 1993; In re Anthony Stephens v. Attorney-General of Fiji (JR No. 26 of 1993, 4 May 1995):
“This Court is not concerned with a review of the decision which the commission reached at the Inquiry but simply with a review of the manner or process in which the decision was reached. It is the decision-making process employed by the Commission of Inquiry in reaching its decision which is the primary concern of this Court.”
[31] Hon. Justice Callanchini in Ramasi v Native Lands Commission [2015] FJCA 83; ABU 00562012, concluded at paragraph 11 that:
“Therefore in my judgment, whenever a challenge to a decision of the Tribunal is based on a lack of jurisdiction or a denial of natural justice, the High Court has the necessary jurisdiction to consider an application for judicial review under Order 53 of the High Court Rules notwithstanding section 7(5) of the Act. However, in this case the challenge by the Appellant went to the merits of the Tribunal’s decision and for that reason there was no right to apply for judicial review.”
[32] In this matter, the second respondent decided that the forth respondent is entitled to hold the position of Tui Nadi (‘the position’). The applicant appealed that decision to the tribunal. On 1 June 2018, the tribunal after hearing the appeal confirmed the fourth respondent’s decision and dismissed his appeal.
[33] Section 7 (5) of the Act makes the tribunal’s decision final and conclusive and cannot be challenged in a court of law. In view of the ouster clause in that section, the tribunal’s decision may be judicially reviewed on the ground of illegality.
[34] Lord Diplock in Council of Civil Service Unions v Minister for Civil Service [1985] AC 374 said that:
‘Illegality arises where a decision-maker who must understand correctly the law that regulates his or her decision-making power and must give effect to it fails to do so.’
[35] Illegality also includes ultra vires and errors of law. An error in relation to a precedent (jurisdictional) fact is also often placed under the illegality heading.
[36] The applicant seeks leave to apply for judicial review of the tribunal’s decision on the ground of illegality among other grounds.
[37] In his affidavit in support, the applicant [at paragraphs 3, 4, 47, 50 and 51] states:
“...
3. THAT the decision of the 1st Respondent of the 1st June 2018 is a decision that is arrived at unlawfully and in breach of the orders of Connors J of the 12th of May 2005 and the consent orders of Connors J of the 24th of January 2007 in the case of Ratu Kaliova Dawai v Native Lands and Fisheries Commission, Ratu Napolioni Dawai, Attorney General of Fiji; Judicial Review No. 4 of 2005.
4. THAT in arriving at its decision of the 1st of June 2018, the 1st Respondent had accepted without reservation the decision of the 2nd Respondent of the 5th of December 2017 arrived at in breach of the process and procedures ordered by consent by Connors J in the case of Ratu Kaliova Dawai v Native Lands & Fisheries Commission, Ratu Napolioni Dawai, Attorney General of Fiji; Judicial Review No. 4 of 2005 to ensure fairness and compliance by the 2nd Respondent with the rules of natural justice.
47. THAT the 1st and 2nd Respondents have all our evidence before them. That the evidence relied upon by the 2nd Respondent to declare Ratu Sailosi Dawai and Ratu Vuniani Navuniuci have already been discontinued by the High Court of Fiji in Ratu Isireli Rokomatu Namulo v Josefa Saronicava Waqairatu & 5 Ors; HBJ 0021 of 1997L.
50. THAT the High Court has recognised from the past conduct of the 2nd Respondent that it is bias in favour of the family of Ratu Napolioni Naulia Dawai, the close blood relative of Ratu Sailosi Dawai and Ratu Vuniuani Navunicui.
51. THAT this bias and unlawful conduct by the 2nd Respondent continues to this day.
...”
[38] It appears that the first and the second respondents have failed to assess the evidence properly.
[39] A failure to assess the evidence properly, resulting in a decision which appears to be unsupported by the evidence, can also be characterised as failure to take account of relevant considerations. This may arise where the court is unable to identify the evidence to support a decision, in which event the decision will be flawed in law (see: AJ (Liberia) v Secretary of State for the Home Department [2006] EWCA Civ 1736).
[40] Having had a look at the application, I am satisfied that the application demonstrates that there is an arguable case for granting relief.
Undue delay
[41] The applicant seeks relief by way of writ of certiorari (quashing order) to remove the decisions of the first and the second respondents. In that case, the relevant period is 3 months after the date of the proceeding (see: O 53, R 4 (2)).
[42] The decision to which this application relates was made on 1 June 2018. The applicant has made his leave application on 31 August 2018. The application has been filed within 3 months of the impugned decision. The question of undue delay does not arise.
Conclusion
[43] Having read the application, the supporting affidavit and the affidavit in opposition and having heard and read the submissions advanced by both counsel, I conclude that the applicant has demonstrated an arguable case for judicial review of the decisions of the first and the second respondents. I would accordingly grant leave to apply for judicial review of the decisions of the first and second respondents. The costs of this application shall be in the case.
Stay
[44] Mr Fa of counsel for the applicant submits that the granting of leave should immediately operate as a stay as the illegality created by the unlawfulness of the first and the second respondents’ conduct should be stopped forthwith. If it is, he further submits, allowed to continue then when the decision is eventually reversed, considerable loss and damages will arise to innocent parties who have relied on the unlawful acts on the first and the second respondents will be left without a remedy.
[45] The HCR, O 53, R 3 (8) (a), states:
“(8) Where leave to apply for judicial review is granted, then-
(a) if the relief sought is an order of prohibition or certiorari and the Court so directs, the grant shall operate as a stay of the proceedings to which the application relates until the determination of the application or until the Court otherwise orders;” (Emphasis supplied)
[46] By way of relief, the applicant seeks an order of certiorari to remove the impugned decisions of the first and the second respondents on the ground of illegality among other grounds. I am of the view that it would be appropriate that there should be a stay of the proceedings. I accordingly, acting under R 3 (8) (a), direct the granting of leave must operate as a stay of the proceedings to which the application relates until the determination of the application for judicial review.
[47] The applicant now will make his application for judicial review either by originating motion or originating summons and enter it for hearing within 14 days (see: O 53, R 5 (4)).
The result
- Leave to apply for judicial review is granted.
- The grant of leave shall operate as a stay of the proceedings to which the application relates.
- The applicant shall enter his application for judicial review for hearing within 14 days.
- The costs shall be in the case.
M. H. Mohamed Ajmeer
JUDGE
Solicitors:
Fa & Company, Barristers & Solicitors for the applicant
Office of the Solicitor-General for the first to third respondents
From Fiji Sun, 17 September 2020
A claimant to the Tui Nadi chiefly title will be laid to rest at Narewa Village in Nadi today.
Ratu Kaliova Dawai passed away on August 30 after a short illness, spokesperson Sairusi Nabete confirmed.
The Tui Nadi chiefly title has been at the centre of controversy. The late Ratu Kaliova, who was installed in 2013 by the vanua, after the death of his brother who held the title, Ratu Sireli Rokomatu Namulo.
He was dethroned by the iTaukei Lands and Fisheries Commission and then he challenged the decision. It was defeated.
The commission installed Ratu Sailosi Dawai.
However, when Ratu Sailosi died in 2016, the current Tui Nadi Ratu Vuniyani Navuniuci became his successor.
This was also challenged in court by the late Ratu Kaliova. The dispute is still before the High Court.
Mr Nabete said: “Ratu Kaliova belonged to the people. He took over from his brother and predecessor the then Tui Nadi late Ratu Sireli Rokomatu Namulo.” The late Ratu Kaliova Dawai was 61. He is survived by one daughter.
The church service is at 10am and burial at the Sautabu.
A claimant to the Tui Nadi chiefly title will be laid to rest at Narewa Village in Nadi today.
Ratu Kaliova Dawai passed away on August 30 after a short illness, spokesperson Sairusi Nabete confirmed.
The Tui Nadi chiefly title has been at the centre of controversy. The late Ratu Kaliova, who was installed in 2013 by the vanua, after the death of his brother who held the title, Ratu Sireli Rokomatu Namulo.
He was dethroned by the iTaukei Lands and Fisheries Commission and then he challenged the decision. It was defeated.
The commission installed Ratu Sailosi Dawai.
However, when Ratu Sailosi died in 2016, the current Tui Nadi Ratu Vuniyani Navuniuci became his successor.
This was also challenged in court by the late Ratu Kaliova. The dispute is still before the High Court.
Mr Nabete said: “Ratu Kaliova belonged to the people. He took over from his brother and predecessor the then Tui Nadi late Ratu Sireli Rokomatu Namulo.” The late Ratu Kaliova Dawai was 61. He is survived by one daughter.
The church service is at 10am and burial at the Sautabu.
"Nonetheless, watching the proceedings today, Grubsheet was left with the uncomfortable feeling that Sitiveni Rabuka has a long way to go to match his words with deeds. Yes, the launch of the People’s Alliance took place in a traditional setting outside the home of the Tui Nawaka so the exclusively iTaukei nature of the proceedings was to be expected. But the one undeniably jarring element was that there wasn’t a single Indo-Fijian face visible in the audience. Not one. And all the lofty talk about inclusivity will amount to nothing unless the People’s Alliance can broaden its ethnic base between now and the election. So all in all, a good start but ample evidence that Sitiveni Rabuka needs to do a lot better to win the trust of every Fijian and set the seal on his extraordinary comeback."
As the Tui Nadi – the President of the People’s Alliance - observed at the official launch of the party today, Sitiveni Rabuka’s greatness lies in his humility. It was what took him within a whisker of government in 2018 and is undoubtedly still the quality that is resonating with the electorate today – the stark contrast between Rabuka’s low key, consultative demeanour and the strutting arrogance of Frank Bainimarama - the man who only just beat him three years ago but didn’t learn his lesson and is heading for almost certain defeat when and if the Fijian people get the opportunity to have their say in the election of 2022.
Sitiveni Rabuka pressed all the right buttons in his speech today – the highhandedness and lack of consultation of the FijiFirst government, the breakdown of cabinet governance and the dominance of one man ( “we know who he is! ” someone yelled from the audience of the Covid-reduced gathering), the arbitrary detention of opposition figures in the dead of night, the war being waged against the University of the South Pacific and its Vice Chancellor and what Rabuka described as the “banishment” to Australia of Fiji’s most prominent historian, Professor Brij Lal, and his wife, Padma, who he vowed to bring back to “where they should be”.
The FijiFirst government is highly vulnerable on all these issues and the wonder of it is that the Prime Minister and his ventriloquist have allowed them to fester to the point where they will return to bite them when they could, and should, have all been diffused long ago. Yet arguably the most devastating moment of Rabuka’s speech for Frank Bainimarama was when he alluded to the PM’s remarks last week that he is “firmly in control of the country”. It didn’t require elaboration. Because the entire nation knows that the PM long ago abandoned control of the FijiFirst government to his even more arrogant deputy. (Incidentally, why were the astonishing contents of Bainimarama’s slurred remarks – uncharacteristically redolent with biblical references – confined to CFL-Fiji Village and not reported by the Fiji Sun, FBC or the Fiji Times? Were they suppressed - in the case of the Sun and FBC - on the orders or the AG? And why did the Fiji Times ignore them? Because they were also curiously and glaringly absent from the government’s website and social media platforms).
Yet the most striking note of Rabuka’s speech was his emphasis on inclusivity and his stated determination to govern in the interests of all Fijians, including minority communities. This was greeted with applause by the almost exclusively iTaukei gathering, as was Rabuka’s pledge to return the economy to responsible management working with the Indo-Fijian dominated business community. And there was the striking head-on acknowledgement of the ghosts of the past. “I am not the man I was in 1987”, declared Rabuka, pointing out that he had repeatedly apologised for carrying out the coups that he freely admitted still haunt him to this day. Is the nation prepared to forgive Sitiveni Rabuka and give him another shot at leadership as he approaches his mid-70s? ( “73 is just a number!, he exclaimed) Only time will tell but there’s no doubting the potency of his message and the extraordinary momentum he is already generating.
Nonetheless, watching the proceedings today, Grubsheet was left with the uncomfortable feeling that Sitiveni Rabuka has a long way to go to match his words with deeds. Yes, the launch of the People’s Alliance took place in a traditional setting outside the home of the Tui Nawaka so the exclusively iTaukei nature of the proceedings was to be expected. But the one undeniably jarring element was that there wasn’t a single Indo-Fijian face visible in the audience. Not one. And all the lofty talk about inclusivity will amount to nothing unless the People’s Alliance can broaden its ethnic base between now and the election.
So all in all, a good start but ample evidence that Sitiveni Rabuka needs to do a lot better to win the trust of every Fijian and set the seal on his extraordinary comeback.
Sitiveni Rabuka pressed all the right buttons in his speech today – the highhandedness and lack of consultation of the FijiFirst government, the breakdown of cabinet governance and the dominance of one man ( “we know who he is! ” someone yelled from the audience of the Covid-reduced gathering), the arbitrary detention of opposition figures in the dead of night, the war being waged against the University of the South Pacific and its Vice Chancellor and what Rabuka described as the “banishment” to Australia of Fiji’s most prominent historian, Professor Brij Lal, and his wife, Padma, who he vowed to bring back to “where they should be”.
The FijiFirst government is highly vulnerable on all these issues and the wonder of it is that the Prime Minister and his ventriloquist have allowed them to fester to the point where they will return to bite them when they could, and should, have all been diffused long ago. Yet arguably the most devastating moment of Rabuka’s speech for Frank Bainimarama was when he alluded to the PM’s remarks last week that he is “firmly in control of the country”. It didn’t require elaboration. Because the entire nation knows that the PM long ago abandoned control of the FijiFirst government to his even more arrogant deputy. (Incidentally, why were the astonishing contents of Bainimarama’s slurred remarks – uncharacteristically redolent with biblical references – confined to CFL-Fiji Village and not reported by the Fiji Sun, FBC or the Fiji Times? Were they suppressed - in the case of the Sun and FBC - on the orders or the AG? And why did the Fiji Times ignore them? Because they were also curiously and glaringly absent from the government’s website and social media platforms).
Yet the most striking note of Rabuka’s speech was his emphasis on inclusivity and his stated determination to govern in the interests of all Fijians, including minority communities. This was greeted with applause by the almost exclusively iTaukei gathering, as was Rabuka’s pledge to return the economy to responsible management working with the Indo-Fijian dominated business community. And there was the striking head-on acknowledgement of the ghosts of the past. “I am not the man I was in 1987”, declared Rabuka, pointing out that he had repeatedly apologised for carrying out the coups that he freely admitted still haunt him to this day. Is the nation prepared to forgive Sitiveni Rabuka and give him another shot at leadership as he approaches his mid-70s? ( “73 is just a number!, he exclaimed) Only time will tell but there’s no doubting the potency of his message and the extraordinary momentum he is already generating.
Nonetheless, watching the proceedings today, Grubsheet was left with the uncomfortable feeling that Sitiveni Rabuka has a long way to go to match his words with deeds. Yes, the launch of the People’s Alliance took place in a traditional setting outside the home of the Tui Nawaka so the exclusively iTaukei nature of the proceedings was to be expected. But the one undeniably jarring element was that there wasn’t a single Indo-Fijian face visible in the audience. Not one. And all the lofty talk about inclusivity will amount to nothing unless the People’s Alliance can broaden its ethnic base between now and the election.
So all in all, a good start but ample evidence that Sitiveni Rabuka needs to do a lot better to win the trust of every Fijian and set the seal on his extraordinary comeback.
We must keep reminding the old and the new generation the pain, distress, depression, suicides, migration, brain drain, evictions, shattered dreams, ruined careers, disrupted education, disenfranchisement, learned helplessness, silent tears, ripped hearts and general thuggery - rape, robbery, and beatings - by this Father of Coups hiding behind IMMUNITY. He must never be allowed to rule Fiji, based on his 1987 to 1999 CV, which is ZILCH
The PEOPLE'S ALLIANCE LAUNCH |  |
    |  |
 |   The late Professor Anthony Kirk-Greene (1925-2018) |
Fijileaks: In 1990, a leading Professor of African History at the University of Oxford, and a former colonial administrator in Nigeria, ANTHONY KIRK-GREENE (1925-2018) had passed to our Founding Editor-in-Chief a typescript of the above article by YAW SAFFU on 'Changing civil-military relations in Fiji' for comments. An expert on Nigerian military intervention in politics, the African chiefs, emirs, and colonial governors in Africa (some had served in Fiji), Professor Kirk-Greene had exchanged many intimate insights on the African military - "Men On Horseback" - with our Editor-in-Chief during the writing up of his study, "Fiji's Racial Politics - The Coming Coup" (completed in 1986; and later published as Fiji: Coups in Paradise - Race, Politics and Military Intervention)
CHANGING CIVIL-MILITARY RELATIONS IN FIJI
By YAW SAFFU, 1990
*There are several other indicators of the growth of the power of the military since the coups.
*First, the military imposed conditions when handing over ogvernment back to the Ratus in December 1987. These included regular consultations with senior army officers on government policy, and the exclusion of Labour Party/NFP Coalition members from the Cabinet
*The draconian Internal Security Decree of June 1988, following the discovery of arms were being smuggled into Fiji, widened the scope of immunity for the military and other security agencies, giving their overall head, the Minister of Home Affairs, no other than Rabuka, virtually totalitarian powers
* Second, the RFMF has expanded enormously, from 2500 at the beginning of 1987, to over 6000 by the end of the year, with a corresponding increase in defense expenditure, in a period of extreme financial austerity, indicated by two devaluations amounting to over 30%, and public service salary cuts of the order of 15 percent. By the end of 1987, defence expenditure was double the budgetary allocation for the year. By 1989 budgetary allocation for defence had overtaken that for health.
*The increase in military personnel and expenditure reflected the wish of the military leaders to penetrate society to control it, in the context of post-coup security needs. Rabuka's determination to give the military forces a vanguard role in the economy, such as the Indonesian army plays in the Indonesian economy
* Third, the 1989 Auditor-General's Report gives a clear indication of the military's view of itself as now beyond accountability. The military authorities are refusing to submit the increased military spending to audit inspection. According to the Report, accounting records of the RFMF, including those of the Auxillary Unit, had not been audited "due to the situation prevailing in the country from May 1987".
*The Report indicates, however, that an internal Finance Ministry inspection of the RFMF accounts and records in June 1988 uncovered "major items of defect" which the Report itemized, and on which queries had been raised but to which no replies had been received.
*The military authorities have shown in other spheres their sense of impunity and their reluctance to abide by the law. While several decrees have given the military enormous powers, even more powers have been acquired and exercised by military personal without legal backing.
*The same sense of impunity, of being beyond accountabilty, has characterised the military authorities' recruitment and promotion practices, both within the military, which has become very politicized, and in the wider public service.
*Rabuka personally invited several ex-military personnel back to be re-commissioned, the so-called "Sill Got Your Uniform Brigade'. Lt Col Edward Kikau Tuivanuavou exemplifies the membership of that brigade.
By YAW SAFFU, 1990
*There are several other indicators of the growth of the power of the military since the coups.
*First, the military imposed conditions when handing over ogvernment back to the Ratus in December 1987. These included regular consultations with senior army officers on government policy, and the exclusion of Labour Party/NFP Coalition members from the Cabinet
*The draconian Internal Security Decree of June 1988, following the discovery of arms were being smuggled into Fiji, widened the scope of immunity for the military and other security agencies, giving their overall head, the Minister of Home Affairs, no other than Rabuka, virtually totalitarian powers
* Second, the RFMF has expanded enormously, from 2500 at the beginning of 1987, to over 6000 by the end of the year, with a corresponding increase in defense expenditure, in a period of extreme financial austerity, indicated by two devaluations amounting to over 30%, and public service salary cuts of the order of 15 percent. By the end of 1987, defence expenditure was double the budgetary allocation for the year. By 1989 budgetary allocation for defence had overtaken that for health.
*The increase in military personnel and expenditure reflected the wish of the military leaders to penetrate society to control it, in the context of post-coup security needs. Rabuka's determination to give the military forces a vanguard role in the economy, such as the Indonesian army plays in the Indonesian economy
* Third, the 1989 Auditor-General's Report gives a clear indication of the military's view of itself as now beyond accountability. The military authorities are refusing to submit the increased military spending to audit inspection. According to the Report, accounting records of the RFMF, including those of the Auxillary Unit, had not been audited "due to the situation prevailing in the country from May 1987".
*The Report indicates, however, that an internal Finance Ministry inspection of the RFMF accounts and records in June 1988 uncovered "major items of defect" which the Report itemized, and on which queries had been raised but to which no replies had been received.
*The military authorities have shown in other spheres their sense of impunity and their reluctance to abide by the law. While several decrees have given the military enormous powers, even more powers have been acquired and exercised by military personal without legal backing.
*The same sense of impunity, of being beyond accountabilty, has characterised the military authorities' recruitment and promotion practices, both within the military, which has become very politicized, and in the wider public service.
*Rabuka personally invited several ex-military personnel back to be re-commissioned, the so-called "Sill Got Your Uniform Brigade'. Lt Col Edward Kikau Tuivanuavou exemplifies the membership of that brigade.
Click below to read full article:
Fijileaks: The recent glorification of NFP founder and leader AD PATEL
in the Fiji Times is all HOGWASH. The London Constitutional talks, even though Patel had passed away before the talks, revolved around majority and minority population rights, without taking into account the fact that the Indo-Fijians were on their way to becoming a minority race in Fiji
*There were projections that by 1988 the Fijian (i-Taukei) population would overtake the Indians (Indo-Fijians) as the largest racial group in the country. Apart from the far-reaching implications, this trend also raises a fundamental question: which group is to be treated as a minority in need of constitutional and political safeguards?
Chapter One
"Fiji: A New Nation is Born", Excerpt from VICTOR LAL,
Fiji: Coups in Paradise - Race, Politics and Military Intervention, 1990
*A deeper study of the decision reached at the London constitutional talks, however, shows that fear of Fijians (i-Taukei) being swamped by the majority Indians (Indo-Fijians), because the two races were 'equally numerous racial groups, effectively two "majority" communities, each large enough to view itself as capable of assuming a majority role, giving it the right to rule, was an oversimplication.
*Apparently no consideration had been given to future population trends which could result in Indians (Indo-Fijians) becoming a minority in Fiji. In fact, in 1976, for the first time since censuses had been conducted, the number of persons of Indian origin had declined as a percentage of the total population, once more constituting just under 50 per cent of the total population.
*There were also projections that by 1988 the Fijian (i-Taukei) population would overtake the Indians as the largest racial group in the country. Apart from the far-reaching implications, this trend also raises a fundamental question: which group is to be treated as a minority in need of constitutional and political safeguards?
*All the current indicators suggest that the Indians (Indo-Fijians) are on their way to becoming a minority. The latest population figures released in 1986 reveal that the Fijian (i-Taukei) percentage increased from 44.2 in 1976 to 46.2 in 1986, while the Indian (Indo-Fijian) percentage had decreased from 49.8 to 48.6 over the same period.
* The gap between the Indians (Indo-Fijians) and the Fijian (i-Taukei) populations has dropped from 5.6 to 2.4 per cent.
* Among the Indian (Indo-Fijian) community there is a general consensus that their leaders had failed to ensure their security. There have been charges of a sell-out of the community. The in-fighting amongst the Indian (Indo-Fijian leaders; the Fijians' perception that despite their ownership of land, they are an endangered species; and their competition in education and business fields continue to provide tinder for communal warfare.
*If there were any losers in the long, tortous, and complex struggle for political power, it was not the chosen petit-bourgeois Indian (Indo-Fijian) leaders but the ordinary Indian (Indo-Fijian) who had placed faith and hope in the London constitutional talks. The 1970 Constitution, as succeeding chapters show, left a legacy of hatred and mistrust among the different races. Although the predominantly Fijian Alliance government promised to carve out 'unity in diversity', the euphoria of independence was only the beginning of a long journey for the Indians (Indo-Fijians) who had marched from plantation to politics.'
NOTE: The above chapter was completed in 1986. Unfortunately, to our Editor-in-Chief's horror and disappointment, when he received the typeset for final proof-reading, he discovered that the Indian type-setters in New Delhi had taken it upon themselves to change Indo-Fijians to Indians through out the book. Due to expenses and urgency, it was agreed to let the changes stand.
The NFP also handed veto power to CHIEFS, argued against DUAL CITIZENSHIP, and accepted ongoing future COMMON/COMMUNAL ROLL voting system talks. In a hurry to KICK the British out, they went to London with the voice of NFP founder and India-born AD Patel ringing in their ears, and returned empty-handed, except with a new Constitution of Fiji that was the final depository of an i-Taukei's Charter of Rights. Since 1970, NFP kept Indo-Fijians trapped into a BOTTOMLESS PIT but hopefully in 2022 they will have broken free from their inglorious past. So much has been made of the 1997 Constitution. It was designed to ensure that SVT-NFP (Sitiveni Rabuka-Jai Ram Reddy) formed the new government (mandatory power-sharing) after the 1999 election but the
heavy baggage of history and bigotry was against them.
"Colonial rule on its departure left Fiji in Fijian (i-Taukei) hands and might thereby be deemed to have fulfilled, at least in a political sense, its promise of paramountcy of indigenous interests. By permitting European over-representation and facilitating an alliance of European and Fijian communities, it substantially secured the European positiion. As for Indians (Indo-Fijians), who had been brought in initially as indentured labourers but with the prominence of 'employment of rights' and a large majority of whom in 1970 supported the opposiiton National Federation Party, the care of their future was transferred, without any specific legal provisions, from the British to the new rulers of Fiji." - The late Dr AHMED ALI, who later ran and became a Cabinet Minister in the Alliance Party and Rabuka's Interim Coup Cabinet
The book was originally titled Fiji's Racial Politics - The Coming Coup (completed in 1986), and was set for publication in mid-June 1987. However, while waiting for the publication, Sitiveni Rabuka, a third-ranking disgruntled army officer, hiding behind bogus nationalism, and vomitting racism, executed first of two coups on 14 May 1987. As a result, four new chapters (with extensive chronology of events) were added to the original manuscript, and the study was published in 1990 as Fiji: Coups in Paradise - Race, Politics and Military Intervention. |  |
In the last chapter of Fiji's Racial Politics - The Coming Coup, our Editor-in-Chief had concluded: "In the 17-year history of its rule the Alliance [Party] finally realized that the political kingdom was no longer a bed of roses but a crown of thorns. In the past they had employed every domestic tactic to cling to power. Perhaps, as a last bid for power, in the name of ethnicity, the law of force might be invoked by the Fijian [i-Taukei] dominated military, supported by the chiefs, to overturn democracy."
 |  |
| The tenth of October is a memorable date in Fiji’s historical and political calendar. In 1874 it recorded the surrender of the islands’ sovereignty to Great Britain, and in 1970 the end of British rule and Fiji’s entry into the Commonwealth of Nations as an independent state. In August 1969 a series of discussions took place between the Alliance Party and the National Federation Party to consider further constitutional changes and, on 3 November 1969, the two major parties agreed that Fiji should become independent by way of Dominion status. This sudden, amicable agreement was possible because in October 1969, during the negotiations, the leader of the NFP, A. D. Patel, had died. Hs successor, Siddiq Koya, a lawyer by profession, proved flexible and conciliatory towards the Alliance Party and its leader Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara; also, the gesture on the part of the Fijians temporarily forced the Indo-Fijians to shelve their demand for common roll. During the series of discussions in August 1969 the Alliance favoured Dominion status, with the Queen as constitutional monarch, represented in Fiji by a Governor-General. |   |
The NFP envisaged Fiji as an independent state, with an elected President of Fijian origin as its head, but Fiji should be a member of the Commonwealth. Both parties agreed on Commonwealth membership and that Fiji should proceed to independence. Events abroad had again influenced their decision; this time it was the violence in Mauritius, on 12 March 1968, the day of Independence.
Click the link below to read the full REPORT:
https://www.fijileaks.com/uploads/1/3/7/5/13759434/report_of_fiji_constitutional_conference_1970.pdf
 |  |
Mrs IRENE JAI NARAYAN had come to Fiji from India in 1955 after marrying Fiji citizen JAI NARAYAN. She was one of the NFP delegates
to the the London Constitutional Conference
JOURNALISTS and the 1987 and 2006 Coups:
If Fijian journalists were to objectively compare the plight of journalists during the two coups, the Rabuka coups were simply sickening in the treatment of journalists and editors. The Fiji Times was shut down for seven weeks in 1987 but agreed to operate under "partial censorship" and remained afloat because it had since Ratu Mara's Alliance Party days exclusive contract to advertise all Government contracts, tenders, jobs etc. The old Fiji Sun, on the other hand, in September 1988, had to cease operations, and its printing machines were sold to Hari Punja for his company to produce soap products. The Fiji Sun publisher JIM CARNEY and one of its Directors and Lawyer MILES JOHNSON were thrown in the same cell as the deposed Prime Minister TIMOCI BAVADRA. Carney was later deported to his native New Zealand. Most Fiji Sun journalists lost their jobs and their livelihoods, including PETER LOMAS and NEMANI DELAIBATIKI. Our own Founding Editor-in-Chief and former General Secretary of the Journalists Association of Fiji, who was booked to return to his old job at the Fiji Sun on 28 May 1987, after an absence of four years at Oxford, was meted the same punishment as his journalist colleagues. In 1993, the Fiji Times Editor Vijendra Kumar was forced to migrate to Australia after repeated intimidation, harassment and detention by Rabuka's military thugs. Now, 1000 respondents want this MONSTER to lead Fiji once again, with Fiji Times quietly praying for the same. In 2006, Bainimarama had left the Fiji press to regulate itself until the Fiji media, in 2008, set out to name and expose his Interim Finance Minister as the Cabinet Minister that was hiding $2million in Australia. Once again, Fiji slipped back to dictatorship and deportations.
Worst, Rabuka unilaterally declared Fiji a Republic on 10 October 1987, so he could achieve his racist agenda, and total conntrol of Fiji. Again, the depraved and the deniers of his wrongs will turn a blind eye to celebrate Fiji Day on 10 October. Its a BLACK DAY FOR FIJI. Those depraved 1000 respondents might even be Rabuka's new People's Alliance supporters. CRY, THE BELOVED COUNTRY
 |  Philippines journalist Maria Ressa was also awarded the prize for starting investigative news website Rappler which examines corruption |
2018: Our Founding Editor-in-Chief (circled) at the conference in Oxford
Fijileaks: Our Founding Editor-in-Chief congratulates both the winners, notably MARIA RESSA, whom he met when she was a keynote speaker at the 35th anniversary of the founding of the Reuters Institute's Journalist Fellowship Programme on 7-9 September 2018. Our Founding Editor-in-Chief, previously on the old Fiji Sun, was one of the first two recipients of the newly established Reuters Study Fellowship at Oxford. Among other projects, he is finishing a book length manuscript on the history and politics of the Nobel Peace Prize. In 1993, our Editor-in-Chief was Guest Nobel Fellow at the Norwegian Nobel Institute in Oslo, Norway. The book is tentatively titled TOWARDS A WORLD WITHOUT WAR:
The history and politics of the Nobel Peace Prize, 1901-2021. Our Editor-in-Chief had written Fiji: Coups in Paradise - Race, Politics and Military Intervention while holding the Reuters Fellowship at Oxford.
The Nobel Peace Prize has been awarded to the founder of anti-Putin newspaper Novaya Gazeta and a Filipino journalist who took on Duterte in a swipe at dictators.
Russian Dmitry Muratov and Filipino Maria Ressa were awarded the prize on Friday (8 October 2021), honouring the right to free speech which the prize-giving committee described as under threat around the globe.
It comes after a months-long crackdown on press freedom and political opposition by Russian President Vladimir Putin in the run up to the September election.
Muratov's independent newspaper, Novaya Gazeta, has been critical of the Russian strongman and his predecessors in the Kremlin since it was established in 1993.
Chairwoman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee Berit Reiss-Andersen said the pair were given the award 'for their courageous fight for freedom of expression in the Philippines and Russia.'
Responding to the news Muratov told the Telegram news channel Podyom: 'I am laughing. I didn't expect it at all. It's madness over here right now. I saw a call from Norway, but I thought it was some unwanted call.
'Here's what I will say: we will continue to represent Russian journalism, which is now being suppressed. That's all.
'We will try to help people who are now labelled as 'foreign agents', who are being attacked and expelled from the country.'
He later told Russian news agency Tass: 'I can't take credit for this. This is Novaya Gazeta's. It is that of those who died defending the right of people to freedom of speech.
'Now that they are no longer with us, they [the Nobel committee] probably decided that I should tell it to everyone.'
Muratov also paid tribute to journalist murdered in Russia for their work.
'It's for Igor Domnikov, it's for Yura Shchekochikhin, it's for Anna Stepanovna Politkovskaya, it's for Nastya Baburova, it's for Natasha Estemirova, it's for Stas Markelov. This is for them,' he said.
Several Novaya Gazeta journalists have been killed or died under mysterious circumstances, including renowned Kremlin critic Anna Politkovskaya who was shot in 2006.
And in a surprising move, the Kremlin congratulated Muratov on his win.
'We can congratulate Dmitry Muratov,' Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters.
'He persistently works in accordance with his own ideals, he is devoted to them, he is talented, he is brave.'
Meanwhile Philippines journalist Maria Ressa was awarded the prize for starting investigative news website Rappler which examines corruption and has exposed President Rodrigo Duterte's violent war on drugs.
Reiss-Andersen added: 'At the same time, they are representatives of all journalists who stand up for this ideal in a world in which democracy and freedom of the press face increasingly adverse conditions.'
The prize is the first for journalists since the German Carl von Ossietzky won it in 1935 for revealing his country's secret post-war rearmament programme.
'Free, independent and fact-based journalism serves to protect against abuse of power, lies and war propaganda,' Reiss-Andersen said.
The Nobel Peace Prize will be presented on December 10, the anniversary of the death of Swedish industrialist Alfred Nobel, who founded the awards in his 1895 will.
Russian Dmitry Muratov and Filipino Maria Ressa were awarded the prize on Friday (8 October 2021), honouring the right to free speech which the prize-giving committee described as under threat around the globe.
It comes after a months-long crackdown on press freedom and political opposition by Russian President Vladimir Putin in the run up to the September election.
Muratov's independent newspaper, Novaya Gazeta, has been critical of the Russian strongman and his predecessors in the Kremlin since it was established in 1993.
Chairwoman of the Norwegian Nobel Committee Berit Reiss-Andersen said the pair were given the award 'for their courageous fight for freedom of expression in the Philippines and Russia.'
Responding to the news Muratov told the Telegram news channel Podyom: 'I am laughing. I didn't expect it at all. It's madness over here right now. I saw a call from Norway, but I thought it was some unwanted call.
'Here's what I will say: we will continue to represent Russian journalism, which is now being suppressed. That's all.
'We will try to help people who are now labelled as 'foreign agents', who are being attacked and expelled from the country.'
He later told Russian news agency Tass: 'I can't take credit for this. This is Novaya Gazeta's. It is that of those who died defending the right of people to freedom of speech.
'Now that they are no longer with us, they [the Nobel committee] probably decided that I should tell it to everyone.'
Muratov also paid tribute to journalist murdered in Russia for their work.
'It's for Igor Domnikov, it's for Yura Shchekochikhin, it's for Anna Stepanovna Politkovskaya, it's for Nastya Baburova, it's for Natasha Estemirova, it's for Stas Markelov. This is for them,' he said.
Several Novaya Gazeta journalists have been killed or died under mysterious circumstances, including renowned Kremlin critic Anna Politkovskaya who was shot in 2006.
And in a surprising move, the Kremlin congratulated Muratov on his win.
'We can congratulate Dmitry Muratov,' Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters.
'He persistently works in accordance with his own ideals, he is devoted to them, he is talented, he is brave.'
Meanwhile Philippines journalist Maria Ressa was awarded the prize for starting investigative news website Rappler which examines corruption and has exposed President Rodrigo Duterte's violent war on drugs.
Reiss-Andersen added: 'At the same time, they are representatives of all journalists who stand up for this ideal in a world in which democracy and freedom of the press face increasingly adverse conditions.'
The prize is the first for journalists since the German Carl von Ossietzky won it in 1935 for revealing his country's secret post-war rearmament programme.
'Free, independent and fact-based journalism serves to protect against abuse of power, lies and war propaganda,' Reiss-Andersen said.
The Nobel Peace Prize will be presented on December 10, the anniversary of the death of Swedish industrialist Alfred Nobel, who founded the awards in his 1895 will.
Fijileaks: Davis brings other elements together on previous posting
"Were the PM's remarks a sign of the military encouraging him to distance himself from the AG as a means of shoring up his support in the face of the widespread expectation that he will be beaten by "the Snake" in the 2022 election? Just what happened up at the camp to produce such a startling deviation from the usual script? It is all a bit like Soviet times when western observers honed in on the smallest of details to try to decipher movements in the Kremlin in Moscow. But it's worth mentioning, in this instance, what the new RFMF commander, Major General Kalouniwai, told western diplomats in Suva soon after he arrived back from undergoing his master's degree at military college in Australia. Kalouniwai told them that he would not support a coup to keep any government in power in Fiji, the "days of coups are over" and the RFMF's task is to uphold the 2013 Constitution. If that is still the case, then Bainimarama has to win the 2022 election fair and square. So the pressure on him from the military to reverse his parlous electoral position will be immense because they generally don't like Rabuka either but will have to get used to the idea unless Bainimarama - their former commander and rear admiral - plots a radical change of course. Which perhaps means doing what they asked him to do three years ago to clip the AG's wings and even throw him overboard." Graham Davis
WHAT was said at this event that prompted the Prime Minister in its aftermath to issuing a bizarre statement that "he was firmly in control" of the country? We know that in the immediate aftermath of the 2018 election, the Military Council asked Frank Bainimarama to reform the government and reduce the power of the Attorney General, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum. "The military's secret blueprint for change", is how I described it in this Grubsheet article https://www.grubsheet.com.au/the-militarys-secret.
The installation on October 4 of the newly promoted Major General Ro Jone Kalouniwai as Commander of the RFMF would have been followed by a social event and an exchange of views between the Prime Minister, the military hierarchy and Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho, who is effectively still part of that hierarchy.
*Did the military say anything to the PM about his deteriorating political position and the rise as preferred prime minister of the man Bainimarama refers to as "the Snake" - People's Alliance leader Sitiveni Rabuka?
*Did the military eventually provide the PM with remarks that deviated from his normal narrative and included biblical references that are unlikely to have been approved by the AG?
*Was the stand-out phrase he used - "I am firmly in control" - a message to the nation designed to counteract the widespread perception peddled by the government's critics that Bainimarama is a puppet of the AG and that Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum is actually in control"?
* Were the PM's remarks a sign of the military encouraging him to distance himself from the AG as a means of shoring up his support in the face of the widespread expectation that he will be beaten by "the Snake" in the 2022 election? Just what happened up at the camp to produce such a startling deviation from the usual script?
It is all a bit like Soviet times when western observers honed in on the smallest of details to try to decipher movements in the Kremlin in Moscow. But it's worth mentioning, in this instance, what the new RFMF commander, Major General Kalouniwai, told western diplomats in Suva soon after he arrived back from undergoing his master's degree at military college in Australia.
Kalouniwai told them that he would not support a coup to keep any government in power in Fiji, the "days of coups are over" and the RFMF's task is to uphold the 2013 Constitution. If that is still the case, then Bainimarama has to win the 2022 election fair and square. So the pressure on him from the military to reverse his parlous electoral position will be immense because they generally don't like Rabuka either but will have to get used to the idea unless Bainimarama - their former commander and rear admiral - plots a radical change of course. Which perhaps means doing what they asked him to do three years ago to clip the AG's wings and even throw him overboard.
The installation on October 4 of the newly promoted Major General Ro Jone Kalouniwai as Commander of the RFMF would have been followed by a social event and an exchange of views between the Prime Minister, the military hierarchy and Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho, who is effectively still part of that hierarchy.
*Did the military say anything to the PM about his deteriorating political position and the rise as preferred prime minister of the man Bainimarama refers to as "the Snake" - People's Alliance leader Sitiveni Rabuka?
*Did the military eventually provide the PM with remarks that deviated from his normal narrative and included biblical references that are unlikely to have been approved by the AG?
*Was the stand-out phrase he used - "I am firmly in control" - a message to the nation designed to counteract the widespread perception peddled by the government's critics that Bainimarama is a puppet of the AG and that Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum is actually in control"?
* Were the PM's remarks a sign of the military encouraging him to distance himself from the AG as a means of shoring up his support in the face of the widespread expectation that he will be beaten by "the Snake" in the 2022 election? Just what happened up at the camp to produce such a startling deviation from the usual script?
It is all a bit like Soviet times when western observers honed in on the smallest of details to try to decipher movements in the Kremlin in Moscow. But it's worth mentioning, in this instance, what the new RFMF commander, Major General Kalouniwai, told western diplomats in Suva soon after he arrived back from undergoing his master's degree at military college in Australia.
Kalouniwai told them that he would not support a coup to keep any government in power in Fiji, the "days of coups are over" and the RFMF's task is to uphold the 2013 Constitution. If that is still the case, then Bainimarama has to win the 2022 election fair and square. So the pressure on him from the military to reverse his parlous electoral position will be immense because they generally don't like Rabuka either but will have to get used to the idea unless Bainimarama - their former commander and rear admiral - plots a radical change of course. Which perhaps means doing what they asked him to do three years ago to clip the AG's wings and even throw him overboard.
"So uncharacteristic of the usual Qorvis-AG written speeches that, on reflection, I don't think they had anything to do with it. When I was writing these speeches, the AG wouldn't allow biblical references because of the secular state and clichés like "clear and present danger" aren't the usual Qorvis fare. So who wrote it? Maybe someone from the military after the PM went up to the camp for the induction of the new commander?" - Davis |   |
This man is showing genuine signs of being deranged. The usual boasting accompanied by an invocation of the Almighty and passages from the Bible. And so uncharacteristic of the usual Qorvis-AG written speeches that, on reflection, I don't think they had anything to do with it.
When I was writing these speeches, the AG wouldn't allow biblical references because of the secular state and clichés like "clear and present danger" aren't the usual Qorvis fare. So who wrote it? Maybe someone from the military after the PM went up to the camp for the induction of the new commander?
"I am in control!" Is this saying "the AG is not in control, I am"? We know elements of the military want to prise the ruling duo apart. Is this the first signs of a possible shift?
It's impossible to say but it seems that the PM is finally bypassing Qorvis and the AG and taking advice from others. And it's undoubtedly the case that these remarks are a direct attempt to counter the mounting threat from Sitiveni Rabuka, which will be driving Frank Bainimarama and elements of the military mad.
Whatever the truth - and it's impossible to be definitive without inside information - this is so off-piste - to use a skiing term - that it could well signal a major shift in power and the AG's influence over the PM.
Despite what Bainimarama says, the Covid pandemic and its impact on Fiji is not over. Far from it. And he is not " firmly in control", so much so that he seems not even to be in control of himself in that he is clearly slurring his words.
Grog, alcohol, medication or fatigue?
See Biman Prasad's withering response in the comments section below. But definitely evidence of someone under intense pressure and worried that he is losing control.
When I was writing these speeches, the AG wouldn't allow biblical references because of the secular state and clichés like "clear and present danger" aren't the usual Qorvis fare. So who wrote it? Maybe someone from the military after the PM went up to the camp for the induction of the new commander?
"I am in control!" Is this saying "the AG is not in control, I am"? We know elements of the military want to prise the ruling duo apart. Is this the first signs of a possible shift?
It's impossible to say but it seems that the PM is finally bypassing Qorvis and the AG and taking advice from others. And it's undoubtedly the case that these remarks are a direct attempt to counter the mounting threat from Sitiveni Rabuka, which will be driving Frank Bainimarama and elements of the military mad.
Whatever the truth - and it's impossible to be definitive without inside information - this is so off-piste - to use a skiing term - that it could well signal a major shift in power and the AG's influence over the PM.
Despite what Bainimarama says, the Covid pandemic and its impact on Fiji is not over. Far from it. And he is not " firmly in control", so much so that he seems not even to be in control of himself in that he is clearly slurring his words.
Grog, alcohol, medication or fatigue?
See Biman Prasad's withering response in the comments section below. But definitely evidence of someone under intense pressure and worried that he is losing control.
WHISPERING GOD BUSY IN FIJI - HIJACKING Lauan Christianity: |  |
“This is symptomatic of a typical DICTATOR who thinks he or she is always right despite the fact that people are dying, poverty is increasing and people are struggling to put food on the table”.
BIMAN PRASAD on Frank Bainimarama
“Stop bragging and taking the Lord’s name in vain when you have presided over the single biggest disaster and loss of lives in our country’s 51 years of Independence”.
“Talk about issues like how to alleviate poverty that reached almost 30% at the time of the so-called Bainimarama Boom but has now escalated to about 50% due to economic depression caused by Covid-19”.
This is the message to Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama from National Federation Party Leader Professor Biman Prasad after a message posted on the Fiji Government social media page shows the PM as saying the battle against Covid-19 pandemic is about to end, he has proved critics wrong and is in firm control.
“This is a national leader who brags about himself and claims he will secure every Fijian from clear and present danger. The PM forgets what he announced the start of the second wave of the pandemic on 19th April”.
“Then, he spoke about grave and present danger to the lives of our people and the need to comply with strict measures and enforcement of lockdowns to contain and eliminate the virus”.
“Almost six months later with the virus out of control due to the PM’s egoistic and ‘My Way or the Highway’ leadership in deciding to open up containment zones, 1,150 citizens have lost their lives through no fault of theirs and over 51,200 people have so far been infected”.
“And in a bid to keep a lid on the death toll and rate of infection, the Health Ministry split the death toll into two categories as well as significantly reduced testing and contact tracing”.
“Worse, the Ministry is now announcing deaths that occurred in the last three months saying it takes time to investigate and determine the cause of death”.
“It is shameful and despicable that instead of sympathising with the families who have lost loved ones and offering his genuine and sincere condolences, the PM showers himself with praise for his handling of the crisis”.
“Does he have the courage to go to each individual family, undoubtedly, still grieving the loss of a loved one, and tell them that he is in firm control and protecting them from the grave danger posed by the pandemic?”
“It is the PM and his government and their ‘From Containment to Containers” approach, where they allowed the virus to spread freely by opening up containment zones and installed three forty feet container freezers as morgues, who must be held responsible for the needless loss of life of our citizens and heaping pain, suffering and misery on the people”.
“The nation is at the cross-roads, at odds with itself, due to failed leadership. Yet, we have a PM who says he is in firm control of the situation”.
“This is symptomatic of a typical dictator who thinks he or she is always right despite the fact that people are dying, poverty is increasing and people are struggling to put food on the table”.
“This façade must end at the next elections”.
Professor Biman Prasad
Leader
“Talk about issues like how to alleviate poverty that reached almost 30% at the time of the so-called Bainimarama Boom but has now escalated to about 50% due to economic depression caused by Covid-19”.
This is the message to Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama from National Federation Party Leader Professor Biman Prasad after a message posted on the Fiji Government social media page shows the PM as saying the battle against Covid-19 pandemic is about to end, he has proved critics wrong and is in firm control.
“This is a national leader who brags about himself and claims he will secure every Fijian from clear and present danger. The PM forgets what he announced the start of the second wave of the pandemic on 19th April”.
“Then, he spoke about grave and present danger to the lives of our people and the need to comply with strict measures and enforcement of lockdowns to contain and eliminate the virus”.
“Almost six months later with the virus out of control due to the PM’s egoistic and ‘My Way or the Highway’ leadership in deciding to open up containment zones, 1,150 citizens have lost their lives through no fault of theirs and over 51,200 people have so far been infected”.
“And in a bid to keep a lid on the death toll and rate of infection, the Health Ministry split the death toll into two categories as well as significantly reduced testing and contact tracing”.
“Worse, the Ministry is now announcing deaths that occurred in the last three months saying it takes time to investigate and determine the cause of death”.
“It is shameful and despicable that instead of sympathising with the families who have lost loved ones and offering his genuine and sincere condolences, the PM showers himself with praise for his handling of the crisis”.
“Does he have the courage to go to each individual family, undoubtedly, still grieving the loss of a loved one, and tell them that he is in firm control and protecting them from the grave danger posed by the pandemic?”
“It is the PM and his government and their ‘From Containment to Containers” approach, where they allowed the virus to spread freely by opening up containment zones and installed three forty feet container freezers as morgues, who must be held responsible for the needless loss of life of our citizens and heaping pain, suffering and misery on the people”.
“The nation is at the cross-roads, at odds with itself, due to failed leadership. Yet, we have a PM who says he is in firm control of the situation”.
“This is symptomatic of a typical dictator who thinks he or she is always right despite the fact that people are dying, poverty is increasing and people are struggling to put food on the table”.
“This façade must end at the next elections”.
Professor Biman Prasad
Leader
FLASHBACK TO 1999 AND THE RABUKA GOVERNMENT
Sitiveni Rabuka and his SVT party contested the election in 1999. He lost to the People's Coalition government, led by Mahendra Chaudhry. On the eve of the polling, the Fiji Labour Party laid bare the Rabuka government's track record of scandals:
* NBF - which will cost the taxpayers around $500million;
* CDF - $69million;
* Cupit Farm - $7million;
* PAFCO - $5million;
* Public Trustees - $3million;
*Rabi Trust Fund - $8.25million
The FLP told the VOTERS: "SVT will not fulfil promise"
The country has been brought to the bring of destruction by the Rabuka Government, says Fiji Labour Party president Jokapeci Koroi.
"While the Prime Minister and his merry men and women have been enjoying themselves, the poor people became poorer and they did not bother," Ms Koroi said while addressing supporters at the last Fiji Labour Party rally in Suva yesterday.
"The Rabuka government has not bothered to look after you, the ordinary people. You may again ask why - like many of my Fijian brothers and sisters who probably voted for the SVT in the 1992 and the 1994 elections - has the Rabuka government not delivered the goods that it promised you in 1992 and 1994."
Koroi told the voters that since 1992 when Rabuka first took over our public debt has gone from $700million to $1.5billion as it stands today - that is an increase of around $700million in the last seven years. Our public debt in the last seven years, Ms Koroi said has increased an average of $100million each year.
"Can you believe that? Well I certainly can as these are from official government statistics," she said. Last year, the debt service fee paid by the taxpayers was $118million.
This works out at $323,000 a day or $13,500 an hour, 224 a minute or $3.74 a second.
"For every breath we take we are paying $3.74 - thanks to the Rabuka government's abysmal management of our public finances."
* Our social indicators show that almost:
* 40 percent of our people live below the poverty line;
* 25 per cent of our youths are unemployed and;
* crime has increased by 130 per cent in the last five years."
Ms Koroi said that with the SVT Government's track record, they would not fulfil what they had promised. She said that People's Coalition was ready to form a Government for the people. Ms Koroi said the People's Coalition now had the support from all races and they were confident they would have the number to form a new Government after the general election.
Fijileaks: As history records, People's Coalition did oust Rabuka from power in 1999 but a year later was overthrown by the George Speight putsch. The Chaudhry government was held hostage for 56 days, prompting Ratu Mara to accuse Rabuka of having a hand in the putsch.
Contact Email
[email protected]
[email protected]
Archives
December 2025
November 2025
October 2025
September 2025
August 2025
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