 |  |  |
RETREATING INTO THE TRADITIONAL BURE: Misuse of Indigeneity to Undermine the Commission of Inquiry
It was deeply regrettable and politically dangerous that Barbara Malimali and Tanya Waqanika chose to invoke indigeneity in their criticism of Justice David Ashton-Lewis and Janet Mason, the so-called foreign lawyers appointed to lead the Commission of Inquiry into the conduct of Barbara Malimali and other members of the Coalition government.
Their suggestion that they felt “lectured” or diminished “as indigenous women” was not only intellectually disingenuous—it was a deliberate attempt to racialise a lawful constitutional process and undermine its credibility.
This tactic misused the language of identity and empowerment to deflect from the serious constitutional issues under investigation. It distorted the genuine cause of indigenous rights by weaponising it against transparency, legality, and scrutiny. In doing so, it sent a dangerous message: that indigenous identity could somehow be used to exempt public officials from the rule of law or to discredit independent legal oversight.
Their attack on Mason and Lewis for being "foreigners" was a retreat into shallow nationalism--xenophobic in tone, and legally irrelevant. The Fijian legal and constitutional system has long accepted the role of foreign counsel in matters requiring impartiality, particularly in politically sensitive inquiries. To claim otherwise was to ignore precedent and erode public trust in the independence of the process.
Indigeneity was never meant to be a shield for misconduct or a tool to silence legitimate legal examination. By invoking it in this context, Malimali and Waqanika risked diminishing the very principles they purported to defend. They used identity not to elevate justice, but to obstruct it.
This conduct deserved to be called out for what it was: a reckless and divisive political manoeuvre, cloaked in the language of cultural grievance, but aimed squarely at undermining accountability from the 'Traditional Bure'. Justice Lewis has links with Fiji going back to the 1990s, and Mason's mother is from Fiji.
Moreover, Mason was on the panel that had chosen Sitiveni Rabuka to lead SODELPA into the 2018 elections. Waqanika failed to be elected but in 2020 she was nominated by SODELPA to take up a seat in Parliament following the resignation from Parliament of Rabuka, after he had lost the leadership of SODELPA. In the 2022 election she failed to be re-elected to Parliament as a SODELPA candidate, getting 558 votes.
Strange, Waqanika had never questioned Mason's 'foreign credentials'.
Dau veivakaisini levu. The usual fake Tagi ni i-Taukei in 2025.
It was deeply regrettable and politically dangerous that Barbara Malimali and Tanya Waqanika chose to invoke indigeneity in their criticism of Justice David Ashton-Lewis and Janet Mason, the so-called foreign lawyers appointed to lead the Commission of Inquiry into the conduct of Barbara Malimali and other members of the Coalition government.
Their suggestion that they felt “lectured” or diminished “as indigenous women” was not only intellectually disingenuous—it was a deliberate attempt to racialise a lawful constitutional process and undermine its credibility.
This tactic misused the language of identity and empowerment to deflect from the serious constitutional issues under investigation. It distorted the genuine cause of indigenous rights by weaponising it against transparency, legality, and scrutiny. In doing so, it sent a dangerous message: that indigenous identity could somehow be used to exempt public officials from the rule of law or to discredit independent legal oversight.
Their attack on Mason and Lewis for being "foreigners" was a retreat into shallow nationalism--xenophobic in tone, and legally irrelevant. The Fijian legal and constitutional system has long accepted the role of foreign counsel in matters requiring impartiality, particularly in politically sensitive inquiries. To claim otherwise was to ignore precedent and erode public trust in the independence of the process.
Indigeneity was never meant to be a shield for misconduct or a tool to silence legitimate legal examination. By invoking it in this context, Malimali and Waqanika risked diminishing the very principles they purported to defend. They used identity not to elevate justice, but to obstruct it.
This conduct deserved to be called out for what it was: a reckless and divisive political manoeuvre, cloaked in the language of cultural grievance, but aimed squarely at undermining accountability from the 'Traditional Bure'. Justice Lewis has links with Fiji going back to the 1990s, and Mason's mother is from Fiji.
Moreover, Mason was on the panel that had chosen Sitiveni Rabuka to lead SODELPA into the 2018 elections. Waqanika failed to be elected but in 2020 she was nominated by SODELPA to take up a seat in Parliament following the resignation from Parliament of Rabuka, after he had lost the leadership of SODELPA. In the 2022 election she failed to be re-elected to Parliament as a SODELPA candidate, getting 558 votes.
Strange, Waqanika had never questioned Mason's 'foreign credentials'.
Dau veivakaisini levu. The usual fake Tagi ni i-Taukei in 2025.
From Fijileaks Archive, 17 January 2025
