Fijileaks
  • Home
  • Archive Home
  • In-depth Analysis
    • BOI Report into George Speight and others beatings
  • Documents
  • Opinion
  • CRC Submissions
  • Features
  • Archive

ELECTION BEFORE JUSTICE: Chaudhry's lawyer Anand Singh to ask Fiji Court of Appeal to fast-track appeal so FLP leader could fight election!

9/5/2014

22 Comments

 
Picture
Fiji Labour Party leader Mahendra Chaudhry has appealed both his conviction and sentencing and his defence counsel may soon apply for a quick hearing date as they try to get him cleared to contest the upcoming September general election. The Fiji Court of Appeal has confirmed receiving two files of application with one application being filed on April 11 while the other one was filed yesterday. Chaudhry's counsel, Anand Singh confirmed making an amended appeal against the sentence yesterday. Now the appeal by Chaudhry covers both the conviction and the sentencing. If the application for stay is granted, Chaudhry could continue leading the FLP into the general election. Chaudhry was ordered to pay up a sum of $2m by the end of next month or face a 15months imprisonment and his conviction stays recorded. Source: Fijilive, May 9, 2014.


Chaudhry's present lawyer once thought his client was "a daaku"
and the secret $2million did not belong to him (Chaudhry) but to the
Indo-Fijian victims of Speight's 2000 coup; 'I think he is a chor (crook) and should be shown to be one...Daaku will forever curse himself for having left the money in Australia. He must regret
not putting it in Hong Kong':

ANAND SINGH, FLP leader Mahendra Chaudhry's lawyer
to VICTOR LAL,
21 February 2008:
"The question that comes to mind is as to why he did not transfer the funds to FLP? He belonged to FLP at the time and must report any funds to FLP and transfer it to it. I believe that Daaku's outburst in parliament and the argument should be used against him. You would have to read the Hansard alongside my comments to fully follow what I am saying. Eventually I come to the conclusion the the funds were raised fro [for] the community that he has converted to his own use. Incidentally, that story abt the daughter [getting $50,000 as gift from Chaudhry] was very successful. It has got samdhi sahida very quiet. i was looking for Rani's picture and Juniors' that could be published with proper notation as unintended beneficiaries. Perhaps my mind is racing off too much?... For the moment dont you think u should repeat the story with specific details of the Bank transactions. In another unrelated story have a detaied piece on the explanation he gave to Parliamnet and which will be priveleged. The reaaders will read both and know the real culprit and see for themselves the lie that Daaku said in Parliamnent. The facts as disclosed prima facie indicate he lied to Parliamnet and the people of Fiji. If he lied and as we know he did by not telling the complete story as Q had asked him to, he would have been liable to be referred to the Priveleges Committee of Parliament for a serious breach of privilege. In the absence of Parliamnet, the matter has to be dealt with publically thru th media. Daaku was on TV last nite on other issues. He had the artificial smile all over his face. He is pretending nothing has happened or is getting ready to attack everyone else but himself. thsi man is so shameless and ruthless. I dnt think he has any scruples abt taking the money belonging to the people of Fiji. ____ met with Indian high Commissioner yesterday. He has his head buried in sand. Says the money could not have been paid into the Bank by the Consulate General. he was very dismissive.and indirectly casting doubt on the authenticity of the story. I feel it is important to get a statement or verification from Harbajan before Daaku clams up. The admission from Harbajan is enough to hang Daaku politically and will go a long way as a legal defence. Just my thoughts...[The late] Dalpat [Rathod, FLP treasurer] told me that in India Daaku would go in to see the PM by himself and leave Dalpat behind. I have had a similar experience with daaku too. Daaku will forever curse himself for having left the money in au [Australia]. He must regret not putting it in Honk Kong."

ANAND SINGH, FLP leader Mahendra Chaudhry's lawyer to VICTOR LAL,
14 March 2008:
"Do u know the people the world over who collected funds for Daaku? It would be interesting to investigate how much he collected in various countries. I met some people from Melbourne who told me that they collected and gave to Daaku. Do you know much about the Sydney collection by Dr. Karam singh? How much did you give in UK? Was it in cash or cheque? Did you get a receipt for it? How much did you send for Cyclone Ami? do you have a record for it? Now that he is intent to sue everyone why dont we set up a defence of justification or alternatively that he has no reputation to lose or better still that he is a fraudstar who needed to be exposed. He is using the legal system to advantage. Why dont we turn it into a great court of justice where we expose him to the fullest."

Picture
All smiles despite being found guilty and fined $2million
Picture
Chaudhry and his lawyer Anand Singh: In 2008 he thought his client "was a chor who needed to be exposed for what he was - chor"

JUSTICE PAUL MADIGAN, FIJI HIGH COURT, 2 MAY 2014 on Chaudhry:
"...The convict has since that time steadfastly refused to accept that he might have been in breach by remorselessly instructing several eminent Senior Counsel, one after another, to make multiple applications for recusal, stay and quashing of the information - none of which succeeded. It is of course his right to make as many interlocutory applications that he wishes, but the number and merit of the applications inevitably led to the conclusion that he was in a state of denial as to his alleged violations of the law."

MEANWHILE, Victor Lal and Russell Hunter still awaiting for reply from CID and DPP over their September 2012 complaint: Perjury in False Affidavit, Falsification of Documents, Abuse of Office and other criminal investigations arising out of Chaudhry’s Income Tax file

"After the military coup in 2006, the applicant returned to the political arena as the Minister of Finance in the interim government of Fiji. The applicant says, what followed after his ministerial appointment, was a trial by media. The applicant says he later found out that a former editor of the Fiji Sun obtained his confidential tax details from FIRCA and released it to Victor Lal, a former Fiji journalist residing overseas. Victor Lal published those details in anti-government websites" - Fiji High Court judge Justice Daniel Goundar in Chaudhry v State [2012] FJHC 1229; HAM034.2011 (25 July 2012)


To summarize, Justice Goundar observed in Chaudhry v State [2012]  FJHC 1229; HAM034.2011 (25 July 2012):

“The applicant says he later found out that a former editor of the Fiji Sun obtained his confidential tax details from FIRCA and released it to Victor Lal, a former Fiji journalist residing overseas. Victor Lal published those details in anti-government websites.”


We have demonstrated that we never published Mr Chaudhry’s tax details in any anti-government websites but in the Sunday Sun dated 24 February 2008, including the first tax story in the Fiji Sun, on 15 August 2007.
1: We therefore call upon the Director of Public Prosecutions to investigative whether Mr Chaudhry committed the offence of “perjury in a false affidavit”.

2: We call upon the Director of Public Prosecutions to investigate whether Mr Chaudhry’s legal representatives in offering his affidavit to the Fiji High Court are also guilty of aiding and abetting the offence of perjury in a false affidavit, for it is abundantly clear that we did not publish Mr Chaudhry’s tax details in any anti-government websites.

3: We request the Director of Public Prosecutions to establish on what grounds the original letter tendered from one Harbhajan Lal dated 9 September 2004 to FIRCA from Haryana in India was withheld [if it was] and a new letter from Delhi Study Group dated 12 October 2004 substituted in Mr Chaudhry’s affidavit before Justice Daniel Goundar in the Fiji High Court. The “Harbhajan Lal Letter” of 9 September 2004 states the money was collected in Haryana and part of it was transacted through the Indian Consulate in Sydney, Australia. Harbhajan Lal wrote from Haryana:

“Respected Chaudhry Saheb, Nameste. We are hale and hearty here and please accept our good wishes. I received your letter. You have asked for details of the funds. You may recall that when you were here in the year 2000, we had formed a committee, which requested you to leave Fiji and stay in Australia since the situation in Fiji was not safe and you were not secure there. The committee also assured you that it would collect funds for your settlement in Australia. Lakhs of people from Haryana including traders, businessmen, landlords and non-resident Indians contributed heavily for the cause. The amount was pouring in for three years, which was sent to you from the year 2000 to 2002. The total amounting to nearly AUD fifteen laks was sent to you with the help of Government of India through its Consulate General in Sydney. We sent AUD 503,000/- as first instalment in the year 2000. In 2001, AUD $486,890/- was sent and then in 2002 AUD $514, 149/- was sent.”

The “Delhi Study Group Letter” states, “This is to confirm that funds were collected in New Delhi and other parts of India, including NRI's (Non-Resident Indians) to assist Hon'ble Mahendra Pal Chaudhry, Former Prime Minister of Fiji in 2000-2002.”

5: We call upon the Director of Public Prosecutions to ask Mr Chaudhry who transferred the money from India – Delhi Study Group based in New Delhi or Harbahajan Lal in Haryana, India?

6: We request the Director of Public Prosecutions to establish whether Mr Chaudhry and Nalin Patel, in presenting to FIRCA the letter from Harbhjan Lal, whose content was materially false [re his enquiring the details of the funds etc] –Chaudhry (and Nalin Patel) committed a criminal offence under Fiji’s tax laws by offering a false document to FIRCA, namely the Harbhajan Lal letter.

7:
We request the Director of Public Prosecutions to investigate the Suva accountancy firm of G. Lal & Co, Mr Chaudhry’s delegated tax agent to deal with FIRCA in 2004, to establish whether it was aware of the inconsistencies in the Harbhajan Lal-Chaudhry correspondence regarding the $2million, and whether the accountancy firm also had in its possession the Delhi Support Group letter dated 12 October 2004.

8: We request the Director of Public Prosecutions to establish whether Mr Chaudhry and Nalin Patel submitted Harbhajan Lal’s letter knowing its content was false in material respects to prevent FIRCA from pursuing the original source of the funds in Mr Chaudhry’s Australian bank account.

9: We request the Director of Public Prosecutions to investigative whether Mr Chaudhry, in presenting the Tax Amnesty submission to the Cabinet in September 2007 for endorsement, might have abused office as Interim Finance Minister and direct line manager of Fiji Island Revenue and Customs Authority (FIRCA), to benefit himself, and to escape any future criminal prosecutions for submitting late tax returns between 2000 and 2003. We have documentary evidence that in August 2007 Mr Chaudhry still owed FIRCA $57,000 in tax debt, due to be paid on 9 August 2007. His own $57,000 could have fitted into insufficient advance payment or even late payment amnesty.

10. We therefore request the DPP to establish whether Mr Chaudhry had taxes or returns outstanding and paid during the amnesty period he had ordered and hence gained avoidance of penalties, and if so, then a case for Abuse of Office as Finance Minister and line manager of FIRCA could be made against him.

11: We call upon the Director of Public Prosecutions to plead with the Fiji High Court to expunge the patently false claims made against us in Chaudhry v State [2012] FJHC 1229; HAM034.2011 (25 July 2012) – re that we published Mr Chaudhry’s tax details in anti-government websites. In conclusion, we leave you with the words of the great English judge, the late Lord Denning in King v Victor Parsons & Co [1973] 1 WLR 29, 33-34:

“The word 'fraud' here is not used in the common law sense. It is used in the equitable sense to denote conduct by the defendant or his agent such that it would be 'against conscience' for him to avail himself of the lapse of time. The cases show that, if a man knowingly commits a wrong (such as digging underground another man's coal); or a breach of contract (such as putting in bad foundations to a house), in such circumstances that it is unlikely to be found out for many a long day, he cannot rely on the Statute of Limitations as a bar to the claim: see Bulli Coal Mining Co v Osborne [1899] AC 351 and Applegate v Moss [1971] 1 QB 406. In order to show that he 'concealed' the right of action 'by fraud', it is not necessary to show that he took active steps to conceal his wrongdoing or breach of contract. It is sufficient that he knowingly committed it and did not tell the owner anything about it. He did the wrong or committed the breach secretly. By saying nothing he keeps it secret. He conceals the right of action. He conceals it by 'fraud' as those words have been interpreted in the cases. To this word 'knowingly' there must be added recklessly': see Beaman v ARTS Ltd [1949] 1 KB 550, 565-566. Like the man who turns a blind eye. He is aware that what he is doing may well be a wrong, or a breach of contract, but he takes the risk of it being so. He refrains from further inquiry least it should prove to be correct: and says nothing about it. The court will not allow him to get away with conduct of that kind. It may be that he has no dishonest motive: but that does not matter. He has kept the plaintiff out of the knowledge of his right of action: and that is enough: see Kitchen v Royal Air Force Association [1958] 1 WLR 563.”

The limitation statute’s aim is to prevent citizens from being oppressed by stale claims, to protect settled interests from being disturbed, to bring certainty and finality to disputes and so on. These are, as legal commentators have pointed out, laudable aims but they can conflict with the need to do justice in individual cases where an otherwise unmeritorious defendant can play the limitation trump card and escape liability.

We call upon the Director of Public Prosecutions to ask Mr Chaudhry which of the two letters – Harbhajan Lal or Delhi Study Group – is the lie – as they both can’t be genuine. Apart from the false accusations against us in his affidavit, the contents of the Harbhajan Lal letter dated 9 September 2004 does not accord with his bank statements from the Commonwealth Bank of Australia which he offered to FIRCA.

In our humble submission we beg the Director of Prosecutions to call upon the Fiji High Court to waiver the statute of limitation for prima facie there is evidence in the “Harbhajan Lal” letter that Mr Chaudhry obtained a favourable decision from FIRCA (an oversight on the part of FIRCA tax officers) through alleged fraud – the contents of the Harbhajan Lal letter does not square with his Australian bank statements.

Moreover, although we do not have a copy of Mr Chaudhry’s affidavit cited by Justice Goundar (despite requests for one from the Director of the Public Prosecutions) we call upon the Director of Public Prosecutions to examine the contents of both the Harbhajan Lal and the Delhi Support Group letters.  If there are glaring disparities in the two letters than Mr Chaudhry must be deprived of the statute of limitation for the “fraud”, if any on his part, would be a continuing “fraud” since 2004 when he first offered Harbhajan Lal’s letter and now the Delhi Study Group letter in 2012 to explain away the $2million is his Australian bank account.

VICTOR LAL and RUSSELL HUNTER, 4 September 2012
22 Comments
Conflict of Interest
9/5/2014 01:21:46 am

Daaku's grounds of Appeal would now be a 'Conflict of Interests' with his legal counsel. How can your lawyer hold such views (and express it as well) and than later claim to defend daaku from the same related crimes??

See how much we have all learned on 'Conflict of Interests' in two short days - Good reporting FijiLeaks!

Naboro waiting 4 U -Daaku - don't worry about your coming erections!

Reply
ANAND SINGH in Witness Box
9/5/2014 01:39:48 am

It was Anand Singh who travelled with Chaudhry to NZ, UK and USA.

Can Anand tell who were these communities that were spoken in Chaudhry's speach when appealing to people to support?

Should funds be in Labour Party's bank or should it have been dispersed through FLP as custodian to those victims that were directly affected by the coup whose grief was politicised by Judge Gates having asked them to file 2nd writ if they accepted IG or not at the time i.e. Chandrika Prasad case?

This made the Girmit Centre camp residents to having to fight for democracy towards restoration of the 1997 Constitution.

So who was the community - can you name please Mr Anand Singh?

Reply
ANAND OWN UP MAN!!!
9/5/2014 05:13:39 pm

YOU accompanied MPC to UK and USA.

Where is your story to tell the public?

DID YOU black mail MPC not to open his mouth in Court or you will not be able to defend him because you would be compromising your position?

So you chose to give legal advice for MPC to lie by keeping silent.



Reply
Court Clerk
9/5/2014 03:11:56 am

The $2million question is NOW we know what Anand Singh thought of his client and the question of GUILT and OWNERSHIP of the money, WILL CHAUDHRY DUMP HIM AS HIS LEGAL COUNSEL

Vinaka, its bloody time the likes of Singh are exposed!

Its clearly a CONFLICT OF INTEREST unless Anand is trying to get a slice of the $2million which he didn't get in 2008

KEEP IT COMING FIJILEAKS!

Reply
Chaudhry Caught Out Lying
9/5/2014 03:50:48 am

Mr Anand Singh,

Read the media article below. Chaudhry said people were suffering in the refugee camp. Girmit Centre had 300 residents in the camp when Chaudhry was making these comments to Bajpai.

So money was NOT for FLP but was custodian for appeal he made for the refugee community.





[PTI NEWS ACHIVES]
Uphill task ahead to bring Fiji back to normal:Chaudhry
NEW DELHI, Feb 26: Ousted Fijian Prime Minister Mahendra Chaudhry, awaiting the country’s Supreme Court judgement on restoration of an elected Government, today said bringing Fiji back to normal would be "an uphill task."
"So much damage has been done to the national economy and racial relations that whichever Government comes will have an uphill task," Chaudhry said here.
Chaudhry, who called on Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee, told reporters that he apprised him of "the latest situation" in Fiji.
He said the country’s Supreme Court is taking up the case of restoring an elected Government on March one.
The ousted Premier said his meeting with Vajpayee was "fruitful" and that the Prime Minister assured him of due help.
Chaudhry, who was toppled in a coup by rebel leader George Speight last year, said the international community in general and Government of India in particular should "intervene immediately" to help out the Indians settled in the Island nation.
"The plight Indian farmers is serious as most of the land lease is to expire on December 31 and the Indians are being driven out of their place of stay," he alleged.
"Hundreds of people have been rendered homeless and forced to camp in refugee camps," Chaudhry said.
Pointing out that after the first coup in 1987 no effort was made to improve racial relations or adequate legislation enacted to provide protection to Indians, he said " we second time".
Chaudhry, who originally hails from Rohtak in Haryana, is expected to hold discussions with Haryana Chief Minister Om Prakash Chautala on February 28. (PTI)

Reply
Chaudhry's Speech Calculated to mislead Indian Premier
9/5/2014 12:50:43 pm

MPC in his 1st trip that was arranged through Girmit Centre refugee camp's brought in journalist of Hariana (Rohit Kumar Happy) visited the camp on his way to the airport.

When told IG of Qarase was not giving any rations or support to the camp, MPC promised he will appeal to the people on the camps behalf during his trip abroad.

But the Girmit Centre refugee camp already commenced fighting an arduous battle for restoring democracy (C.Prasad case). So apart from the lawyers fees (pro-bono), incidental expenses were day to day expenses of the Girmit Centre Camp.

But as Chautala announced huge financial contribution towards restoration of democracy, MPC rung his chamcha's NFU of Labasa instructing them to immediately form another "false" refugee camp in Dreketi where people who still had about 5 - 10 years of lease remaining were fraudulently brought into the Valelawa Camp by NFU / Chaudhry!!!!!

Then in his 2nd trip after getting greedier - appealed to Indian Premier Bajpai for immediate support to help refugee camp victims which Bajpai promised to help.

Therefore 2nd and 3rd lot of money was also given by Indian Government BUT for the purpose to support refugee camp(s) but Valelawa Camp was not only fake, but the owner was not paid $6,000 rental for his property.

Chaudhry was almost beaten by its resident's when they learnt they were enticed by Chaudhry to the camp and peopel whose lease were not even expired were in the camp with promise to overseas settlement (maybe 100acres land each in Argentina!!)

Reply
Daaku Saheb
9/5/2014 08:17:23 am

If I was Chaudhry saheb I would sack this Anand Singh vakil with immediate effect - for how can this man be seen to be representing Chaudhry saheb when he was convinced (and maybe still is) that Chaudhry saheb swindled the people of Fiji, and that our saheb is a daaku and chor who ought be to be exposed as such.

Reply
Chautala Pani
9/5/2014 09:44:45 am

In his judgment of 2 May 2014 Justice Madigan said: "In about November 2000, the Consul-General for India based in Sydney progressively between 2000 and 2002 deposited the monies directly into MPC's Sydney bank account with the Commonwealth of Australia Bank."

But Anand Saheb, "Daakus" lawyer had said in 2008: ____ met with Indian high Commissioner yesterday. He has his head buried in sand. Says the money could not have been paid into the Bank by the Consulate General. he was very dismissive.and indirectly casting doubt on the authenticity of the story.

So, Anand Saheb, did your client make it up by the time trial came?

Reply
APPEAL JUDGMENT - DPP
9/5/2014 12:16:20 pm

Madigan in his judgment is wrong to rule Indian Concul General "progressively" depositing money between 2000 and 2002 and must be appealed. They only deposited 1st lot of money that was paid by Government of India of Hariana State.

Matthew Hutchings claimed the Indian Counselor provided Chaudhry with half a million dollars to settle in Australia but failed to explain regarding other money which Harbhajan’s letter confirmed sending in 2001, AUD $486,890/- and then in April 2002 AUD $514, 149/- on top of the half million dollars which Chaudhry received in his personal bank account in Australia in 2000.

However, the money banked in late 2000 which Mr Hutchings said was for Chaudhry to settle in Australia, it appears from the public announcement by State Minister Chautala that money was going to be paid by Government of India, hence transfer of money was made by Indian Consulate Office.

Reply
Money for Restoration of Democracy Expenses
9/5/2014 12:25:12 pm

FIRSTLY, MPC represented Peoples Coalition Government.
SECONDLY, money given was towrads direct and indirect costs associated with restoration of democracy.
THIRDLY, no money given to MPC to settle in Australia, as he announced immediately after his release he will fight on and was not going anywhere.

In Rothak, according to Indian newspaper reports, Chaudhry told a cross-section of politicians and a gathering of up to 8,000 people who had turned up to cheer him that he [his] struggle to restore democracy in Fiji would be fraught with danger because the guns were still in the hands of rebels who had overthrown his Peoples Coalition Government.

In his speech, Chaudhry also told the gathering that it was the second time in 13 years that a democratically elected government in Fiji had been overthrown on racist grounds, and urged the international community not to be taken in by the promises made by the incumbent military-backed Laisenia Qarase interim Fijian government on the restoration of democracy in the country.

Chautala told the masses during the announcement at this reception: ‘Chaudhry is fighting an arduous battle for restoring democracy and we want him to know that we fully support him.’

In his address to the gathering, Chautala, dramatically announced that his government would present a purse of Rs 16 million to Chaudhry before he returns home on 26 August 2000. Chautala said all the State’s subjects would be requested to contribute Rs 1 to the purse.

Therefore according to Chaudhry he was going to struggle with danger to restore democracy in Fiji, and Chautala agreeing this would demand great effort and that he offered to have his government pay a lump sum to support Chaudhry and his "Peoples Coalition Government" (not Labour Party) towards achieving this goal.

Reply
GIMME MONEY,MORE MONEY,MONEY,MONEY.
9/5/2014 08:35:38 pm

Human greed doesn't only affect Chaudhary. It seems that everyone here has some kind of a claim to this $2million...play lotto and have a better honest chance to millions of dollars. Chasing Chaudhary for the dosh is childish to say the least.

Reply
scoundrels in politics link
9/5/2014 05:12:39 pm

They - the rogue politicians or politicians who have gone rogue - always claim what they are doing is for some altruistic reason.
For Rabuka it was championing the primacy of the native Fijians in their own land. Speight also invoked the name of the indigenous Fijians to justify his coup. Chaudhry claimed to be championing the poor. Bainimarama claims his takeover is for the creation of a new and better Fiji.
They are all liars. They were all about themselves. The power, the privilege and the paisa!!!

Reply
daku's cunning
9/5/2014 05:55:16 pm

How Chaudhry duped farmers/Indian govt by creating false refugee camp to raise funds which he then stole:

1. MPC's 1st Indian trip was arranged through Girmit refugee camp.

2. MPC brings Haryana journalist Rohit Kumar to Girmit camp.

3. Journalist told IG of Qarase not supporting camp.

4. MPC promises to appeal on behalf of camp while abroad.

5. Hariyana minister Chautala announces huge financial contribution towards restoration of democracy.

6. Greedy MPC sees opportunity to milk refugee to line his pockets.

7. Instructs NFU Labasa chamchas to create "false" camp in Dreketi.

8. Derekti people still had 5-10 yrs on leases.

9. They were tricked with false promise of settlement in Argentina with 100acres land.

10. They were duped into coming to Valelawa Camp by NFU/ MPC.

11. On his 2nd trip lalchi (greedy) MPC appealed to Indian Premier Bajpai to support refugee camp.

13. Valelawa was a fraudeulent Chaudhry creation.

14. 2nd/3rd lot of money given by Indian Govt to refugee camps.

15. Chaudhry pockets all donations raised people's name.

16. That is why he is known as Daku and chorwa.

Reply
Little Correction
10/5/2014 03:16:45 am

2. Refugee Camp themselves brought Hariana Journist living in Auckland named Rohit Kumar Happy.

3. Refugees themselves told Chaudhry before he headed to Nadi Airport for Auckland that LQ's IG was not giving a cent. MPC promised he will seek financial support when abroad.

Reply
COM KE GADDAAR
10/5/2014 03:19:37 am

Chaudhry's favorate words against opposition Indians was always
"Com Ke Gaddaar" meaning "traitors to Indians".

So he was also a racist who only believed in himself.

Reply
Lalchi (greedy) Mahen
10/5/2014 06:44:18 pm

Mahen's other favourite line of attack was 'lining their pockets', 'feathering their nest', and 'hoodwinking the people'. All three descriptions fit him nicely. Also add hypocrite.

scoundrels in politics link
11/5/2014 02:35:10 pm

Agree 101% with Lalchi (greedy)Mahen. Time and again we have seen good political leaders (or ones that at least started out good) turn bad, even rotten. Mahen falls in this category. He got greedy big time. He saw the opportunity to fill his own pocket and he went for it full on. The opportunity comes when political leaders have TOO MUCH power. Mahen had too much power. Even his party mates were afraid of him!! What a disgraceful situation?!. And those who had the gumption to question or challenge him in any way got booted out of the party. The Fiji Labour Party became Mahen's "private" property. He assumed absolute right to decide on things- just like a dictator.
And we all know dictators are corrupt. Bainimarama, Aiyaz all fall in this category of corrupt dictators.

Reply
Lalchi Mahen/Bai/Aiaz
11/5/2014 03:24:41 pm

- People from FLP got sacked for asking Mahen questions about the money

- People from FICAC got sacked for asking Mahen about the money

- People from media got packed up and flown out of Fiji for asking Mahen about the money

- Media decree was created to lock out offshore ownership of media because they asked Mahen about the money. Fiji Times had to close its doors.

What magic did Mahen have on Bainimarama that he loved him so much to destruct anytthing that came in between Mahen and his $2million?

Is it the $185,000 back pay?

Corrupt feeding another corrupt!!!!

Reply
Tuma
11/5/2014 04:05:52 pm

Nothing trumps the very serious crime of TREASON. Focus on that instead of the money someone allegedly took or used or whatever.

Reply
Lalchi Mahen Chaudhry
11/5/2014 05:24:35 pm

Do not use the serious crime of sedition to hide the serious crime of corruption as lalchi Mahen/Bai/Aiyaz pointed out. mahen is a corrupt seditionist. Not only did he appropriate monies raised in the name of poor, he provided crucial support for the coup to hide and cover up his despicable act. What made it worse in mahen's case was he acted a champion of poor. Talk about wolf in sheep's skin. Do not try to whitewash this please. Everyone needs to be stripped naked and brought to account, chor and lalchi MPC included.

Reply
scoundrels in politics link
11/5/2014 09:37:26 pm

I agree with Lalchi Mahen Chaudhry. Democratic accountability and justice demands every public official who abuses his office or position of power must face justice. It is for the law to decide what is the just desert for individual offenders on the basis of the nature of their crime. But that in turn demands an impartial application of the law. Fiji does not have that at the present time.The law is under the sway of the dictator and his henchman Aiyaz Khaiyum the counterfeit Attorney-General.

Reply
chapan churi
12/5/2014 05:11:57 pm

Anand Singh - mu pe 'ram, ram', buggal me churi! translation: anand singh backstabber.

Reply

Your comment will be posted after it is approved.


Leave a Reply.

    editor@fijileaks.com

    ARCHIVES

    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
    Picture
    Picture