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

FNUGATE: The former acting FNU VC Ian Rouse refused to answer  whether he was privy to the missing KIRI-EU funds estimated at $6m!

28/10/2015

10 Comments

 
Picture
Picture
Picture
Making false and/or misleading statements to Committee Members, External Auditors and the European Union (EU)

It is this aspect that caused me the greatest concern and triggered my decision to resign from my role as MFP. As will be self-evident this issue has the potential of exposing FNU to a $6m liability which [Ganesh] Chand and [Narendra] Prasad misled the Council, the Audit Committee, the Financial Resources Committee, FNU’s external auditors and the officials of the EU. This liability has its genesis in the Kiri EU saga and the following is just a snapshot so FICAC can get the gist of this matter.

Between 2006 and 2008 the EU entered into a donor contract with the Government of Kiribati for training and infrastructure. EU also entered into a bilateral contract with then Fiji School of Medicine (FSM), under which FSM was to provide training and supervise the infrastructure projects. The total funding granted by EU for the whole project was some EU$7.28m (F$18m).

The project was completed in 2010 and in the same year the FSM merged with the newly formed FNU. By virtue of s45 of the FNU Decree 2010 FNU was deemed to have taken over the FSM’s bilateral contract with EU and hence liable under the contract for any ineligible expenditure expended from the donor monies.

During early 2013 EU officials in Fiji expressed concerns to Chand/Prasad regarding the ineligible expenditure of some EU$5.8m (F$14m), based on EU auditors report. This amount was later reduced by EU$3.3m after the Kiribati Government engaged its own engineers which certified that the donor funding for infrastructure was properly spent on the buildings, the existence of which they also verified.

This now exposes FNU to the current ineligible expenditure of EU$2.5 (F$6m) for which EU has been seeking credible documentation since 2013. I enclose the chronology of events [ANNEXURE J] which Chand/Prasad gave to the Audit Committee when it “grilled” them about the saga at its 12/8/14 meeting. The Audit Committee had asked Chand and Prasad to resolve the saga and convene an urgent meeting for further deliberation. Both men have failed to do so. At this juncture I again refer FICAC to my submissions of 9/9/14 (Annexure C). That document gives cogent evidence regarding my continuing efforts to get the assistance of Prasad and Anand to resolve the matter, to no avail. Despite knowing the urgency attaching to this case, Prasad went overseas (Solomon Islands) without informing me. He appointed Anand acting Director Finance in his absence. When I asked Anand to provide me documents so that we could provide credible information to EU, this was simply ignored. Upon Prasad’s return Anand complained that I was dragging the chain and hindering the progress to resolve the saga.

Prior to my appointment Anand had major involvement with the Kiri EU saga and had even gone to Kiribati to obtain documents. He also liaised with local auditors in Fiji who had performed certain audits of the Kiri EU project. Despite his extensive involvement and knowledge, he refused to assist me and was overtly evasive when I sought documents about the project that were in his control or possession. One Sanjesh Lal who was initially the Kiri EU Project Accountant at the FSM during 2010 to 2013 also had extensive knowledge of various documentation, but deliberately barred by Chand/Prasad to assist me about the missing documentation pertaining to the ineligible expenditure.

Prasad and Chand have deliberately misled the Audit Committee and the Financial Resources Committee about the severity of the Kiri EU saga and the potential $6m liability to hide their own fraud, incompetence or financial governance obligations. They have failed to inform FNU’s external auditors about this potential liability so that a provision for this amount could have been created in FNU’s 2013 annual financial statements; in the event that the EU ultimately decides to recoup this amount from FNU in terms of the original contract, then the amount is redeemed from the provision and not from FNU’s operational funding.

Alternatively, the amount should have been disclosed in the financials by way of a note as a contingent liability. This will comply with the true and fair view of financial reporting to the FNU’s stakeholders as mandated by the relevant Accounting Standards and the financial reporting laws of Fiji. Either way, Chand and Prasad ought to have made full and frank disclosures to the Audit Committee, the Financial Resources Committee and the external auditors. They have deliberately failed to do so.

Apart from FNU’s CEO (s30 (2) FNU Decree), Chand is also its Principal Accounting Officer (s36 (2) FNU Decree). In addition, he is an official member of the FNU Council (s13 of FNU Decree). Section 22 of the FNU Decree imposes a personal obligation on him to perform his duties honestly and in the best interests of the FNU. As FNU’s CEO he must bear the ultimate accountability and responsibility of the Kiri EU scam. Both he and Prasad were active participants in the saga.

Based on the evidence submitted so far, it is incomprehensible that Mr Chand has acted honestly and in FNU’s best interest. The contrary is the case. As the credit card situation shows (see 2.1 above) he and Prasad have abused FNU funds for their own personal gain and have attempted to write off the amounts they owe FNU.

I therefore claim that both men have abused their office and that is a further violation of s139 of the Crimes Decree. Their acts described above is yet again arbitrary which is prejudicial to the rights of FNU in several ways. First, the delaying tactics of Prasad and Chand regarding the Kiri EU saga since 2012 is itself prejudicial in that many of the staff involved have left FNU and the memories of the remaining staff have faded during the time. Then, both men appear to have spent FNU funds unnecessarily in their concerted effort to avoid any liability to FNU to simply protect their impropriety.

FICAC will note from the evidence that Chand/Prasad sought legal opinion from Sherani Lawyers how to avoid the liability. However, the trio were advised that FNU was liable. This was a sheer waste of FNU funds or use of funds for an improper purpose. As already mentioned, under s45 of the FNU Decree FNU was always liable once the FSM merged with it. The Decree clearly states so in lay man’s term. Prasad’s inability to read such a simple statutory provision once again raises serious questions about his competence. FICAC should also note that FNU has its own in house lawyer who could have provided the opinion to the duo.

Thirdly, FNU’s reputation has been seriously damaged by the actions of Chand, Prasad and their cronies. EU may not provide any future donor finding to FNU in light of the Kiri EU saga. This will severely prejudice FNU’s stakeholders, including its current and future students and its bilateral relationship with other Pacific nations or their universities.

Finally, the conduct of Chand and Prasad preventing me to expose their wrongdoing tells its own compelling tale. Both men accuse me of shirking from my responsibility in not resolving the saga, yet refuse to provide me with all the information and documentation that I have been seeking. For example, on 5/9/14 [ANNEXURE K] I emailed Prasad seeking various information that appeared on the chronology that he provided to the Audit Committee. He has refused to provide any of the information I sought, nor provides any cogent reasons for his refusal. This is as odds with his assurance that he gave to the Audit Committee at its 12/8/14 meeting that he and his team (me included) were working tirelessly to resolve the saga.

Referral to the Office of the Prime Minister

I have been advised by some of the employees of FNU that in the past they complained about some of the matters that I have raised in this complaint. However FICAC refused to act and Chand and Prasad later victimised the staff after a FICAC employee revealed their identity to Chand. Whilst I have no evidence to back this up, I am concerned that given Chand’s political clout he has the ability to derail any corruption complaint against him, Prasad, Anand and FNU Council members implicated in this complaint.

It is for this reason I have taken the step in providing a copy of this complaint to the Office of the Prime Minister so that it is accorded proper, genuine and realistic investigation and prosecutorial consideration. The public interest and rule of law demand no less.

Conclusion

I therefore request my complaint be investigated urgently. Please note that my last day as an employee at FNU is 20/11/14 after which I intend to return to Australia. It is therefore in everyone’s interest that FICAC act with all due diligence and promptitude in resolving all the matters raised in this complaint.

Copies of all the relevant documents referred to in the complaint are enclosed. Should FICAC require any further documents or information, please let me know.

Yours sincerely
[SIGNED]
ANDREW M SINGH
Copy to: Josaia Vorege Bainimarama, Prime Minister, Office of the Prime Minister, 4th Floor, Government Buildings, Suva.

Picture
Picture
10 Comments
Wheres the money
29/10/2015 11:08:44 pm

If under Chand's stewardship, F$6 MILLION vanished, why was he paid half a million dollars of taxpayers money when he got fired????

Have the auditors properly scrutinised FNU financials?? Where is this missing F$6 MILLION??

Lots and lots of unanswered questions.

Reply
honesty link
30/10/2015 07:45:22 am

why Ganesh? When this investigation is about EU-KIRI SAGA. Ian Rouse must answer for the misuse of funds. His renting a flat worth $4000/month. Ian must have done this misuse of funds like what he did while he was appointed as AVC.He entertained nepotisam,cronocism,and corruption. The Hr. advisor has employed his 70year old father who is working as a cook getting $5/hr and just peeling garlic and onion,57years old mother in-law as a canteen supervisor who doesn't have any food operation knowledge no experience no nothing paid $4.78/hr,wife as an accounted in levy and grants and many more. Ian Rouse is a rubbish cant produce good doctors and nurses than how can we expect him to run a university. Ian Rouse is very biased in decision making.

Reply
Mele Savu
30/10/2015 09:17:05 pm

Hello. $6m missing? Are you guys joking? $6m is not 60 cents that one puts in ones pocket and goes home. Either Dr. Ian or Dr. Ganesh are damn smart criminals, or you guys are absolute idiots believing, propagating, or accepting that $6m can go missing in a year.

Reply
smart link
30/10/2015 10:34:39 pm

The 6 million lost was done when FSM was on its own and at that time did not merger with FNU. The reason FNU is now involved because EU knows the FSM is under FNU now, so all blames will come to FNU. FNU when took over FSM took all liabilities as well

actual culprit is FSM under Ian Rouse. Agree with Honesty, Ian Rouse runs FSM like animal farm.

Reply
Only ganesh, anthing but ganesh
31/10/2015 10:52:02 pm

Honesty and Smart (and all you ilk), it appears your minds have been overtaken by aliens. The $6M missing (and God knows many millions) is clearly Ganesh Chand's own making. The FNU Decree (which he was instrumental in drafting with S-A-K) clearly states that following the merger of all institutions (including FSM, FIT) FNU was liable for all assets and liabilities of these institutions. According to Fijileaks ganpat and his cronies knew this when they signed on the dotted line.

Blaming Rouse does not absolve ganesh and his cronies. Rather it supports what Victor Lal has revealed to date - that both ganesh and rouse colluded to steal the $6m. Fijileaks revealed that Rouse and Kafoa had abused their FNU credit cards and were both investigated by ganesh's own investigators who found both men criminally liable.

Why didn't ganesh take any action? Simply because he and his finance director naren nz Prasad were doing the very same. Every body at FNU knew about this but kept their mouth shut in exchange for financial kickbacks, including Council members like Arvind Maharaj and Uday Sen as revealed by Victor Lal.

It was the sheer courage and determination of Andrew Singh who exposed ganesh's corruption that in reality removed ganesh from FNU for good.

Accountants like Singh give the accounting profession its real credibility and he optimises people that we need to run the country by always acting in the PUBLIC INTEREST and sending a clear message - NO ONE IS ABOVE THE LAW.


Reply
sera link
2/11/2015 08:08:20 am

do you know Singh record.Check his history in Australia jail

Reply
Mele Savu
2/11/2015 12:26:14 am

If Ian or Berlin or Ganesh or Arvin Maharaj or Uday Sen or Andrew Singh or whoever stole $6m and no one knew, the they are damn smart con-men. Jez you guys have this calibre. Or you have idiots for believing $6m can disappear without trace. Let the cops find out and jail the thieves. If there was no theft, then jail the ones saying 6m disappeared.

Reply
Smart
2/11/2015 02:47:23 am

Just for your information, GC send a team to Kiribati to investigate and once they found nothing, This matter was well advised to the council. FNU is run by council and GC and once council was aware of it was their duty.

you talking rubbish. I can bet no one has the guts to merge so many institutions in that time, a good example is Ian rouse, he mucked up what all was done by GC

Reply
Smart Bull
3/11/2015 04:19:39 am

@ Smart must be a GC's lapdog trying to glorify his/her fallen master.

Victor Lal has clearly revealed that GC was fired because he has been charged by ficac for providing overseas medical treatment to council member Bole (who was also the chancellor) from FNU funds WITHOUT THE AUTHORITY or approval of any of the then council members.

True FNU had a council but it was run by GC as his own company since all council members in in GC's pocket. Why didn't they stop GC from paying more than $250k on Bole's overseas medical treatment??? Wasn't it their duty then Mr Smart???

Reply
Mele Savu
2/11/2015 07:56:16 pm

I want to know how much kickback Arvind Maharaj got. I know his family. Young Arvin was the type who could engage in corrupt dealings. He is now in big league with Noor Bano. Plot fits. Uday Sen also made money at Merchant Bank and was kicked out. How much did he make out of this one. Cops - do you job.

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