 |  |
"Idle land is useless land, and contributes nothing to national development..."
Deposed Prime Minister Dr Timoci Bavadra during campaign trail,
speaking at a public meeting in Ba, 21 March 1987
"As I have often stated, there is no question of challenging Fijian land ownership or the ownership of any other land, including freehold land. But the [FLP-NFP] Coalition is sensitive to the legitimate concerns of non-Fijians over lease insecurities. As you know, it is also a primary concern of the Coalition to ensure that more productive use is made of land. Implementing this policy will not only mean opening up more land for agricultural use, but also ensuring secure leases for those who are prepared to work it. Idle land is useless land, and contributes nothing to national development..." Dr Timoci Bavadra, 1987
"If the extremists in the other political parties have their way, much native land will be lying around idle and/or controlled by private trusts as head lessees. Many of those private trusts have shown ((history and court cases) that their own governance leaves a lot to be desired."
TUPOU DRAUNIDALO, 2 September 2021, Fiji Sun
 The following is an opinion by lawyer and politician Roko Tupou Draunidalo. The views expressed are her own. Feedback: [email protected] |  |
"If the extremists in the other political parties have their way, much native land will be lying around idle and/or controlled by private trusts as head lessees. Many of those private trusts have shown ((history and court cases) that their own governance leaves a lot to be desired."
TUPOU DRAUNIDALO, 2 September 2021, Fiji Sun
| "It has been very pleasing to note that since Bill 17 of 2021 was made law and various explainers given to the community at large, we all have not heard complaints about the change in the law. If anything, we may have read and heard more from the ‘know -how’ sector in the Taukei community about how the Taukei can utilise their resources better and more profitably in conjunction with current Government policies and programmes. Now, that is progress and must be encouraged. Although I only read yesterday that some Taukei aligned to other political parties are using their ‘know-how’ to encourage the Taukei to lease their lands wholesale for subdivision by them to any potential investor- foreigner or Fijian from any community. But they emphasised that the lands be subleased to their own members first and foremost. That would be great if many of us have shown at least ten years of leasing our own lands productively and profitably. Not the case. In fact, many leases unrenewed to the other Fijian communities have remained idle and unproductive. |  |
The idealists will say ‘So what? That is a prerogative of ownership.’ Fine, but reality dictates that the more native land is productive, the better for the national economy.
National economy benefits Taukei the most. And again, the national economy benefits the Taukei the most- the Taukei and landowning units comprise the greatest number of citizens by far and we should be very concerned about the productivity of native lands and resources because we as a percentage of the population have the greatest to gain from government coffers- in education services, health, FNPF, ration distribution and cash support from the government whether it be $120 or $360.
If the extremists in the other political parties have their way, much native land will be lying around idle and/or controlled by private trusts as head lessees. Many of those private trusts have shown ((history and court cases) that their own governance leaves a lot to be desired.
The High Court at Lautoka used to be filled with many cases which involved infighting in those private trusts between trustees and beneficiaries. And those fights impacted leases, investments, profits and losses.
Happily, I am confident that in the issuance of leases, the iTaukei Land Trust Board (iTLTB) already has knowledge and experience of such issues and that will be guiding their decisions as trustee on when to issue a lease, to whom, for how long and other terms and conditions that benefit the landowning units “as a whole.”
Those are the very reasons why Ratu Sukuna in his infinite wisdom worked hard and thoroughly towards the set up of the iTLTB. A central trust that managed dereserved native lands for the benefit of “all” beneficiaries.
Not just the owners of the tourism lands or the sugarcane lands- but for the benefit of “all” Taukei in every province because every piece of native land is valuable for national development.
Native land that not only benefits landowning units communally but members individually (if they take advantage of government programmes for development) and benefits every citizen through national developmenthealth, hospitals, education, schools, roads, civil service, national governance policies and programmes.
iTLTB governance system
That iTLTB governance system of native lands for national development through a near perfect trust system is what Mr Nawaikula (Opposition MP) heavily favoured recently in a livestream discussion on Bill 17/2021.
He favoured that central trust over and above the formal decentralisation of power to landowning units - similar to the informal decentralisation to private trusts that is being suggested by some others in his party.
This would be a good time for him to rein in those others by explaining better to them who stands to gain the most from a near perfect central trust governing all native lands for the beneficiary of “all” Taukei.
It is the Taukei who will benefit the most first, second and third. The other communities benefit too as they have but the primary benefit is to the Taukei, the majority of the population and the majority of voters.
Not mixing politics with business
The only outstanding issue is how that benefit is to translate to greater economic power and progress to we who own 90 per cent of all lands.
In my humble opinion, the first steps will include not mixing politics with business.
Many business people in the other communities will wake up in 2022 and vote for their preferred political party but if their party does not win the elections, they will continue to make profit. Because they do not mix business or profit with their votes.
Unfortunately, we see much of the opposite from the conservative Taukei community. If their political party does not win in the elections, they close their ears and eyes to the government programmes that they should use to make economic progress and profit. That is made worse if their political party remains in the political wilderness for more than two terms.
Appeal to Taukei community
I therefore urge the Taukei community again to engage the ‘know-how’ that will allow them as individuals or communally to use their resources with Government programmes and assistance to make a profit.
Further, there is no need to tie up large swathes of natural resources that they and their community cannot utilise or make productive.
Idle lands or lands tied up in landowning unit disputes between their private trustees and beneficiaries will bring nothing good to the Taukei.
Allow the iTLTB to lease out to others all native lands that each Taukei their enterprise/s cannot cultivate.
Let those other Fijians or foreigners make those resources productive too for the direct and indirect benefit of the Taukei first, second, third and the other Fijians in our economy. Win-win."
National economy benefits Taukei the most. And again, the national economy benefits the Taukei the most- the Taukei and landowning units comprise the greatest number of citizens by far and we should be very concerned about the productivity of native lands and resources because we as a percentage of the population have the greatest to gain from government coffers- in education services, health, FNPF, ration distribution and cash support from the government whether it be $120 or $360.
If the extremists in the other political parties have their way, much native land will be lying around idle and/or controlled by private trusts as head lessees. Many of those private trusts have shown ((history and court cases) that their own governance leaves a lot to be desired.
The High Court at Lautoka used to be filled with many cases which involved infighting in those private trusts between trustees and beneficiaries. And those fights impacted leases, investments, profits and losses.
Happily, I am confident that in the issuance of leases, the iTaukei Land Trust Board (iTLTB) already has knowledge and experience of such issues and that will be guiding their decisions as trustee on when to issue a lease, to whom, for how long and other terms and conditions that benefit the landowning units “as a whole.”
Those are the very reasons why Ratu Sukuna in his infinite wisdom worked hard and thoroughly towards the set up of the iTLTB. A central trust that managed dereserved native lands for the benefit of “all” beneficiaries.
Not just the owners of the tourism lands or the sugarcane lands- but for the benefit of “all” Taukei in every province because every piece of native land is valuable for national development.
Native land that not only benefits landowning units communally but members individually (if they take advantage of government programmes for development) and benefits every citizen through national developmenthealth, hospitals, education, schools, roads, civil service, national governance policies and programmes.
iTLTB governance system
That iTLTB governance system of native lands for national development through a near perfect trust system is what Mr Nawaikula (Opposition MP) heavily favoured recently in a livestream discussion on Bill 17/2021.
He favoured that central trust over and above the formal decentralisation of power to landowning units - similar to the informal decentralisation to private trusts that is being suggested by some others in his party.
This would be a good time for him to rein in those others by explaining better to them who stands to gain the most from a near perfect central trust governing all native lands for the beneficiary of “all” Taukei.
It is the Taukei who will benefit the most first, second and third. The other communities benefit too as they have but the primary benefit is to the Taukei, the majority of the population and the majority of voters.
Not mixing politics with business
The only outstanding issue is how that benefit is to translate to greater economic power and progress to we who own 90 per cent of all lands.
In my humble opinion, the first steps will include not mixing politics with business.
Many business people in the other communities will wake up in 2022 and vote for their preferred political party but if their party does not win the elections, they will continue to make profit. Because they do not mix business or profit with their votes.
Unfortunately, we see much of the opposite from the conservative Taukei community. If their political party does not win in the elections, they close their ears and eyes to the government programmes that they should use to make economic progress and profit. That is made worse if their political party remains in the political wilderness for more than two terms.
Appeal to Taukei community
I therefore urge the Taukei community again to engage the ‘know-how’ that will allow them as individuals or communally to use their resources with Government programmes and assistance to make a profit.
Further, there is no need to tie up large swathes of natural resources that they and their community cannot utilise or make productive.
Idle lands or lands tied up in landowning unit disputes between their private trustees and beneficiaries will bring nothing good to the Taukei.
Allow the iTLTB to lease out to others all native lands that each Taukei their enterprise/s cannot cultivate.
Let those other Fijians or foreigners make those resources productive too for the direct and indirect benefit of the Taukei first, second, third and the other Fijians in our economy. Win-win."
Below is a picture taken from today's Fiji Sun (page 20) of an article on Bill 17 / Act 22 by Ms Tupou Draunidalo . Tittled, " No Complaints About Change in Law". (Fijileaks: Not reproduced but see above).
Ms Draunidalo had stated openly she supported the change in law and I had replied to her during a common discussion that I respect her views but I differ completely.
It is important therefore that I make this statement to you all to clarify why I differ from Ms Tupous views.
In answer to, her first point "that it is pleasing to note there has been no complaints about the change in Law", I wish to clarify and state to you all that my group, "StandwithNiko," has already issued instructions to a Legal team to file a Constitutional redress before the high Court challenging the law on the basis that is Racist , and in breach of iTaukei Human Group Rights and breach of their Proprietory Rights.
Expect the court challenge to Bill17/Act22 to be filed in few weeks time. I am restricting myself to being instructing Solicitor to concentrate on raising money for the court challenge.
Ms Tupous second point is that "The change in Law is good because it encourages the Leaseing of Native Land to outside communities.
In answer to that, I would like to say that TLTB's first priority is the benefits to Native owners and in all these years TLTB has failed the Native owners who are the beneciaries of the trust. The better option therefore is to maintain Native Land until a better alternative toTLTB is found. We will get that better alternative soon after the next election when we form Government.
Ms Tupous demonizes Land owners private trust for many infightings saying the better option is to give it out to the wider community to develop native Land and land Owners to collect income.
In answer to her third point, I wish to say that her view will only perpetuate our current problem of owning 90% of Natural resources with only 10% of the wealth.
Infighting between Land Owner private trust, at least means Land Owners are getting involved and we must encourage training and entrepreneurship on their natural resources instead of merely being consumers that is the catalyst of laziness, indolence & misuse.
Ms Tupous third point is that "I had favored a central trust as opposed to decentralization during a common discussion we had.
I wish to clarify that what I meant that ITLTB was a great example of balancing indigenous land rights with the interest and need of other races to native land that is a necessity in a multicultural Fiji.
It allows equality of access of native land to other races because it it our responsibility to balance our rights to Land with the interest & need for land by the wider community. Otherwise our ( itsukei) denial will amount to racism.
But of course the balancing act must not result in the total denial of use to iTaukei because it is he who has the use & of native land that controls the money and wealth.
Moving forward, I see an urgent need to review and restructure ITLTB. First priority is to make it completely independent of Government.
Second priority, is to restructure so that TLTB role is not limited as it is now to giving out leases & payment agency of rent & income for consumption.
TLTBs future role will be to develop as investment native land and enough land must retained for the Land owners/tltb to use for their own entrepreneurship & training.
To convice iTaukei land owners to give up their Land to ITLTB, Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna referred to the parable of the talent . Now ask yourself ?
In the 80 years, what has ITLTB to show to the Land owners in return for investing their talent. I say nothing. Therefore the need to review and restore tltb to its role that Rt Sukuna visioned.
Fijileaks: The Politics and Division on Land will see many more Evictions of Indo-Fijians
Ms Draunidalo had stated openly she supported the change in law and I had replied to her during a common discussion that I respect her views but I differ completely.
It is important therefore that I make this statement to you all to clarify why I differ from Ms Tupous views.
In answer to, her first point "that it is pleasing to note there has been no complaints about the change in Law", I wish to clarify and state to you all that my group, "StandwithNiko," has already issued instructions to a Legal team to file a Constitutional redress before the high Court challenging the law on the basis that is Racist , and in breach of iTaukei Human Group Rights and breach of their Proprietory Rights.
Expect the court challenge to Bill17/Act22 to be filed in few weeks time. I am restricting myself to being instructing Solicitor to concentrate on raising money for the court challenge.
Ms Tupous second point is that "The change in Law is good because it encourages the Leaseing of Native Land to outside communities.
In answer to that, I would like to say that TLTB's first priority is the benefits to Native owners and in all these years TLTB has failed the Native owners who are the beneciaries of the trust. The better option therefore is to maintain Native Land until a better alternative toTLTB is found. We will get that better alternative soon after the next election when we form Government.
Ms Tupous demonizes Land owners private trust for many infightings saying the better option is to give it out to the wider community to develop native Land and land Owners to collect income.
In answer to her third point, I wish to say that her view will only perpetuate our current problem of owning 90% of Natural resources with only 10% of the wealth.
Infighting between Land Owner private trust, at least means Land Owners are getting involved and we must encourage training and entrepreneurship on their natural resources instead of merely being consumers that is the catalyst of laziness, indolence & misuse.
Ms Tupous third point is that "I had favored a central trust as opposed to decentralization during a common discussion we had.
I wish to clarify that what I meant that ITLTB was a great example of balancing indigenous land rights with the interest and need of other races to native land that is a necessity in a multicultural Fiji.
It allows equality of access of native land to other races because it it our responsibility to balance our rights to Land with the interest & need for land by the wider community. Otherwise our ( itsukei) denial will amount to racism.
But of course the balancing act must not result in the total denial of use to iTaukei because it is he who has the use & of native land that controls the money and wealth.
Moving forward, I see an urgent need to review and restructure ITLTB. First priority is to make it completely independent of Government.
Second priority, is to restructure so that TLTB role is not limited as it is now to giving out leases & payment agency of rent & income for consumption.
TLTBs future role will be to develop as investment native land and enough land must retained for the Land owners/tltb to use for their own entrepreneurship & training.
To convice iTaukei land owners to give up their Land to ITLTB, Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna referred to the parable of the talent . Now ask yourself ?
In the 80 years, what has ITLTB to show to the Land owners in return for investing their talent. I say nothing. Therefore the need to review and restore tltb to its role that Rt Sukuna visioned.
Fijileaks: The Politics and Division on Land will see many more Evictions of Indo-Fijians
"Let those other Fijians or foreigners make those resources productive too for the direct and indirect benefit of the Taukei first, second, third and the other Fijians in our economy. Win-win."
TUPOU DRAUNIDALO in the Fiji Sun
