Blog Posts

LANDGATE: In his declarations to the Fiji Elections Office Biman Prasad states that his wife Rajni Chand owns a plot of land valued at $30,000 but a search in Lands Registry reveal it was owned by RANESHWAR Prasad

17/8/2024

We understand that one Raneshwar Prasad leased the land (iTaukei Lease No 33777) for $6,000 in December 2017. And, Raneshwar is allegedly 'kaka'* - uncle of Biman.
Unless there is an error in the lands records, no where in the 27-page file Rajni Chand is mentioned as the lessee of Lease No 33777 or Raneshwar Prasad transferred the land to Rajni Chand for $30,000.
We, therefore, call on FICAC to investigate whether Biman Prasad made a false declaration that his wife bought the land (33777) for $30,000.
The documents from Lands Registry list Raneshwar as the Lessee, 2018

LAND HAS EYES: The only time Rajni Chand is mentioned in the Land Registry Office file is on 10 December 2018 but there is no mention of who transferred this land (No 870465) to Rajni Kaushal aka Rajni iK Chand.
This land is not in Biman Prasad's declarations.
We call on FEO and FICAC to re-visit Prasad's declarations.

Fijileaks to FICAC: As we have pointed out previously, Biman Prasad breached the Political Parties Act by not declaring his wife's link to the Global Girmit Institute (co-trustee with Ganesh Chand), and Prasad also gave the GGI $200,000 of Fiji taxpayers money during girmit celebrations.
*We, however, understand FICAC investigation is on-going with raids on NFP office including FRCA to seize crucial documents.

RISING UP. USP's fall guy who was sent to file complaint against FRANK Bainimarama and Sitiveni Qiliho says PAL AHLUWALIA must go from the USP. Ilima Finiasi: 'All the campuses support the call for Ahluwalia to go.'

16/8/2024

USP Staff Association executive Ilima Finiasi was the complainant who filed the complaint on 8 July 2019 at the Totogo Police Station.
Rashmi Dass, the Investigating Officer from CID responsible for investigation into USP, had disclosed the name of Finiasi during the trial of Frank Bainimarama and Sitiveni Qiliho

From Fijileaks Archive, 12 October 2023

*ILLIMA FINIASI is an Office Assistant in Neelesh Gounder's School of Accounting, Finance and Economics (SAFE) at USP.

Meanwhile, the BDO Report commissioned by Pal Ahluwalia, parts of which were revealed by Lionel Aingimea, President of Nauru and on USP Council on Tuesday 7 September 2021 despite a decision to maintain strict confidentiality regarding its contents.
On 13 March 2023, Ahluwalia was recommending an Honorary Doctorate in Law for Aingimea and some months later, in July, hypocritically sacked Dr Tamara-Osborne for giving a one-paragraph comment to Islands Business magazine on Ahluwalia and the future of USP.

The full report and further incriminating materials were leaked to Fijileaks

Pacific Technical and Further Education former CEO, Dr. Hasmukh Lal says he cannot recall if Research and Analytical Officer, Priya Devi analysed data for his doctorate paper.

He has taken USP to court following his dismissal in 2020 due to alleged plagiarism in his doctorate paper.

Dr Lal alleges his dismissal by Vice-Chancellor Professor Pal Ahluwalia was against procedures and did not allow him natural justice.

He is alleging that there was breach of contract by USP and is claiming financial loss such as salary, and entitlements under the contract, humiliation and loss of dignity.

Dr. Lal is claiming about $500,000 as loss of salary.

While being cross-examined by USP's lawyer Feizel Haniff, Dr. Lal says certain pages were inserted by Devi as annexure.

When put to Dr. Lal if he can confirm if certain pages were not appendices but the actual body of the paper, he says there was data put in by her.

He denies she was commenting on the data on the paper.

He also denies that up until a meeting with Devi on 21st May, 2019 there was any transfer of documents from him to her.

Dr. Lal has also denied when put to him by Haniff that he called her into the meeting to tell her to treat the paper as highly confidential and not to mention it until published.

"As CEO of the Tertiary Scholarships and Loans Service, my role is developing and nationally administering public policies on scholarships, study loans and grants to make tertiary education more accessible to Fijians. With two international awards as an entrepreneurial leader and one as commitment to quality in tertiary education, organisational transformation, growth and achieving operational excellence are my mantras."

USPGATE: One alleged whistleblower was sacked. Another who revealed parts of secret BDO Report in Nauru Parliament was recommended for Honorary Doctor of Laws to USP Council by Pal Ahluwalia in March 2023

15/8/2024

Hasmukh Lal

Pal Ahluwalia and Lionel Aingimea

Tamara Osborne-Naikatini

The USP Council rebuffed the nomination. When Ahluwalia and his partner were deported from Fiji in February 2021, he spent 6 months in Nauru and while there Lionel Aingimea was the President of Nauru and member of the USP Council.
So Ahluwalia, together with Aingimea and Pat Walsh (the NZ government representative on the Council) pushed for Ahluwalia to be reinstated at USP, and they were successful.
In August 2021, Ahluwalia moved from Nauru to Samoa where he signed his 3-year contract that was to expire this August but has been renewed.
Was Ahluwalia returning the favour to Aingimea when he unsuccessfully recommended an Honorary Doctor of Laws for Aingimea in March 2023?
Furthermore, why Ahluwalia thought that it was acceptable for Aingimea to abuse his parliamentary privilege and reveal portions of the BDO Report in the Nauru Parliament but Dr Tamara Osborne-Naikatini, the USP biology lecturer and AUSPS president, had to be fired from her job by Ahluwalia in July for allegedly sharing, in an Islands Business (March 2024 edition) interview the alleged flawed process of the performance of Ahluwalia, which subsequently led to a two-year renewal of his contract.
Last month, related to Aingimea and the BDO Report, the former South Pacific Technical and Further Education CEO Hasmukh Lal was ordered to pay USP $3000.
Hasmukh Lal had claimed in his court case against USP that on 27 April 2021, the USP Council had discussed the BDO Report at its meeting and had agreed that the contents of the BDO Report would not be released to the public.
However, on or about 9 September the same year, Aingimea, the President of Nauru, who was also the Chancellor of the USP Council, breached the Council directive and its Code of Conduct by tabling part of the BDO Report in Nauru's Parliament during a parliamentary speech, thus breaching the obligation of confidentiality expected of the USP Council.
According to Hasmukh Lal, he has faced continuous contempt of court and reputational harm from the public since the leaked part of the BDO Report.
Hasmukh Lal had sought a declaration from the Fiji High Court that USP had breached the Code of Conduct, damages for the leak of the BDO Report and cost of action on a suitable basis plus taxes.
On 24 August two years ago, USP filed a summons to strike out the statement of claim on the grounds that Nauru was a more convenient form to hear Hasmukh Lal's claim.
And it was an abuse of the court process as the matter pleaded in Hasmukh Lal's statement of claim were domestic in nature and not justifiable in the High Court of Fiji.
While granting USP's summons to strike out Hasmukh Lal's claim, the acting Master Liyanage Wickramasekara ruled as follows:
I do not find, based on facts pleaded therein the statement of claim, that the alleged action of third party in leaking the BDO report can be considered as giving rise to any cause of action in law to the plaintiff (Hasmukh Lal) to claim damages against the defendant (USP).'
Hasmukh Lal was ordered to pay USP $3,000 within 28 days.

Fijileaks: Lionel Aingimea, who was the Chancellor of the USP Council from July 2020 until June 2021, breached the Council’s directive and its Code of Conduct and tabled part of the BDO report in Nauru’s Parliament about the contents of the BDO report during a parliamentary speech in Nauru.
The tabling of part of the BDO Report by Aingimea as well as his accompanying speech in the Parliament of Nauru breached the obligation of confidentiality that was expected of the USP Council.
Under the Code of Conduct, USP had a responsibility to ensure to never disclose confidential information such as the BDO report.
USP's lawyers had claimed that the release of the BDO Report, despite an agreement by its Council to keep it confidential, was done by Lionel Aingimea whilst he was no longer the Chancellor of the USP, but in his personal capacity as the 'President of Nauru, and/or either as a member of the Nauruan parliament and/or at the least as an individual'.
Shockingly, while sacking Dr Tamara Osborne Naikatini in July, PAL AHLUWALIA was prepared to ignore Aingimea's breach of USP's agreed decision to keep the BDO Report confidential and nominated Aingimea for the Honorary Doctor of Law(s).
**'The Law is an Ass'* when it comes to Aingimea and Osborne-Naikatini.

RFMF SECTION 131(2) in Constitution. Our only hope is for the military to step in and remove Nancy Tikoisuva and John Rabuku from DPP's Office before law and order goes to dogs. No wonder outlaws want s131 gone.

15/8/2024

'If nothing should be done but what is according to law, the throat of the nation might be cut while we sent for someone to make the law.'

SALUS POPULI SUPREMA LAX:
The maxim attributed to Oliver Cromwell is becoming increasingly relevant in Fiji as the Coalition government and its side-kicks (lawyers included) - masi polos and kana lotos - are robbing the Fiji taxpayers.

In this case, the RFMF high command would be right to invoke s131 in the Constitution before those in the DPP's office run riot.
The Doctrine of Necessity dictates the RFMF march into DPP's Office and get Tikoisuva and Rabuku by the scruff of their collars:

'If nothing should be done but what is according to law, the throat of the nation might be cut while we sent for someone to make the law.'*

Despotic, debauched and deranged mini 'Roman Emperor Caligulas' are running riot in Fiji with utter impunity. They know no one will stop them.
These lot are behaving just like the drug lords in control of Fiji.

We understand that John Rabuku had refused to vacate his acting DPP position, claiming that the three Supreme Court judges had merely tended an 'opinion'* so it was not binding on him and the Coalition government for him to relinquish his appointment.
As pressure mounted, he allegedly agreed to go provided NANCY TIKOISUVA was appointed to replace him, and that he was compensated for thousands of dollars.
After Tikoisuva was appointed, she put out a tailor-made position of Deputy DPP and Rabuku was appointed through the back door.
She very cleverly, and cunningly, omitted to demand that the applicant should not have been found guilty of any professional misconduct so that John Rabuku could be selected as Deputy DPP.
Crikey, Fiji. Its like an acting school principal is booted out of school for molesting a pupil, and a new acting school principal goes ahead and re-appoints the same former acting principal as Deputy School Principal.
Where is the Fiji Law Society president Wylie Clarke (Richard Naidu, John Apted, Graham Leung) who were most recently wanting changes in the 2013 Constitution because some judges had made passing comments that the Constitution was the handiwork of Frank Bainimarama and Aiyaz Sayed Khaiyum.
Come on, three Supreme Court judges ruled that Rabuku was not fit to be acting DPP because he was found guilty of professional misconduct.

TAILOR-MADE job advertisement for John Rabuku to come back through the back entrance, for Nancy Tikoisuva decided NOT to state that those found guilty of professional misconduct will not be considered for the position of Deputy Director of Public Prosecutions.
There should be a Commission of Inquiry into Rabuku's appointment, and Nancy Tikoisuva should be charged with gross Abuse of Office.

Meanwhile, Christopher Pryde, 'the fella who was only obeying Khaiyum's orders over the years', is still in a limbo:

Suspended Director of Public Prosecutions, Christopher Pryde is today raising his disappointment that he still does not have the disclosures he needs to properly understand the charge against him in relation to the superannuation.

In a statement, Pryde says this matter is soon to enter its 17th month with no resolution and with the Judicial Services Commission refusing to discuss the issue of the unilateral suspension of his salary.

He says he has also been advised that the proposed Tribunal hearing dates of 19th to 31st August 2024 have been vacated.

Pryde says he was suspended as the DPP in April 2023 for being seen talking to the former Attorney General, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum at an official function.

He says a year later, the Judicial Services Commission added an additional charge of Pryde allegedly being overpaid superannuation which is denied by him.

Pryde says he is dismayed that the Tribunal is yet to set a hearing date and that his salary continues to be suspended 5 weeks after the Prime Minister said that it should continue to be paid.

It is alleged that Pryde spoke to Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum at a function at a time there was an ongoing police investigation against Sayed-Khaiyum. The second allegation is that Pryde has been receiving $2,200 superannuation a month since September 2019 which was not approved by the Judicial Services Commission, the Attorney General or the President.

fijivillage News has sent questions to the Prime Minister, Sitiveni Rabuka and Acting Chief Justice Salesi Temo.
Acting Chief Justice Temo will not make any comments. Source: Fijivillage News.

REVOLVING JUDICIAL APPOINTMENT. How could JOHN RABUKU, sent packing from DPP's office by three Supreme Court judges, be deemed fit by acting DPP NANCY TIKOISUVA to be brought back as the Deputy DPP

14/8/2024

Fijileaks: With appointing power vested in the acting DPP, comes responsibility and common sense, which seems to have deserted Tikoisuva. Or is she indulging in some Yellow Ribbon program in appointing Rabuku who has a conviction and a fine against him as a LAWYER?
He had chosen not to appear before the Supreme Court judges.
In fact, she must be removed from office to protect its reputation.
*The recently appointed A-G, Graham Leung, should lead the call for her removal, even though both spent time with the law firm, Toganivalu Legal.

In the Matter of a reference by Cabinet for an opinion from the Supreme Court concerning the interpretation and application of Sections 105(2) (b), 114(2), 116(4) and 117(2) of the Constitution of the Republic of Fiji [2024] FJSC 20; Miscellaneous Action 0001 of 2024:

"Mr John Rabuku is not qualified to hold the office of Director of Public Prosecutions because he is not qualified to be a judge, as required by section 117(2) of the Constitution. He is not eligible for judicial appointment by virtue of the disciplinary proceeding disqualification in section 105(2)(b) because he was sanctioned for professional misconduct in a disciplinary proceeding."
Supreme Court Justices Brian Keith, Terence Arnold, William Young
28 June 2024.

The Italian Job? John Rabuku had not defended his appointment as acting DPP or his sanction for professional misconduct before the three Supreme Court judges, raising the troubling question whether there was a plan in place for Nancy Tikoisuva to appoint him as Deputy DPP?
CRY THE BELOVED COUNTRY!

*We may recall that Graham Leung had returned to Fiji from the Cook Islands and was suddenly singing Sitiiveni Rabuka's praise, and is now the Attorney-General of Fiji. GOD HELP FIJI

BLOODY 2000 MUTINY: It was just a pimple on the backside of Fiji's inglorious coup history. Come on, FORGET it, for it happened 22 Years ago. Maybe, Suva lawyer GRAHAM LEUNG should donate the $130,000 in fees that he received to flood victims. We may recall that the former Fiji Law Society president Leung was the Judge Advocate of the Court Martial panel that had tried the 20 soldiers convicted of mutiny in relation to the Speight coup of 2000.
The Suva lawyer had been commissioned as an Army officer, with the rank of Lieutenant Colonel. Before Leung’s appointment a row had broken out between Bainimarama and the Minister for Defence Josefa Vosanibola over the payment fees of $130,000 to Leung, with Bainimarama arguing that the payment to Leung was being made from the Army budget (still to be audited) and that the Ministry of Home Affairs had no say in the payment.

They have debased our young democracy. Mr Rabuka’s day or reckoning will come, if not in this life, then in the next.

He will carry this heavy burden forever.

Love him or hate him, Mr Rabuka is an integral part of the Fiji story.

I truly believe that the Rabuka who was responsible for 1987 is a changed man. He has apologized for his role in those events.

He was forgiven by the leader of the NFP the then leader of the largest Indian party, Jai Ram Reddy and together they worked to produce the 1997 Constitution which led to equality of Fiji’s races and the formation of a genuine multiracial cabinet.

Mr Reddy was a victim of the 1987 coup but he set aside his personal hurt and feelings in the wider national interest. This act of statesmanship destroyed his political career.

If Mr Reddy was able to collaborate with Mr Rabuka, that is good enough for me.

In February 1990, the then president of South Africa, FW de Klerk, took the fateful decision to release Nelson Mandela who later became President.

Mandela was later to form a political partnership with his arch enemy although their political views were diametrically opposed at one stage.

What President Mandela has taught the world is that it is possible to forgive one’s political enemies and work together for the common good.

Fiji has had 14 years of one party rule.

The record of government during that period has been dismal – unprecedented levels of poverty, decrepit infrastructure as evidenced by frequent water cuts and power outages, diminution of human rights, extraordinarily high levels of external debt and mismanagement at all levels.

Democracy needs to be refreshed and reinvigorated from time to time.

Any government that is in power for too long tends to become arrogant, complacent and authoritarian. They stop listening to the people.

The coming elections this year provides voters a chance to have more of the same, or the choice of a new government that has the ability to take Fiji out of the wilderness.

None of the parties or their leaders are perfect. All of them have weaknesses, just as they have strengths.

None of us are perfect. That is the nature of being human.

The electoral system in the Fiji Constitution is skewed and unfair.

A political party or candidate cannot qualify for a seat in Parliament unless they win at least 5% of the votes cast.

That is a very high bar and which many candidates and small parties will be unable to reach.

Some other opposition leaders have outstanding records, but regrettably the electoral system places them in a disadvantageous situation.

Reviewing the current political landscape, I believe Mr Sitiveni Rabuka is the leader who will best be able to take Fiji forward and bring the changes that Fiji needs at this time.

He is humble and compassionate.

He is a leader that listens.

He has learnt from his past mistakes.

He has the experience of being a former head of government.

I trust him.

The founders of Mr Rabuka’s party give me confidence that if they win a majority of seats in the general elections, Fiji will have a government that is kinder, gentler and more inclusive.

Fijileaks: Jai Ram Reddy might have destroyed his political career (he was rejected at the poll) but he returned to his successful legal career, becoming President of the Fiji Court of Appeal, and later a Judge on the International Tribunal on Rwanda. Instead of holding Rabuka to account for crimes against humanity, he was sending Rwandans to prison.
As for Mandela and d'Klerk, they went on to carve lucrative political careers, one becoming President and the other his Vice-President. That is what Reddy had hoped for in 1999, to serve as Rabuka's deputy, informing us that Fiji was NOT ready for an Indo-Fijian Prime Minister. It seems NFP's Biman Prasad is replaying the same music in 2022.
Reddy, Rabuka, Mandela and d'Klerk's were no Mahatma Gandhi, who died penniless and without power or property. Like Mandela, d'Klerk and Reddy, Gandhi was a lawyer. Where is Jai Ram Reddy? Sitiveni Rabuka is a wolf in a fake Tapa Cloth, remote controlled by his handlers until the election is over.

“We went through the process when we advertised the position and we got applicants,” she said. “There was a very small group of applicants, and we followed that due process and the recommendation has come to have him back to the office.”
Fijileaks: We wonder if this debarred lawyer was one of the applicants? Rabuku's appointment will see more rogue lawyers in DPP's prosecuting team.

HAPPY TO BE BACK. RABUKU AND TIKOISUVA OUTSIDE DPP OFFICE IN SUVA

From Fijileaks Archive, 25 November 2021

Purpose of disciplinary proceedings and sanctions
Commissioner Justice Kulatunga said the purpose of disciplinary proceedings against SURESH CHANDRA was to protect the public interest and that the Commission acted in the public interest

Former Fijian Electoral Commission chairperson and lawyer Suresh Chandra has been fined $500,000.

Mr Chandra was found guilty of six counts of professional misconduct by the Independent Legal Services Commission for failing to reconcile funds totaling $2.139 million. ILSC Commissioner Justice Gihan Kulatunga found Chandra liable for five out of the six professional misconduct charges.

He was a partner of MC Lawyers and the trustee of the MC Lawyers Trust Account no. 9101000000175 kept at Bank of Baroda, Suva branch.

Between October 1, 2016 and September 30, 2019, Chandra, being the principal of the law firm MC Lawyers and the Trustee of MC Lawyers trust account, failed to ensure that trust monies kept in MC Lawyers trust account were not used for unauthorized purposes and failed to properly supervise and monitor all transactions made from MC Lawyers trust account and by reason of such failure the said trust account had an unreconciled amount of $2 million. He failed to properly supervise and monitor all transactions made from MC Lawyers trust account and by reason of such failure the said trust account had an unreconciled amount of $2.139 million, failed to maintain and/or keep proper accounting records and authorized withdrawals from MC Lawyers trust account by signing on 25 incomplete drawn cheques, which resulted in unauthorized withdrawals to be made from the said trust account.

Justice Kulatunga said it was proved that Chandra had acted in violation of Section 82 (1)(b) of Legal Practitioners Act in respect of the Trust Account of MC Lawyers kept at Bank of Baroda.

He said the Commission found that Chandra committed professional misconduct arising from his failure to supervise the Trust Account and signing incomplete cheques which caused an unreconciled amount of $2.139 million of client trust funds inter alia due to unauthorized withdrawals.

Purpose of disciplinary proceedings and sanctions

Commissioner Justice Kulatunga said the purpose of disciplinary proceedings was to protect the public interest and that the Commission acted in the public interest

Mitigation

In mitigation, Chandra submitted that he was 69 years old and was admitted in Fiji as a practitioner on March 31, 1992.

He had joined civil service on December 29, 1973 and held office inter alia as Registrar of Titles, senior legal officer at the AttorneyGeneral’s chambers, chairperson reform of Registrar of Titles office, chairperson of Electoral Boundaries Commission, chairperson of Electoral Commission.

Commissioner’s remarks

Justice Kulatunga said Chandra had clearly acted in violation of his basic obligation as a solicitor. He said the maintaining with due diligence the funds of the clients held in the trust account was a primary

obligation of a practitioner and was the trustee of the said funds.

He said Chandra’s misconduct included the failure to properly supervise his staff and amongst other things, providing a large number of signed incomplete trust cheques to the employee.

The Commission noted that Chandra claimed to have reimbursed the sum of $468,768.27 and according to his submission and documents; it appeared that a sum of $70,000 was recovered from the previous employee and the said balance was lying to the credit of the trust account which Chandra claimed he would forego.

Orders of the Commission:

■The name of Chandra is struck from the roll of the practitioner’s held by the Chief Registrar.
■ It is directed that the law firm MC Lawyers ceased to operate as or engage in legal practice with immediate effect.
■Chandra pay a fine in the sum of $500,000 to the Chief Registrar. If and when such a fine is paid, the Chief Registrar is hereby directed and ordered to pay the said sum to the credit of the Trust Account of MC Lawyers or to otherwise utilize the said sum to meet and settle the sums due to the clients of MC Lawyers.
■ Pursuant to Section 124 of the Legal Practitioners Act 2009, the costs payable by Chandra towards the reasonable costs incurred by Chief Registrar is summarily assessed in the sum of $2000.

USPGATE. As USP staff hold ballot to remove Ahluwalia as VC, he is yet to answer questions regarding Rajni Chand and her GGI hosting Girmit Conference at USP. Her USP appointment (2021-23) mired in controversy

13/8/2024

USP is refusing to disclose if her appointment as Director, Centre For Flexible Learning, has been renewed. The appointment was for three years, from 2021-23.
At last dollar count, she was on a salary of $130,000 annually.
*The move from $103,000 (see below) to $130,000, she was either given inducement or moved to the next salary grade.

Dr. Rajni Kaushal Chand is the new Director for CFL for the next 3 years
(2021 – 2023).

SALARY: From 2021-23, Rajni Chand has been on $130,000 annual salary

Source: Fijivillage News, Thursday 19/08/2021

From Fiji Sun Archive, 20 February 2021

About 10 recent high-level appointments at the University of the South Pacific (USP) under Professor Pal Ahluwalia’s leadership allegedly did not follow USP processes.

And, the minimum qualification requirement in a number of appointments, appeared written so as to exclude other meritorious candidates.

All these allegations have been gathered from numerous well placed USP sources. They come amidst continuing controversy following the deportation of Professor Ahluwalia.

The USP communications team was made aware of each of the allegations, but have not responded.

Allegations: 1. Appointment of Rajni Chand as Director of the Centre for Flexible Learning (CFL)

From 2016 the Centre for Flexible Learning was led by a Pro Vice Chancellor (Professor Som Naidu) who has received international recognitions and awards for his work in Online and Distance Learning and is a Principal Fellow of the Higher Education Academy.

At the end of Professor Naidu’s contract in December 2020, this leadership role was downgraded to a Senior Lecturer.

This was not mentioned in the restructure approved by the University Council even though the advertisement for the position claimed: “As a result of the reorganisation of the USP that was approved by Council at its 90th meeting held on November 18 and 19, 2020, we now seek to fill the role of Director Center for Flexible Learning”.
A three year contract was awarded to Rajni Chand, but her position was only advertised internally despite Professor Ahluwalia and his human resources team insisting in other cases that all appointments for more than one year must be advertised externally.

There were three other applicants who applied for the position which was ultimately given to Ms Chand. Of the three other applicants who applied:

One was an Associate Professor with substantial research and publications in the field of technology enabled learning,

A second was a Senior Lecturer who had previously held the position of Faculty Associate Dean Learning and Teaching and had extensive experience of Faculty and University level management in this field,

The third was a senior female member of staff within the Centre for Flexible Unit who has a doctorate and significant research and publication outcomes in Online and Distance Learning as well as being a long-standing departmental manager within the CFL unit.

Ms Chand was selected above all of these candidates.

We asked Ms Chand and the USP whether: Ms Chand has experience of University management.

She has expertise in the field of Online and Distance Education, or in Education more broadly, outside of her specialist area of Linguistics. Apart from the experience all USP academics have of teaching their own courses through the University’s Learning Management System (Moodle).

We further asked Ms Chand and the USP whether her only experience in this field was her participation in a Commonwealth of Learning (COL) Women and Leadership in Online Distance Learning training programme.

The Appointments Committee was chaired by Professor Ahluwalia and other members of the committee included Professor Jito Vanualailai (acting DVC Education) and Akanisi Kedrayate (former Dean of the Faculty of Arts Law and Education).

None of these panel members have any expertise, qualifications, or published research in Online and Distance Learning.

From Fijileaks Archives, 17 February 2021

By Victor Lal

Fijileaks: In 2017, we had supported Biman Prasad and his wife Rajni Chand but now, in 2024, we are holding the COUPLE to account.
*We are shocked and disappointed the evidence we have on us, especially on Biman Prasad, which we will disclose in due course.

Mysterious 'LOTUS' finally 'bloomed open' in 2024 when Biman Prasad revealed in his 2024 declaration that he holds 50% shares in Lotus Fiji Construction with Sunil Chand, and two borrowed over $1m from ANZ

13/8/2024

The Lotus Construction (Australia) is owned by one Sunil Chand.
Under the Political Parties Act, Biman Prasad should have declared to the Supervisor of Elections, although he has no shares in 'Lotus Australia', that Lotus Construction (Fiji) Pte Ltd's co-shareholder Sunil Chand 'is the owner of Lotus Construction, Australia'.
In 2014, it became mandatory to declare assets, incomes and shares under the Political Parties Act.
Lotus Construction (Fiji) Pte Ltd was registered in Fiji on 20 March 2014, with Biman holding 5 shares and Sunil 95 shares). In his 28 July 2014 declaration, Biman merely stated 'Shares in Business' - 85,000

*2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024

In the 2018 Declaration, Biman doesn't state which Lotus Construction he is a Director - Lotus Construction (Fiji) or Lotus Construction (Australia).
But in the 2019 Declaration, he is again vague about the share identity.

*The business partnership was witnessed by Biman Prasad's nephew Krishil Kumar, then at HFC Bank, Suva

In or around 2018, the shares were apportioned 50/50.

PUT UP OR SHUT UP: No DEFAMATION threat will deter anyone from demanding you give breakdown of how your wife Rajni and chamcha Ganesh Chand spent $200,000 of public funds during Girmit celebrations

12/8/2024

And when did you find out that your wife and chamcha* Ganesh were trustees of the Global Girmit Institute?
Why didn't you call for TENDER?
Ficac must investigate whether Solicitor-General Ropate Green and your PS Finance were complicit in authorising the $200,000 to YOUR WIFE.
Who the hell are you FOOLING, NFP leader BIMAN PRASAD?
We notice that your defamation threat to Fiji Labour Party is from Sherani & Co lawyers.
From NFP donor list on us, we see Hemendra Nagin donated to the NFP during the 2022 general election, and he was representing you in the Taniguchi case - re those sensual texts that you had sent to your former provisional candidate Hiroshi's wife (You Look Beautiful* ones).
As required by the Political Parties Act, you failed to declare your wife's GGI trusteeship in your 2023 assets and incomes to the FEO.
In fact, you never revealed it in the 2017-2021 and 2023 declarations.
*We call on FICAC to take you into custody and charge you. Full Stop!

Biman threatens legal action over Girmit Funds

Finance Minister Biman Prasad has moved to legally gag FLP from demanding accountability for his $200,000 grant for Girmit celebrations to a discredited organization of which his wife and a close political ally were trustees at the time.

A letter from his lawyers, Sherani & Co. is threatening legal action unless an apology and “reasonable compensation” is made by Labour Leader Mahendra Chaudhry.

It is also demanding that we remove all “posts from our website that make reference to the Girmit funding” and to Biman’s involvement thereof as they are “false and defamatory”.

Our lawyers are dealing with the matter.

But Mr Chaudhry says: “Such threats will not deter us from demanding accountability from the minister for the $200,000 given to an organization that had been deregistered in 2022 for failure to submit audited accounts and annual reports since its inception in 2017.”

There were other payments allegedly made to close associates of the Minister that must be explained.

The Minister, as well as Prime Minister Rabuka, had assured the nation that detailed accounts would be made public shortly. This was at the height of the controversy surrounding the matter early last year.

Some 18 months later, we are still awaiting the disclosure of the promised audited accounts. Labour will continue to demand disclosure in the interest of accountability and transparency.

Further, the circumstances surrounding the $200,000 granted to the Global Girmit Institute (GGI) were highly questionable.

1: Expressions of interest were not invited.

2: It was highly unethical and improper of the Minister to give the grant to an organization of which his wife and a close political ally were trustees and which had been de-registered for failing to submit audited accounts since its inception.

3. Labour also questions the unlawful manner in which the deregistered GGI was hastily re-registered in February 2023 within 24 hours of an application being lodged.

4. This when a lawfully de-registered organization cannot be lawfully re-registered.

These are the facts of the case. The public is entitled to an explanation for these in the interests of accountability and transparency.

In view of the highly irregular manner in which the 2023 Girmit celebration funds were allegedly disbursed, Labour has demanded detailed accounts scheduling the monies paid out to individuals and organisations.

COMING UP: While letting the POOR survive on $4.50 per hour in Fiji, the PRASAD COUPLE have have been swimming in the bowl of obscene PROSPERITY - $$$$$ in bank accounts in Fiji and NZ, Houses, Cars, Plots of Lands (Native and Freeholds) and still not satisfied, he gave his wife Rajni Kaushal Chand and her chamcha Ganesh Chand $200,000.

*LANDLESS INDO-FIJIANS and their so-called NFP leader sitting on native lands (9 lots) worth over $1million. In fact, in 2014, he had over $2m worth of land which he parcelled out and sold them over the years

PACIFIC POLYTECH SCANDAL. Ganesh CHAND provided $50,000 lift-off money to Polytech after 40 'technical trainers and experts' met at Global Girmit Institute in February 2021. Prasad gives $5million to PP in Budget

10/8/2024

POWER COUPLE: Were Biman Prasad, as Director of Fiji Institute of Applied Studies (FIAS) and his wife Rajni Chand, as Trustee of the Global Institute (GGI), present during the formation of the Pacific Polytech, held on 15 February 2021 at GGI - the Murgi ke Darba (Chicken Coop) in Lautoka

TAIWAN CONNECTION: There are allegations that Taiwanese government gave $50,000 during the initial setting up of Pacific Polytech (PP) but their alleged financial contribution is not listed in the 2021 PP Financial Audit Report.
*We call on FICAC to establish if Taiwan gave $50,000 to Pacific Polytech in 2021.

Fijileaks: During the setting up of the Pacific Polytech, Ganesh Chand (with FFP in power) tried to cover up his role by referring to himself in all correspondence (most in our possession) as 'Technical Advisor' but on
4 March 2024 (with Coalition in power and Biman Prasad as Finance Minister), he became a DIRECTOR while Pacific Polytech (PP) lists him only as Chairperson.

Fijileaks: On 5 December 2023, Ganesh Chand removed most of the original personnel, replacing Jone Dakuvula from the Chairmanship, and himself becoming Chair (more in next instalment). But Chand has not disclosed that he is also Director.

Fijileaks: We are reliably informed that G.Lal and I. Naiveli & Co, auditors, had declined to audit the PolyTech accounts after raising certain specific queries. In the end, G. Prasad & Associates audited it, the auditor's who hastily audited Global Girmit Institute accounts for 2018-2021 (2022 missing) in one sweep, in 2023, after the GCI was re-registered in February 2023, to enable it to receive $200,000 from Biman Prasad during girmit celebrations.
One of the donors ($500) to GGI was 'Ratu G Prasad'.
We call on Ficac to establish if 'Ratu G Prasad' was GGI auditor,
G Prasad & Associates?

*As we have argued, Prasad didn't disclose his wife's links in his declarations under the Political Parties Act and he also did not disclose in his legally required declaration of 2023 for the year ending 2022 that he was a FIAS Director (see his campaign poster flyer)

Fijileaks: To be continued

High Court Judge Justice Chamath Morais has discharged former Vice‑Chancellor of Fiji National University Dr. Ganesh Chand after FICAC lawyer Rashmi Aslam filed for a discontinuation of the case.

Aslam while explaining to the court on the application said that after examining the evidences of the case, they have come to a conclusion where they need the availability of a certain witness to prove their case. It was not revealed in court on whether FICAC was in touch with the named witness.

Aslam said that FICAC is not concluding the matter but when the witness becomes available they will continue with the matter.

Chand was charged with one count of abuse of office by FICAC.It was alleged that Chand between 14th November 2012 and 4th July 2013 whilst being employed as the Vice Chancellor of the Fiji National University, approved payments amounting to $213,905.05 for overseas medical treatment for the Chairman of FNU, Filipe Bole from the university’s funds.

From Fijileaks Archive, 10 June 2023

FIAS TO PACIFIC POLYTECH:
How could Ganesh Chand, as Chairperson, FIAS Board of Trustees, transfer the assets of FIAS to Pacific Polytech, of which he was 'Technical Advisor' and had loaned $50,000 to set it up?
In his 2022 election campaign, Biman Prasad as leader of the National Federation Party boasted that he was Director of FIAS.
Well, FICAC should take him into custody for not declaring his directorship in his 2023 declaration to the Supervisor of Elections.
We understand that both, GGI and FIAS, were de-registered in February 2022 for failing to provide their financial statements. While GGI was hastily re-registered by the Chands - Rajni and Ganesh, we are still examining the legal status of FIAS, and whether Ganesh Chand was authorized by Biman Prasad to hand over FIAS to Pacific Polytech.

From: Ganesh Chand
Date: Sun, 20 Feb 2022, 11:37 am
Subject: FIAS
To: Nadesa Goundar , Biman Prasad, Ravindra Pillay, Rajni Chand Kaushal, Sunil Kumar, Chandra Dulare, sk.clabss

While CP is getting FIAS registered in Aus, for Fiji can you think on how we can get it legal again?
Options:
1. re-register as trust
2. register as non-profit entity
3. create an institute within PP... (like you have centres etc at USP)
4. create new entity - a new think tank (for which CP is writing the proposal for funding)
G [Ganesh]

Fijileaks to FICAC: Under the Political Parties Act, Section 24, BIMAN PRASAD as leader of the NFP, did not disclose in 2023 his FIAS directorship nor his wife's trusteeship of the Global Girmit Institute in his 2017-2023 Declarations.
We have examined his declarations (2014-2024).
Its clear as daylight that both FIAS and GGI played an active role in the formation of Pacific Polytech.
Prasad has handed over $6m of public funds to PP.

BAIL VARIATION DECLINED. Magistrate rules that Aiyaz Khaiyum can get treated in Fiji. She relies, among other cases, on Qarase's BAIL Refusal precedent. Qarase wanted to travel to collect money for his Legal FEES

9/8/2024

Urologist Isireli Kaloucava

Magistrate Sufia Hamza

The 'sickly figure' claims he needs to travel to Singapore to save his KIDNEY. He might be telling the truth but its most likely he just doesn't trust local treatment, especially after decimating Fiji's health system.
In the past, Mahendra Chaudhry to Sitiveni Rabuka, were allowed by the courts to travel for medical treatment but Rabuka was refused permission to travel overseas to take part in a golf tournament.
In Qarase's case, he was charged in connection with the misuse of trust fund money, and wanted to travel to Australia, UK, New Zealand and Solomon Islands, to raise funds for his court case.
In July 2009, FICAC's then prosecutor ACA RAYAWA objected to the bail variation, claiming Qarase had not provided any details of his legal expenses.
* Also, Qarase had previously breached his bail conditions, and the second was that Qarase was a threat to the national security.

Justice Daniel Goundar concurred, ruling that is was not unreasonable to restrict Qarase from travelling overseas and that it did not breach Qarase's right to liberty.
In Khaiyum's case, his lawyers did not argue whether the objection to his travelling overseas to seek medical treatment violated his constitutional right to overseas medical treatment under the
2013 Constitution of Fiji.
*Later, Qarase was found guilty on all charges and jailed for one year.

Former Attorney General, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum has not been allowed to travel to Singapore on medical grounds.

In her ruling today, Magistrate Sufia Hamza says Sayed-Khaiyum has already had his heart and kidney treatment in Singapore therefore it is dismissed. Magistrate Hamza is hearing the health tender case of Sayed-Khaiyum, former Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama and former Health Minister Doctor Neil Sharma.

Magistrate Hamza says Urologist, Isireli Kaloucava who is a kidney specialist has also told the court that there is post care treatment available in Fiji for Sayed-Khaiyum. She says she does not find it necessary for Sayed-Khaiyum to travel as he had taken 4 months to get medical treatment in Singapore.

Magistrate Hamza earlier said that she will not review the decision of Magistrate Yogesh Prasad, who is handling Sayed-Khaiyum’s case regarding the alleged payment to the former Supervisor of Elections. Magistrate Prasad had earlier ruled that he finds Sayed-Khaiyum’s bail variation motion to travel to Singapore not essential and therefore it was dismissed.

He had said that there was no evidence of monthly check-up reports that Sayed-Khaiyum is visiting the hospital for any great pain such as on his heart or kidney function, and now needs bail variation for urgent medical procedures. Magistrate Prasad said there was no evidence of an immediate emergency by which he means immediate hospitalisation of Sayed-Khaiyum in Fiji Government Hospital of the excruciating pain.

Sayed-Khaiyum was excused from court this afternoon. Magistrate Hamza has given 28 days to the defence counsel to appeal. The matter is adjourned to the 10th of September. Source: Fijivillage News.

The State opposes the application on two grounds. The first is that the applicant has previously breached his bail conditions, and the second is that the applicant is a threat to the national security.

Under the first ground, Mr. [Aca] Rayawa submits that the applicant gave political speeches at public functions held in Australia when he was last permitted to travel overseas, which contravened the Public Order Act, but due to jurisdictional issue the applicant was not charged.

It is Mr. Rayawa’s contention that the applicant has breached his good behavior bail condition.

Mr. Rayawa further submits that the applicant has travelled to his island of Vanuabalavu on two occasions, when his bail condition is to reside at 6 Moti Street, Samabula until the conclusion of his trial.

The second ground was an extension of the first. Mr. Rayawa submits that the applicant could cause political instability in the country if allowed to travel overseas, which he uses for political motives.

The late Laisenia Qarase

Justice Daniel Goundar

Rayawa

IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI
AT SUVA
CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

MISCELLANEOUS CASE NO: HAM 038 OF 2009

BETWEEN:

LAISENIA QARASE
Applicant

AND:

FIJI INDEPENDENT COMMISSION AGAINST CORRUPTION
Respondent

Date of Hearing: 15th July 2009
Date of Ruling: 22nd July 2009

Counsel: Mr. A. Bale for Applicant
Mr. A. Rayawa for FICAC

RULING

[1] The applicant’s bail conditions restrict him to travel overseas pending his trial in the High Court. His passport is in the custody of the court. The charges against the applicant are prosecuted by the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC). The charges relate to abuse of office.

[2] The applicant filed a Notice of Motion on 25 June 2009, seeking release of his passport and leave of the court to travel overseas. The reason advanced for the overseas trip is to raise funds to pay legal costs, which the applicant incurred in litigations challenging his removal from power as the Prime Minister on 6 December 2006.

[3] The applicant wishes to travel to overseas countries including the United States of America, the United Kingdom, the Solomon Islands, New Zealand and Australia, as and when travelling and associated arrangements and expenses permit. He proposes to return his passport to the Chief Registrar within forty eight hours upon his return to Fiji in respect of each overseas visit.

[4] The State opposes the application on two grounds. The first is that the applicant has previously breached his bail conditions, and the second is that the applicant is a threat to the national security.

[5] Under the first ground, Mr. Rayawa submits that the applicant gave political speeches at public functions held in Australia when he was last permitted to travel overseas, which contravened the Public Order Act, but due to jurisdictional issue the applicant was not charged. It is Mr. Rayawa’s contention that the applicant has breached his good behavior bail condition.

[6] Mr. Rayawa further submits that the applicant has travelled to his island of Vanuabalavu on two occasions, when his bail condition is to reside at 6 Moti Street, Samabula until the conclusion of his trial.

[7] The second ground was an extension of the first. Mr. Rayawa submits that the applicant could cause political instability in the country if allowed to travel overseas, which he uses for political motives.

[8] Mr. Bale for the applicant submits that any concerns that FICAC has about the applicant’s motive to visit overseas countries could be addressed by imposing stringent bail conditions. Mr. Bale further submits that the applicant’s statements about threat to his life which he made at public functions in Australia were sympathy gestures and that he would not make such statements again. Finally, Mr. Bale submits that the applicant could be dealt by the court if he breaches any of his bail conditions.

[9] The right to liberty is a basic human right. Bail for a person accused of an offence means authorization for the person to be at liberty instead of in custody, on condition that the person appears for trial. Conditional bail is granted as an alternative to pre-trial detention. Permissible conditions include the surrendering of travel documents, imposition of a residence requirement and the provision of a surety assessed in relation to the means of the accused. These restrictions on the right to liberty are consistent with international law (Wemhoff v Germany (1968) 1 EHRR 550).

[10] Bail must be granted unconditionally unless the court considers that conditions should be imposed for the purpose of:

ensuring the accused person’s surrender into custody and appearance in court;
protecting the welfare of the community; or

protecting the welfare of any specially affected person.

(see s.23 of the Bail Act)

[11] In State v. Khan [2008] FJHC 62; HAC 009.2008 (11 April 2008) this Court adopted the following statements of Gates J (as he was then) in Iliaseri Saqasaqa v. The State HAM 005.06S:

"Bail conditions, imposing as they must restrictions on persons awaiting trial, must therefore be reasonable and commensurate with the gravity of the offence and with the individual risks identified as applicable. Bail must not be fixed excessively, in effect, denying the applicant an opportunity to take up the grant of bail. This has been a principle of great antiquity in the common law."

[12] In Seniloli v. State Criminal Misc. Case No. HAM029.04 the accused made an application for release of passport for overseas travel for medical review pending his trial. Gates J in granting the application said:

"This is an unusual application in that it comes on the eve of the trial and does not concern an already identified need for urgent medical treatment. However in weighing the various objections, I consider it more likely that the applicant will attend, and that he will not delay the start of that trial: section 17(2) Bail Act. Because of the view I take on attendance some relaxation of the conditions set can be allowed. Applications based on these grounds may not always succeed however."

[13] Whilst the need to secure the accused’s attendance at hearings is a paramount consideration in this kind of application, the purpose of the overseas visit, the length of time the accused will be abroad and the inconvenience caused to the administration of justice are equally relevant factors for consideration.

[14] The reason advanced by the applicant for the overseas trips is to raise funds to pay for his legal costs. I do not find the applicant to be a flight risk. He has always surrendered to the jurisdiction of the courts since he was charged. However, I am not satisfied that the applicant has shown a good cause to travel overseas. The applicant has led no evidence of any details of his legal expenses. Neither the applicant has made any point that he has no other means to pay for his legal expenses than to travel overseas and raise funds, nor has he made a case that he would be prejudiced in any manner whatsoever if he is not allowed to travel abroad.

[15] The trial is pending before the court. It is in the applicant’s interests that the trial is heard without unnecessary delay and that the applicant remains in this jurisdiction pending his trial.

[16] I hold that the bail condition restricting the applicant to travel overseas is not an unreasonable restriction on his right to liberty. In absence of showing good cause to travel overseas, the application is refused.

[17] Further, I make an order that if the applicant visits his island of Vanuabalavu, he notifies of his departure and return to both his counsel and FICAC.

Daniel Goundar
JUDGE

At Suva
22nd July 2009

Solicitors:
Messrs. Q.B. Bale & Associates for Applicant
Office of the Commissioner for FICAC for Respondent

<<Previous

Forward>>