Radio NZ international reported the leader of Fiji's SODELPA party, Ro Teimumu Kepa, saying that the party will follow through with its call for a parliamentary inquiry into the election but it also wants to find out where it went wrong.
Ro Teimumu told Sally Round the party wants to know why about 40 percent of indigenous Fijians, seen as Sodelpa's support base, went for FijiFirst. Really?
HELLO?! didn't SODELPA realise they were dealing with a corrupt, lying, dictator, who is running from the law so he will do and say anything to ensure that he remains in power and out of prison! This includes fraud, torture, lies, murder and intimidation and vote buying using taxpayer funds he was not allowed to use. That's ONE reason! Another reason is that the party had no alternative vision for a better united and more fair Fiji post Bainimarama's dictatorship!
In 2006 the party [then SDL] was democratically elected and in power with full access to all the key resources - yet it still failed to deal effectively with a bully who overthrew the government in a coup. Then in 2014, the party failed to accept the reality of the dirty politics being conducted by the junta and opted for a placid approach believing that simple democracy would set them free! Didn't happen! Its clear the vote was rigged so democracy failed the party again!!
Democracy failed the party and the nation, twice, in 2006 and again in 2014. But still the party shows no signs of having any constructive and effective game-plan to deal with the situation in Fiji and to lead the people to better world post dictatorship.
Yet some ardent party supporters claim that loosing the election was a blessing! How the hell is this a blessing?! They claim that by losing the election the party will now be able to reveal the junta's lies in parliament using the democratic process. How bloody naive!
If SODELPA had won and were in government then they would be in a far better position to reveal the truth about Bainimarama's corruption and dirty deals undertaken by Khaiyum. BUT as the opposition, the party can only ask questions, if they will be even allowed to. As the opposition the party has no teeth, with its 15 seats minority, to stop any new controversial legislation that may be introduced to either conceal or legalise any of the corrupt deals and activities and fraud being undertaken by the Bainimarama dictatorship. Already, no one can take the junta to court! Any information the party receives in parliament will be a sanitised version.
The Bainimarama dictatorship now has the "legal" means, thanks to the corrupt and deceitful MOG, to do whatever it wants. The dictatorship has been doing it illegally for the past eight years. Its not going to be any better now, with their 32 seat majority they can do as they please - albeit via a rigged elections endorsed by the corrupt and deceitful Multinational Observer Group led by New Zealand!
Yes democracy was Double-Crossed in Fiji's 2014 elections by deceitful actors! But what is also evident is that the SODELPA party lacked an effective strategy and tactics and proper advisers to overcome Fiji's now perceived "legal", but still illegal, dictatorship. Source: http://www.truthforfiji.com/
Ro Teimumu told Sally Round the party wants to know why about 40 percent of indigenous Fijians, seen as Sodelpa's support base, went for FijiFirst. Really?
HELLO?! didn't SODELPA realise they were dealing with a corrupt, lying, dictator, who is running from the law so he will do and say anything to ensure that he remains in power and out of prison! This includes fraud, torture, lies, murder and intimidation and vote buying using taxpayer funds he was not allowed to use. That's ONE reason! Another reason is that the party had no alternative vision for a better united and more fair Fiji post Bainimarama's dictatorship!
In 2006 the party [then SDL] was democratically elected and in power with full access to all the key resources - yet it still failed to deal effectively with a bully who overthrew the government in a coup. Then in 2014, the party failed to accept the reality of the dirty politics being conducted by the junta and opted for a placid approach believing that simple democracy would set them free! Didn't happen! Its clear the vote was rigged so democracy failed the party again!!
Democracy failed the party and the nation, twice, in 2006 and again in 2014. But still the party shows no signs of having any constructive and effective game-plan to deal with the situation in Fiji and to lead the people to better world post dictatorship.
Yet some ardent party supporters claim that loosing the election was a blessing! How the hell is this a blessing?! They claim that by losing the election the party will now be able to reveal the junta's lies in parliament using the democratic process. How bloody naive!
If SODELPA had won and were in government then they would be in a far better position to reveal the truth about Bainimarama's corruption and dirty deals undertaken by Khaiyum. BUT as the opposition, the party can only ask questions, if they will be even allowed to. As the opposition the party has no teeth, with its 15 seats minority, to stop any new controversial legislation that may be introduced to either conceal or legalise any of the corrupt deals and activities and fraud being undertaken by the Bainimarama dictatorship. Already, no one can take the junta to court! Any information the party receives in parliament will be a sanitised version.
The Bainimarama dictatorship now has the "legal" means, thanks to the corrupt and deceitful MOG, to do whatever it wants. The dictatorship has been doing it illegally for the past eight years. Its not going to be any better now, with their 32 seat majority they can do as they please - albeit via a rigged elections endorsed by the corrupt and deceitful Multinational Observer Group led by New Zealand!
Yes democracy was Double-Crossed in Fiji's 2014 elections by deceitful actors! But what is also evident is that the SODELPA party lacked an effective strategy and tactics and proper advisers to overcome Fiji's now perceived "legal", but still illegal, dictatorship. Source: http://www.truthforfiji.com/
From the Archives:
Fiji Labour Party needs leadership CHANGE!
By Victor Lal
Fiji Sun, August 2006
In another country, the Leader of the Opposition after loosing a parliamentary election for the second time in his political career might have gracefully stepped down. Even if the leader lost with a razor-thin minority, it is never prudent for him to cling on to the leadership. Such a practice is disdainfully frowned upon in most democratic systems, except in Africa, where dictatorial leaders hold on to party leadership in the hope of capturing power at the next election.
On the other hand, if the twice-defeated party leader in a western-style democracy refuses to relinquish control, he is humiliatingly forced out of the Opposition office through a ‘palace coup’ by one or some of his colleagues, supporters, or by a potential challenger.
Why should the Fiji Labor Party change its leader? Firstly, Mahendra Pal Chaudhry had his chance in 2001, and now again in the 2006 general election, to wrest political control of the nation from the Laisenia Qarase-led SDL party, but has failed. This should be sufficient ground for him to take a parliamentary back seat, and let another Fiji Labor Party parliamentarian take the helm. As his deputy Poseci Bune indicated during the campaign, there are parliamentarians in the party who have the clout and the experience to even become Prime Minister.
Secondly, I still believe that it was a strategic blunder on the part of Mr. Chaudhry to have boycotted Parliament for a long spell over the issue of the allocation of Cabinet portfolios following the 2001 elections. After all, his new found coalition partner Mick Beddoes, had stepped in and did a sterling job as Opposition leader. Mr. Chaudhry’s entire political posture on the land issue, despite his genuine concern for the Indo-Fijian tenant farmers, was a potential vote loser among the Fijian voters.
It would be no exaggeration to suggest that its Coalition partner [Party of National Unity] PANU felt the full brunt of the Fiji Labor Party’s posturing on the land question at the ballot box. The SDL was able to privately persuade the Fijian voters that PANU would not hesitate to ‘sell’ the landowners in a post Chaudhry-led government. What other explanation can be put forward to explain why PANU was trounced in its own backyard in Ba and other western constituencies? Cynics will attribute it to the politics of preference sharing and the electoral system.
Thirdly, despite being frequently described as a wily and cunning old political fox and one of the shrewdest of political operators in the country, I think Mr. Chaudhry miserably failed to take the Fijian pulse and gauge the political tempo of the 2006 election. I was surprised that, having secured the Indo-Fijian communal seats through last-minute deals with the National Federation Party, he again popped up in the midst of electioneering to explain the alleged frauds and malpractices in terms of race i.e. that there was a sinister plot to disenfranchise the Indo-Fijian voters.
In the minds of many Fijian voters, he stamped an image of being a closet ‘Indo-Fijian nationalist and racist’, a charge that was frequently hurled at his political opponent and rival, Mr. Qarase. In view of the dramatic shift in population where Fijians are now a majority race in the country, it is very important for any non-Fijian political leader to pitch at the Fijian voters, even if it means ‘betraying’ a part of the Indo-Fijian constituents. Elections, after all, are about winning, and Mr. Qarase played his cards very cleverly and strategically.
For example, once he forcefully made the point that Fiji was still not ready for an Indo-Fijian Prime Minister, his view, even if it was construed as racist, was relegated to the political backburner. Mr. Chaudhry did not have the same fall back opportunity. He still needed the Fijian voters to make up the winning numbers. These are just some of the reasons why I personally think it is time for Mr. Chaudhry to honorably relinquish the party leadership.
And if he refuses to go, well, it is up to those parliamentarians with clout and experience to become the next Prime Minister to come out of his political shadow. Leaders and supporters come and go but the party has a life of its own. There is nothing stopping Mr Chaudhry from becoming the elder statesman of the party that he helped found in 1985 with many visionary and multi-racialist Fijians. The Fiji Labour Party blunderingly placed all its political eggs in one basket: it calculated that if it won at least 30 seats, and PANU and UPP their share of seats, it would go on to form the next government.
It was also hoping that the leader of the National Alliance Party, Ratu Epeli Ganilau, was going to win his seat until the NFP disclosed its preference against the paramount chief. It also seems likely that the Fiji Labor Party had expected that Commodore Frank Bainimarama’s frightening and threatening statements might just persuade a sufficient number of Fijian voters to swing the results in the Fiji Labor Party-UPP-PANU’s favour.
I had thought otherwise, that the Commodore’s intervention in politics would backfire on the Fiji Labor Party.
Why does the Fiji Labor Party need a new leader? There are other indisputable reasons. This was the last general election where race really mattered. In 2011 the Fijians will be the majority of the voters, and fully groomed in democratic politics. For this reason, the Fiji Labour Party will have to broaden its outlook, and cannot rely on Indo-Fijian voters in the Open seats to win future elections.
It will need a leader who has a ‘clean slate’ and preferably speaks the Fijian language (there are many Indo-Fijian parliamentarians who are fluent in Fijian). It must also stop clinging to the politics of land to win votes.
When his own political obituary is written one day, Mr Chaudhry’s Fijian political rivals will sorely miss him: his towering and controversial presence on the political stage has so far welded the taukei Fijians into one political unit. His presence has suppressed the politics of tribalism and regionalism so rampant on the continent of Africa, where their own ‘Chief Lutunasobasobas’, after expelling or marginalising the Asians (Indians) in their midst, are tearing their countries apart as they vie for political, economic, and military supremacy.
The Fiji Labor Party needs a complete political makeover if it is to win the next general election. (Edited Version, from Fiji Sun, August 2006)
Fijileaks Editor: When this article was written in 2006, no one in Fiji knew that Chaudhry was hiding $2million in his Sydney bank account. It was not until he became Interim Finance Minister in Bainimarama government in 2008 when Victor Lal exposed the secret $2million. In 2014 election, the voters saw FLP was still led by Chauhdry, by now a convicted tax dodger.
On the other hand, if the twice-defeated party leader in a western-style democracy refuses to relinquish control, he is humiliatingly forced out of the Opposition office through a ‘palace coup’ by one or some of his colleagues, supporters, or by a potential challenger.
Why should the Fiji Labor Party change its leader? Firstly, Mahendra Pal Chaudhry had his chance in 2001, and now again in the 2006 general election, to wrest political control of the nation from the Laisenia Qarase-led SDL party, but has failed. This should be sufficient ground for him to take a parliamentary back seat, and let another Fiji Labor Party parliamentarian take the helm. As his deputy Poseci Bune indicated during the campaign, there are parliamentarians in the party who have the clout and the experience to even become Prime Minister.
Secondly, I still believe that it was a strategic blunder on the part of Mr. Chaudhry to have boycotted Parliament for a long spell over the issue of the allocation of Cabinet portfolios following the 2001 elections. After all, his new found coalition partner Mick Beddoes, had stepped in and did a sterling job as Opposition leader. Mr. Chaudhry’s entire political posture on the land issue, despite his genuine concern for the Indo-Fijian tenant farmers, was a potential vote loser among the Fijian voters.
It would be no exaggeration to suggest that its Coalition partner [Party of National Unity] PANU felt the full brunt of the Fiji Labor Party’s posturing on the land question at the ballot box. The SDL was able to privately persuade the Fijian voters that PANU would not hesitate to ‘sell’ the landowners in a post Chaudhry-led government. What other explanation can be put forward to explain why PANU was trounced in its own backyard in Ba and other western constituencies? Cynics will attribute it to the politics of preference sharing and the electoral system.
Thirdly, despite being frequently described as a wily and cunning old political fox and one of the shrewdest of political operators in the country, I think Mr. Chaudhry miserably failed to take the Fijian pulse and gauge the political tempo of the 2006 election. I was surprised that, having secured the Indo-Fijian communal seats through last-minute deals with the National Federation Party, he again popped up in the midst of electioneering to explain the alleged frauds and malpractices in terms of race i.e. that there was a sinister plot to disenfranchise the Indo-Fijian voters.
In the minds of many Fijian voters, he stamped an image of being a closet ‘Indo-Fijian nationalist and racist’, a charge that was frequently hurled at his political opponent and rival, Mr. Qarase. In view of the dramatic shift in population where Fijians are now a majority race in the country, it is very important for any non-Fijian political leader to pitch at the Fijian voters, even if it means ‘betraying’ a part of the Indo-Fijian constituents. Elections, after all, are about winning, and Mr. Qarase played his cards very cleverly and strategically.
For example, once he forcefully made the point that Fiji was still not ready for an Indo-Fijian Prime Minister, his view, even if it was construed as racist, was relegated to the political backburner. Mr. Chaudhry did not have the same fall back opportunity. He still needed the Fijian voters to make up the winning numbers. These are just some of the reasons why I personally think it is time for Mr. Chaudhry to honorably relinquish the party leadership.
And if he refuses to go, well, it is up to those parliamentarians with clout and experience to become the next Prime Minister to come out of his political shadow. Leaders and supporters come and go but the party has a life of its own. There is nothing stopping Mr Chaudhry from becoming the elder statesman of the party that he helped found in 1985 with many visionary and multi-racialist Fijians. The Fiji Labour Party blunderingly placed all its political eggs in one basket: it calculated that if it won at least 30 seats, and PANU and UPP their share of seats, it would go on to form the next government.
It was also hoping that the leader of the National Alliance Party, Ratu Epeli Ganilau, was going to win his seat until the NFP disclosed its preference against the paramount chief. It also seems likely that the Fiji Labor Party had expected that Commodore Frank Bainimarama’s frightening and threatening statements might just persuade a sufficient number of Fijian voters to swing the results in the Fiji Labor Party-UPP-PANU’s favour.
I had thought otherwise, that the Commodore’s intervention in politics would backfire on the Fiji Labor Party.
Why does the Fiji Labor Party need a new leader? There are other indisputable reasons. This was the last general election where race really mattered. In 2011 the Fijians will be the majority of the voters, and fully groomed in democratic politics. For this reason, the Fiji Labour Party will have to broaden its outlook, and cannot rely on Indo-Fijian voters in the Open seats to win future elections.
It will need a leader who has a ‘clean slate’ and preferably speaks the Fijian language (there are many Indo-Fijian parliamentarians who are fluent in Fijian). It must also stop clinging to the politics of land to win votes.
When his own political obituary is written one day, Mr Chaudhry’s Fijian political rivals will sorely miss him: his towering and controversial presence on the political stage has so far welded the taukei Fijians into one political unit. His presence has suppressed the politics of tribalism and regionalism so rampant on the continent of Africa, where their own ‘Chief Lutunasobasobas’, after expelling or marginalising the Asians (Indians) in their midst, are tearing their countries apart as they vie for political, economic, and military supremacy.
The Fiji Labor Party needs a complete political makeover if it is to win the next general election. (Edited Version, from Fiji Sun, August 2006)
Fijileaks Editor: When this article was written in 2006, no one in Fiji knew that Chaudhry was hiding $2million in his Sydney bank account. It was not until he became Interim Finance Minister in Bainimarama government in 2008 when Victor Lal exposed the secret $2million. In 2014 election, the voters saw FLP was still led by Chauhdry, by now a convicted tax dodger.
COVER UP: Ironically, Frank Bainimarama as Interim Prime Minister had refused to sack Chaudhry as Finance Minister, and instead accused Victor Lal of trying to divide the Military Council in order to bring down his regime in 2008; Will he employ the same ostrich-like mentality to defend FFP Ministers?
Anit Singh The Ultimate TRUTH - from the (first) Fiji First Party, has just posted a comment on your blog post, REALITY CHECK: TruthforFiji tells it straight to SODELPA, HELLO?
Yes Victor, Chaudhary should have heeded your advise in 2006 - just as he should have heeded the desperate pleas of the Girmit Center refugees for some ‘rice and dhal’ in 2000. All our desperate cries and pleas for HELP fell on deaf ears of Chaudhary – because Chaudhary wanted ALL of the money for HIMSELF and his family. A Self-fish Man. A Self-fish Leader. Chaudhary is an embarrassment to our Community and to our Country. Chaudhary’s Me…,Me…,Me…. Mine…Mine…Mine… Monotone is what has brought about Chaudhary’s doom! And then – with what idiocy Chaudhary joined the thug Bainimarama in 2006.
Even the RACIST Qarase and the SDL shamelessly ‘STOLE’ the ‘allocated refugee compensation funds’ –for vote-buying and RIGGING their elections in 2000 and 2006. The SDL were CHORS! These were the same, shameless lot, now calling themselves SODELPA in 2014 and refusing to acknowledge their historical misdeeds -CHORS.
We (refugees) acknowledge with a lots of pleasure (and pride) the investigative journalism of VICTOR LAL – who exposed Chaudhary’s CHORI – after 14 long years – justice at last was done to the REFUGEES.
But the Irony of all Ironies – and not learning (or caring) about lessons from history - Comes Aiyaz and Bainimarama ruthlessly and shamelessly STEALING from the Refugees’ -Refugees’ “Intellectual Property”, – their political party platform ; ‘FIJI FIRST PARTY’.
So in the final analysis - what is the Difference between Chaudhary, Qarase, Aiyaz and Bainimarama? To me (and us) as simple logic dictates and with EVIDENCE they are ALL CHORS.
So they should listen to my/our ‘nara’ (repetitive poetic justice) of:- Bainimarama CHOR!, Qarase CHOR! , Aiyaz CHOR!, Chaudhary CHOR!,
Saab Sala CHOR!
Anit Singh – (First) Fiji First Party!
Yes Victor, Chaudhary should have heeded your advise in 2006 - just as he should have heeded the desperate pleas of the Girmit Center refugees for some ‘rice and dhal’ in 2000. All our desperate cries and pleas for HELP fell on deaf ears of Chaudhary – because Chaudhary wanted ALL of the money for HIMSELF and his family. A Self-fish Man. A Self-fish Leader. Chaudhary is an embarrassment to our Community and to our Country. Chaudhary’s Me…,Me…,Me…. Mine…Mine…Mine… Monotone is what has brought about Chaudhary’s doom! And then – with what idiocy Chaudhary joined the thug Bainimarama in 2006.
Even the RACIST Qarase and the SDL shamelessly ‘STOLE’ the ‘allocated refugee compensation funds’ –for vote-buying and RIGGING their elections in 2000 and 2006. The SDL were CHORS! These were the same, shameless lot, now calling themselves SODELPA in 2014 and refusing to acknowledge their historical misdeeds -CHORS.
We (refugees) acknowledge with a lots of pleasure (and pride) the investigative journalism of VICTOR LAL – who exposed Chaudhary’s CHORI – after 14 long years – justice at last was done to the REFUGEES.
But the Irony of all Ironies – and not learning (or caring) about lessons from history - Comes Aiyaz and Bainimarama ruthlessly and shamelessly STEALING from the Refugees’ -Refugees’ “Intellectual Property”, – their political party platform ; ‘FIJI FIRST PARTY’.
So in the final analysis - what is the Difference between Chaudhary, Qarase, Aiyaz and Bainimarama? To me (and us) as simple logic dictates and with EVIDENCE they are ALL CHORS.
So they should listen to my/our ‘nara’ (repetitive poetic justice) of:- Bainimarama CHOR!, Qarase CHOR! , Aiyaz CHOR!, Chaudhary CHOR!,
Saab Sala CHOR!
Anit Singh – (First) Fiji First Party!
