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

By RUSSELL HUNTER
ELECTION 2014? Dream on, Fiji

Those in Fiji patiently awaiting their chance to vote out the Bainimarama dictatorship – and there are very many – are dreaming.

For there will be no general election in 2014 or any other year – at least not one that the non-China world might recognise as being worthy of the name. Already we see the strategy emerging. The registered political parties, in their advised view, met with the requirements of the Khaiyum Decree in that they have declared their personal assets and those of their children – that is, those under the age of 18. Here it seems that Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, not for the first time, has stuffed up the decree, but that should be no incentive for glee among the party faithful. For Khaiyum still holds all the cards. Another correcting decree is not out of the question. Nor is an investigation by the regime-controlled military-police-courts apparatus to eliminate party officials and activists on trumped up charges.


For if – read when – Bainimarama can jail or otherwise dismantle all opposition, what need is there for an election? In an echo of the People’s Charter (whatever happened to that?) he would declare himself accepted by the people and carry on business as usual.

He will not and cannot sanction any election that contains the remotest risk of his defeat. He might as well offer to swap places with George Speight.  Remember, there is still a warrant for his arrest on sedition charges and any independent police force will still want to interview him as their primary person of interest in the November 2000 CRW murders.

A bald statement of his acceptance by the people, then, seems the most likely outcome though a rigged election is still possible.  For Bainimarama must know by now that he cannot win in any free and fair – in the internationally accepted sense – gauge of the populace’s will. Of course they’ll smile at his village visits, accept his handouts and praise his “achievements”. But they will not vote for him in a secret ballot.

For they know his record – and he knows theirs. Bainimarama famously stated that he did not trust the people and he can hardly complain if he finds that the people reciprocate. To them, his word is worthless. He is still in their eyes the man who made so many bold promises in his broadcast takeover address of December 5, 2006. He solemnly pledged an election in six months, that no minister in his interim government would stand, that racism would end, that government borrowing would be reined in and, of course, that no member of the RFMF would benefit from this coup. He has reneged – spectacularly so – on every one. He has slashed pensions and at the same time looted the nation’s savings for his very dubious schemes. He has alienated the Methodist Church, the mainstream chiefs, even larger sections of his own military. It would be a grave error to imagine that villagers are not aware of this.

Meanwhile the dictator has no party. He hasn’t even the basis for one. For while the military will not have a bar of Khaiyum its leader would find it near impossible to dump him. And despite all the pious promises the electorate is probably more racially divided than ever. Where, then, is Bainimarama’s party coming from?

And Bainimarama’s political record is, to put it mildly, poor. On the day he is dislodged from power, the dictator is likely to face charges that include his laughingly titled Truth and Justice drive during the 2006 election campaign under which batches of soldiers were ordered out into the villages to blatantly campaign against the sitting government and urge villagers to cast their votes instead for a new party. It failed to return a solitary member and its leader lost his deposit, turning up later as the minister for deportations before he discovered some conscience and quit Bainimarama’s illegal regime.


What’s more, it’s certain that in 2006 even his own squaddies declined to vote the way he ordered them to.
Certainly none voted for his favoured party while overseas voting patterns strongly indicate the soldiers’ support for the SDL. Since then, of course, the troops have enjoyed generous pay rises but Fiji will probably never know if it’s enough to buy their votes.

Bainimarama has thumbed his nose at the international community, the European Union, the Commonwealth, the IMF and the world’s labour unions. He thinks he is using the Pacific Forum, especially its Melanesian Spearhead Group, but is in fact used by them while at home his frequent travels, often with a large retinue of family and hangers-on, as well as his constant need for a heavily armed bodyguard team  are subjects of much tanoa talk.

But it will take more than talk to dislodge Bainimarama.

“It’s the economy stupid” has become a clichéd quotation but in Bainimarama’s case it’s one to which he ought to pay close attention. For it is more likely than any talk of election to cause his downfall. He’s going to run out of money.

Under Bainimarama’s ministership, the sugar industry is in its death throes. The Fiji Sugar Corporation is all but insolvent, depending on the regime for its day to day survival. The $80 a tonne payout will barely keep farmers on the land and even that would have had to be borrowed, most likely from the long suffering FNPF though in the presence of yet another broken pledge – transparency – it’s not possible to be certain. What is sure is that the FSC didn’t have the money. Again under the Bainimarama ministry sugar production has halved. Buyers are turning away and part of last year’s production is still unsold. Propaganda will not save the sugar industry.

But Bainimarama’s performance as finance minister is if anything worse.  His pledge to slash government borrowing has become a subject of gallows humour as government debt has ballooned in an orgy of borrowing – mostly from China – to fund his ramshackle regime and to keep the squaddies loyal. Again, in the new “transparent” Fiji it’s impossible to be certain of government liabilities but there seems little doubt that state debt as well guarantees of loans by government entities has tripled since 2006. Estimates vary between $5.5 billion and $7+ billion – but even the lower end of the range is a chilling indictment of Bainimarama’s mishandling of a national economy cruelly exposed to world economic conditions. Any downturn will hammer Fiji while an upturn will take time to assist, in however small a way, its import-dominated economy. Meanwhile China seems to have lost much of its appetite for Fiji debt while the new regime seems more likely to place its relationship with Australia much higher than its interest in Fiji.

Fiji’s economy is also exposed to action by the world labour movement – action that draws closer by the day. Any concerted effort would mean disaster for Bainimarama and blaming it all on Australia won’t help him.  He is in effect cornered if that happens. He can’t go back on the trade union decrees and he can’t survive a prolonged effort by the world’s labour organisations. Quite what he or world labour will do remains to be seen.

He’s been praying, of course for a change of government in Australia, and his prayers will be answered in September when the Labour government of Julia Gillard (or possibly Kevin Rudd) is removed. But that’s probably as far as it will go. The most likely new foreign minister, Julie Bishop, has talked of re-engagement with Fiji (just as Bob Carr tried to to) but there is as yet no evidence of any intention to overturn policy. And that’s because the very existence of the Bainimarama regime flies in the face of what most Australians, Labour or Liberal, hold dear – democracy, human rights and a fair go for all. Ms Bishop will find it difficult to sell any policy that goes against those group feelings. Indeed she may find it more practical to steer well clear of the issue.

For all of those reasons and more 2014 will be a stern test for Voreqe Bainimarama. While his almost certain failure of that test won’t end his regime it will further erode his standing at home and abroad. And with his bag of political capital all but empty he can’t afford that.

russellfji@gmail.com


By PROFESSOR BIMAN PRASAD
The Decline of Sanatan Dharam Pratinidhi Sabha of Fiji

Picture
"I attended the Easter weekend convention of the Sanatan Dharam Pratinidhi Sabha of Fiji since I wanted to support the Dreketi soccer team which was formed by the younger players living in Suva. I was impressed with the energy of the players and their enthusiasm towards community participation. While attending the soccer tournament, I had the opportunity to sit through the opening ceremony of the convention at the Shreedhar Maharaj College, in Nausori. A school named after a great Sanatani, moral and ethical community and religious leader and a businessman, the late Mr. Shreedhar Maharaj. The opening ceremony had a total of approximately 300 people who had congregated in the leaking and soggy shed; most of those who attended were women who had travelled from different districts to attend the convention. In fact, more people are usually present during individual Ramayan mandali gatherings around the country and in temples than the numbers that were present at the annual convention.
The presidential speech by Mr. Dewan Chand Maharaj was more like a talk given by some local community leader to primary school students on unity, HIV and how Sanatani’s should always promote unity and how women should behave in society. He even, wrongly stated that the President of Fiji was Ratu Epeli Ganilau. The Chief Guest Indian High Commissioner brought some respect back to the occasion by his very clear, concise and excellent speech about the role of Sanatani’s in Fiji and how they could contribute to building a multiracial Fiji. I believe the poor planning failed to attract a decent crowd to the convention, a direct reflection of very poor and pathetic leadership. In fact the whole opening ceremony was a disgrace. I could not stop myself from reminiscing, the excellent leadership provided by people like Honourable Harish Sharma, Pt. Salik Ram Sharma and Mr. Surendra Kumar. Thousands of enthusiastic Sanatani’s used to attend the annual convention in the past.
The current leadership of the Sabha has put the whole organization to disrepute. One has to only compare ethical and professional leadership standards shown by other religious and cultural organizations in Fiji with what the Sanatan Dharam Pratinidhi Sabha is able to put up. It then does not take long to understand why so many Sanatani’s have been put off by the current leadership. Many are disillusioned with the organization and have shied away from participating in its activities. What you hear from the ramblings of Mr. Vijendra Prakash and Mr. Dewan Maharaj is lectures to the ordinary members on how they should behave and not question them.
In addition, no one questions their individual loyalty and support to the Bainimarama government. However, Mr. Vijendra Prakash and Mr. Dewan Maharaj have given statements and dragged the Sabha into the political arena by openly declaring that the Sabha supports the government’s 2013 draft constitution. This is nothing short of misrepresenting the views of the ordinary members. Nothing was discussed about the draft Constitution at the convention yet Mr. Vijendra Prakash and Mr. Dewan Maharaj have gone openly to the media declaring the Sabah’s support for the draft constitution.
In fact they have gone against the government’s often stated position that religious organizations should remain apolitical.

Picture
Outgoing president Dewan Maharaj (left) is led by his successor Sarju Prasad at the Sanatan celebrations at Wainibokasi, Nausori
The future of the Sanatan Dharam Prithinidhi Sabha looks grim. The organization led by Mr. Dewan Maharaj and his Secretary, Mr. Vijendra Prakash have managed to implement a new Constitution which has several undemocratic provisions. The election held on Sunday to elect the office bearers other than the President cannot be said to be fair and transparent. The General Secretary, Mr. Vijendra Prakash, who was contesting the election, was involved in the so called sorting/counting out of the votes. Where are the moral and ethical standards of these officials who preach publicly about moral and ethical standards?
To add insult to injury to all the Sanatani’s in Fiji, a man who is currently before the court for presenting false transfer documents to transfer a temple property belonging to Shree Sanatan Dharam Nasea
Ramayan Mandali to the Sanatan Dharam Pratinidhi Sabha of Fiji, has been elected National President.
If he was a person with principles, he should have stood aside and let one of the senior Vice Presidents like Mr. Ashok Balgovind to act as President until his court case is resolved.
The trustees of the organization must act now and ask all the national officials to stand aside until an independent investigation is carried out on all the activities of the Sabha, its elections, its finances, processes and procedures. If the investigation shows irregularities in any aspect of the organization, especially in the process of adopting the new Constitution of the Sabha, the finances and the conduct of the elections, the office bearers should all be asked to resign and a fresh election be called. In fact they should hand over the leadership to the Trustees, after the failed convention. This would have saved the Sabha from further disunity and fragmentation. The current leadership has presided over a most disunited organization since its inception. If the largest Hindu organisation in Fiji begins to put its leadership into the hands of a person who is currently before the court, and allows it to be run by unconstitutional, unethical and unclear means, it is unlikely to serve its members effectively."
Fijileaks Editor: The view expressed in this article does not reflect in anyway the view of Professor Prasad's employer, the University of the South Pacific.

By RUSSELL HUNTER
Burning the Bridges

Picture
Tourists landing at Nadi international airport this week will find nothing has changed if they’ve been there before while first time visitors can never fail to be impressed by the genuineness of the smiles and the heartfelt Bulas that come from deep within.

But much has altered in Fiji in the space of a few days. Bridges have been burned. Since the day last week when dictator Voreqe Bainimarama officially trashed the “people’s constitution” he claimed to have so earnestly wanted, his true intent is there for all who care to look. And plenty do.

This, remember, was to be a constitution prepared by the people for the people, with, naturally, a few clauses that were non-negotiable. It was to be a completely independent process, run by a group of untouchable commissioners – though that notion didn’t survive once the people’s intentions became clear.

So a new decree suddenly appeared announcing that the draft people’s constitution could not be seen by the people and the regime’s considerable propaganda machine was focused in a vitriolic campaign to discredit its author.

Another day, another law. It is no longer a criminal offence to read the Yash Ghai draft since the dictator and a toadying president eager to keep his job, his big house and his many perks and to hell with the suffering of the people, decreed it unworkable.

The real reason, as all of Fiji knows (though some refuse to admit it) is that Bainimarama and his cronies (including and especially the military) insist on a constitution that will entrench their control indefinitely. They see a Suharto-style state with the military the final arbiter of all things. Ten per cent is freely discussed. Already Fiji is possibly the most corrupt state in the region. Nepotism is rife, major contracts are let without the benefit of open tender, the people’s savings are routinely looted to support pet projects – the list could go on. What is clear is that the RFMF officer corps intends to get seriously rich at the cost of the people they are supposed to protect.


It’s worth remembering that the squaddies no longer swear an oath of allegiance to the nation – they pledge allegiance only to their leader.
And he has repaid them well but must keep on repaying.

But this is where the game has changed. Nobody outside the regime ever believed its propaganda but in the past most would shrug and get on with their lives as best they could. But the strength and unity of the submissions to the Ghai commission have shown them they are not alone. Far from  it – they now see that they comprise an overwhelming majority. Of the 7000 submissions how many supported the “non-negotiables”?

So far a few of the single-issue activists who clung to the dictator’s coat tails, having realised they were seen as no more than useful idiots, have let go. But there are signs that the process is accelerating. Former coup cheerleaders such as Penni Moore, Akuila Yabaki and Prue Rouse, for example, are beginning to make disapproving noises. Maybe they have sensed a changing wind, perhaps their consciences have caught up with them or maybe a combination of the two is driving them. But all landslides begin with the movement of a few. The regime, meanwhile, is clearly rattled. With a cowed media, all forms of dissent crushed by the military and a refusal to hear outside voices, the junta has long conducted a dialogue with itself to the point at which some had even begun to believe their own publicity. So the weight of submissions to the Ghai commission (transmitted daily to the Boss by a spy within) came as a shock.

Rattled, it is, but by no means beaten.  It still has the guns and the will to use them. The alternative of a life sentence would tend to focus the simplest of minds. And focus – in the form of leadership – is what the widespread opposition plainly lacks. And the military will be used to keep things that way.

But cracks are appearing in the strategy. The announcement that the preferred constitution will be drafted by the illegal attorney general has sent a wave of revulsion through the community where it is now widely accepted that the junta’s constitution – a charter for military dictatorship – was written long before the charade of the constitution-making process began.

And tomorrow’s decree on political parties is likely to be another error if, as it is thought it will, it outlaws the “old” political parties and leaders, none of whom have sufficiently widespread support to lead an effective opposition to the junta. The regime might have done better to leave them in place to divide the community.

But there’s another change taking place in Fiji. The reaction (or in some cases lack of one) among the metropolitan powers sends a clear message and it’s finally getting through. It is that outsiders will stand by or (as in the case of Australia and the US) conduct a careful survey of their shoes while Bainimarama and his thugs finally dismantle the few remnants of democratic rule that survive in Fiji.

The opposition will have to come from within. And that’s a chilling thought. 

By RUSSELL HUNTER
Krankie Frankie’s biggest stuff-up

Picture
IF the leak of the Draft Constitution - now widely read in Fiji and the region - is a disaster for the Bainimarama dictatorship, it’s double trouble for the illegal attorney general Aiyaz Sayed Khayum. For it was he who brought Professor Yash Ghai, his academic supervisor in the days when ASK prepared his now infamous thesis in Hong Kong. Clearly, Ghai’s role in the regime’s mind was to deliver the constitution Bainimarama wanted and ask no questions. Hence the non-negotiable elements.

But it got off to a bad start for the junta. Within days it was clear that there was no public appetite for the “non negotiable” element of immunity for the dictator and his cronies for the multiple crimes committed. Indeed, by seeking immunity, Bainimarama confessed to these crimes. So the people, who he famously does not trust, have his guilty plea while he does not have their approval for immunity. This was not in the script and his current attitude to ASK can only be guessed at while the feeling of the officer corps towards him is well known.

Most want him gone.


But what has been overlooked is the fact that the Constitution Commission process of taking written and verbal submissions from all corners of the land is the first reliable gauge of public opinion since December 2006. No wonder the dictator is throwing a hissy.

As is now internationally and domestically known, he has in his own peculiar style, sent in the heavies. The Yash Ghai Draft Constitution is to be suppressed. It cannot even be discussed. All available copies are seized and some even shredded and burned before the eyes of the document’s world respected creator, an act of breathtaking folly that is still reverberating around the globe. To put none too fine a point on it, the document and its fate represent Bainimarama’s – possibly ASK’s – biggest stuff-up among many.

Applying vinegar to the wound is the Khaiyum diktat that the Commission, having angered the dictator by hiring an “enemy” as consultant, must account for every cent of its spending – notwithstanding the facts that the regime refuses to account for its own spending (not least on its salaries) and that it did not contribute a cent to the commission. In yet another bullet in the foot, Khaiyum talked piously about the need for transparency in spending other people’s money!

It is now – thanks to Victor Lal and Fijileaks – a matter of record that the commission’s costs were picked up by Australia, New Zealand, the EU and the UK. Their reactions to the suppression of its report are not yet known. But the sad expectation is that all of them will be caught studying their shoes while Bainimarama continues to wave two fingers at them.

The reason is good old Uncle Sam. Washington, that steadfast defender of worldwide democracy, has never been squeamish about buddying up to tin pot dictators who regard torture as legitimate policy if it suits the State Department’s perceived interest. History offers no shortage of examples from the Shah of Persia to Augusto Pinochet to Saddam Hussein. The people who suffer most in America’s interest are rarely American.

In this case they are Fijian. Living standards will continue to fall and poverty will inexorably rise in Fiji while the Americans think that by sucking up to Frank – and insisting its allies do the same – will serve their interest in blunting China’s and India’s cheque book diplomacy advances in the region.

They don’t – or refuse to – see that China and India are already doing that job much better than Uncle Sam can. China offers loans to build monuments (using Chinese materials and labour) that host governments cannot maintain. India offers to “help” revive the sugar industry.

Nobody - with the apparent exception of the Americans – is fooled while the island governments are more than happy to play the China card to get what they want. And who can blame them?Meanwhile the Australian and New Zealand public and leadership are appallingly served by their domestic media whose fawning focus on the northern hemisphere tells us the cringe is far from dead. Fiji (and the region in general) is ignored unless there is a local angle. The exceptions are few but they include Radio Australia and Michel Field.

So the suppression and burning of the Ghai draft won’t go down well with Australia, NZ and the EU. But don’t expect a public angry reaction. For the White House won’t allow it.

Only perhaps two years ago, however, it might have. There is a school of thought, certainly in Australia, gaining traction that while Canberra (and Wellington) have been expected to do all the heavy diplomatic lifting, the people of Fiji have done nothing. Meanwhile, Pacific Forum leaders can’t see why Fiji should continue to be ostracised and excluded while its people support Frank. At least in the absence of any cohesive resistance, that’s how they see it. They’re mostly polite people, at least where international relations are concerned and while they detest the Bainimarama bluster they don’t see it as sufficient reason for exclusion.

Of course, as the submissions to the Constitution Commission have shown, they’re quite wrong about that. But until a leader of the Fijian people emerges, little will change. And should such a leader even look like emerging, the army will put the boot in at once. It’s Fiji’s conundrum.

As of Lal’s Christmas Day scoop, however, things have changed. And the interview by Bruce Hill of Radio Australia with Professor Ghai has added kero to the flames.

The genie is well and truly out of the bottle and even the combined (and considerable) efforts of Qorvis, Graham Davis and poor deluded Crosbie Walsh will not put it back. Bainimarama has been exposed as a cheat and a liar before – but the past four days take exposure to new heights.

That same exposure represents a unique political opportunity. It has at least the potential to be the beginning of the end for the criminal regime. But the political parties, it seems, can’t wait to squander the opportunity. Already there are mumblings about boycotting the dictator’s hand-picked assembly that will “consider” a draft constitution – almost certainly not Yash Ghai’s and almost certainly a version of that offered by the military – before delivering the document Bainimarama demands.

 Politics 101: Engage. Everyone who is or wants to be active in political life should apply to join the Constitution Assembly. That forces Bainimarama to publicly reject them in a glare of transparency he won’t like.  Those, if any, not rejected will know which draft is being considered and when it becomes clear (as it will) that the CA is being manipulated they can resign, paving the way for a parallel body that can discuss the real issues as expressed by the people to Prof Ghai.

Naturally the junta will use its goons to supress that also. But by then the world will be watching as the Australian and New Zealand media awake from their slumber and recognise the major story that’s happening on their doorstep.

We hope.

Warning signs on the road map

Picture
Picture

By Russell Hunter
Special Guest Contributor

Six years on from the treason of 2006, a couple of the community weeklies on Australia’s Gold Coast carry notices from charity groups seeking donations of bras for girls aged up to 14 in the Ba area. The same groups are appealing for clean bed linen to be donated to Suva’s Colonial War Memorial Hospital. The Fiji police force has run out of paper. Vital bridges have been closed as there is no money to render them safe. Sugar production has halved since 2006.

FNFP: Milking Cow for Regime Extravagances

A thousand road workers are to be sacked, 150 of whom may or may not be picked up by the Kiwi company brought in to fix the roads while a $70 million debt to Malaysia for the same purpose remains outstanding. The mahogany industry has been handed to an American company without tender and specifically excluding local sawmillers.The Chinese company hired to complete road and sewerage work has paid no FNPF contributions for five years.The regime will yet again raid the nation’s savings to fund its many extravagances.

The depressing news goes on but the point is that, as the sixth anniversary of the Bainimarama coup approaches, Fiji’s vital signs are rapidly moving from disappointing to alarming. The economy, despite repeated rosy predictions by regime-aligned bodies and individuals, has still to recover to its pre-treason level. Poverty is now likely to affect up to 60 per cent of the population, depending on whose account we accept, while government debt – the same government debt Bainimarama in his coup speech solemnly pledged to rein in - continues to climb.

The people of Fiji do not know how much they owe. And those debts have been incurred by one individual who had and has no right to do so. Foreign direct investment is 2 per cent of GDP according to the Asian Development Bank or 6 per cent according to an economist at the regime-friendly University of Fiji (using a slightly broader definition). Whichever figure one accepts, it’s a dismal performance and the minister responsible must shoulder the blame. Domestic investment is hard to gauge in the new secretive Fiji.

It is generally accepted that investment of 25 per cent of GDP is required for sustainable growth. To be fair, no post-independence government in Fiji has achieved such a figure though the elected People’s Coalition and SDL-led governments accepted that as a target and came reasonably close.

As if on cue, then, comes Bainimarama’s confident statement in his 2013 budget address that total investment is now running at 18 per cent of GDP. If true, this would be a great achievement after six years of flat figures. However, there are no details – other than Bainimarama’s word – to support such a figure and so it must remain, like the rest of the budget figures, in the realm of spin.

Where to with the Road Map?


Certainly the people of Fiji have yet to feel the benefit of any such investment. So where is the road map taking Fiji? Again the signs are far from encouraging. Vital services such as health and education continue to suffer in budget terms while the military – which has no other purpose than to keep its leader in office – continues to eat. Sure, there have been some token realignments in spending but a comparison of the last lawful budget in 2006 with the latest junta estimates of 2012 tell the whole sad story. For even though direct comparisons are difficult since the budget papers became, like so much else, secret the trend is readily identifiable.

Again, the minister responsible should be held accountable though the chances of that happening in the foreseeable future are probably zero.The price of dalo at the roadside or the market is some three times what it was in 2006. Pensions have been slashed for no known reason (the reports on which the cuts were predicated are secret and there’s little need to wonder why). Some over-70s now receive pensions - a positive move in a forest of negative signals.

Now the FNPF which has lost even a semblance of independence is to be raided again. This time it will purchase state assets overseas in the form of foreign missions and rent them back to the regime. But did the fund’s managers (far less its investment committee) have any say in this “agreement”? Who will decide what is market value for those properties? Who will decide what rent will be paid? Who decides what will happen in the event of a default? The people of Fiji know the answers to those questions and more.
Picture
Price of dalo has sky rocketled three-fold since the 2006 coup
The Bainimarama regime is, in effect,  the borrower and the lender through its control of the pension fund – a perilous situation for the owners of the money.There are similarities in the charade that is the constitution process. Echoing Henry Ford (you can have any colour you like as long as it’s black), the dictator has told the country to be part of the constitution-forming deliberation – but the final document will say what he wants it to say.

2014 Election no guarantee for better times

Will the 2014 elections – if held – be any different? Again the people of Fiji, on both sides of the debate, know the answer to that.  

Regionally the situation is no better. Fiji has lost, probably forever, its position as the non-metropolitan leader in the Pacific Islands Forum. Veteran (and former) PNG Prime Minister Sir Michael Somare was given to addressing his Fiji counterpart, the late Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara, as “papa”. Those days are gone. Today Fiji remains suspended from the forum (though some leaders are content to play the “Bainimarama card” in order to extract concessions elsewhere) and when reinstated will be relegated to minor player status while PNG in particular, with GDP growth rivalling that of China, takes a lead role.

This is not the profile of an election winner.

Here too we see the failure of the much-vaunted “journalism of hope” eagerly embraced by some (it makes the job so much easier for journalists and editors to publish or broadcast only what the regime wants them to) and forced on others.

But the outcome is a regime that reads, sees and hears only what it wants to. There is no national debate and, worse still, there are signs the junta has started to believe its own propaganda. If all the media praises it, it must be doing well, right? All the warning signs are put up by non-believers, racists, foreign agents and other losers. Aren’t they?

Who will dare to disagree – in public at least?

So, again, where does this road lead? Bainimarama’s declared intention to eradicate racism in all its ugly forms (apart from in the military) continues to strike a chord with sections of the population but even they are beginning to hear the alarm bells.

They begin to see that this road ends at the gates of failed state status. That’s a country in which law and order has completely broken down, the currency made worthless by hyperinflation, business activity stagnant, shops looted, the public institutions inactive or powerless and survival of the fittest the only law.

Fiji, it must be said, is a very long way from that destination. But that’s where the road ends if the driver doesn’t execute a U-turn or at the very least take the next turn off.

He won’t because he can’t. But there will be a price to pay. What has been coughed up so far is little more than a down payment. For as the economy stagnates, so does the regime’s tax take – hence its ceaseless quest for cash. But the well is running dry.

Radical action – not propaganda - is now needed to restore Fiji’s social, political and economic well-being. The military regime cannot deliver it.

For it sees a future of well-being for itself under a dictator-for-life that needs it to survive. In the months leading up and after the coup, there was much and study and discussion among the officer corps of General Suharto’s dictatorial regime in Indonesia under which the military became the arbiter of national policy. The army owned or controlled much of the commercial life of the nation and under a heavy veil of secrecy and intimidation, corruption ran rampant. Even middle ranking officers became seriously wealthy.

Top military brass warming to South America dictatorship model

That still seems to be the broad thinking at the camp. But the intellectual model has migrated to South America in that a particular study of that region’s dictatorships is now favoured reading among the educated top brass.

This is the future they intend to impose on Fiji – an ordered society in which know their places and are given only the knowledge they need, a society in which the military sees all and rules all. George Orwell was but 35 years ahead of his time in Fiji’s case.

There’s no doubt that this vision for the future has some support in Fiji – apart from the military’s and Bainimarama’s self-interest. But absent the emergence of a cohesive, credible and peaceful resistance, that support level will never be tested.

E-mail: russellfji@gmail.com

One Man, One Law

By Russell Hunter

It’s hard not to have at least some sympathy for those who take the Dirty Harry (“Well, I’m all broken up about his rights”) view of the Naboro prison escapees and their fate at the hands of the military.

At least two were unable to appear before a magistrate in the required timeframe because they were being treated in hospital. When they did finally appear they were obviously the worse for wear. One  was on crutches, another had his foot amputated. All were kept away from civilian care and were attended to by military medical personnel.

The police/military said reasonable force had been necessary as the five had resisted arrest.

Magistrates abandon right to inquire law

But in a fully functioning magisterial system it might have been equally reasonable to expect the magistrate to inquire more fully and forcefully into why the accused could not be produced. Bedside hearings are not unheard of in such cases in order for the magistrate to satisfy his or herself that the law governing the treatment and production of prisoners was being adhered to.

The law in Fiji, however, is what one man says it is. And what he says may alter from day to day, even hour to hour, and no magistrate interested in remaining in employment is likely to rock that particular boat.

But so what? These guys were in prison for a reason. They broke out and therefore deserve everything they got, right?

Perhaps so – in the public eye at least. But courts that function under any accepted rule of law are required to take a different view. That’s because their primary function is to implement the law and safeguard the rights of all.

Justice v Revenge

It’s the difference between justice and revenge. It’s also the difference between the justice system and the executive. It is for the courts to administer justice in the cold light of day without rancour and after due consideration of all facts laid before them. The courts mete out punishment to wrongdoers, not the police and certainly not the military.

But these vitally important distinctions have been lost in Fiji as the courts, the police and military increasingly meld into a blurred but blunt instrument of control in the hands of one individual. Thus we continue to see the whole system used as a means to inflict ruin on those who have displeased that same individual.
Picture
Hobbling without right foot: captured prisoner Epeli Qaraniqio on way to Magistrates Court.

Favoured enjoy protection in Frank's Fiji


And while a conviction is desirable in such cases, the end can and has been achieved without one. Endless changes of pleadings, adjournments and delays are the stock in trade of the regime – with its access to public money - as it sets out to financially cripple with legal costs those it deems dangerous or even just deserving of punishment.

At the same time, of course, the favoured ones enjoy protection.

Frank Bainimarama has come a long way from his initial clean-up campaign that would end corruption, nepotism, government borrowing and the politics of race. All in fact now flourish as never before. As the letter writer put it when the newspapers were able to publish a range of opinion: “Well, he did say he’d clean up.


E-mail: russellfji@gmail.com

Tug of war between common and communal roll in Fiji: Back to future

By Dr Sanjay Ramesh

Picture
Dr Ramesh
The Prime Minister of Fiji, Voreqe Bainimarama, announced on 9 March 2012 that Fiji will hold consultations on the new constitution from May of this year and further announced the names of three Constitution Review Commission (CRC) members including constitutional expert Professor Yash Ghai who has been involved in supporting a non-communal and a non-ethnic constitutional outcome since the first military coup in Fiji in May 1987. The other CRC members are Professor Satendra Nanadan, the head of Literature and Language at the University of Fiji,Taufa Vakatale who served as a Minister in the Rabuka Government from 1993 to 1999, social activist Peni Moore and Professor Christina Murray of South Africa.

The response from the region has been cautious. Fiji was suspended from the Pacific Islands Forum in 2009 for failing to hold democratic elections and there has been a spate of tit for tat expulsions of diplomats from Fiji and Australia as Fiji managed to resist political pressure from Australia and New Zealand in securing the seat of the chair of the Melanesian Spearhead Group (MSG). Moreover, the Fiji Government has hosted "engaging with the Pacific Forum" with friendly Pacific Island States and in 2011 reiterated its roadmap for democracy under the Peoples' Charter.

The announcement on 9 March by the Commodore came at a time when the Commonwealth Deputy Secretary-General Mmasekgoa Masire-Mwamba was concluding her three-day visit where she met with senior government officials and with the members of the civil society and the international community. Also there were other important developments in Australia with former Premier of NSW. Bob Carr,  taking over the portfolio of the Minister of Foreign Affairs from former Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd who continued with the policy of the Howard Government of targeted sanctions. Initial indications are that Bob Carr may not change Australia's current position on Fiji.

Speaking to the ABC from Auckland on 9 March, Carr stated that "he wanted to further investigate claims that any union official in Fiji who speaks out against the interim government and  would hold further conversations on this with the Australian Council of Trade Union (ACTU)". New Zealand's Minister for Foreign Affairs was more upbeat than his Australian counterpart and told Radio New Zealand that the announcement from Suva was a "step in the right direction".

The change in policy direction for Australia towards Fiji is led by the Australian shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs Julie Bishop who since 2011 has called for constructive engagement with Fiji . Ms. Bishop is concerned that moves to isolate Fiji has pushed Fiji towards China and that Australia has lost its influence on sustaining a democratic culture in the country. 

Joining Julie Bishop is Jenny-Hayward Jones of the Lowy Institute of International Affairs who in a controversial poll by Caz Tebbutt concluded that Fiji's Prime Minister had a popularity of over 60 per cent.  In Fiji, the Citizens' Constutitonal Forum (CCF) supported constitution review and former Fijian Prime Ministers Laisenia Qarase and Mahendra Chaudhry anticipated playing a part but both expressed reservations regarding the future role of the military and the consultation process under the new Public Order Decree.

There are concerns that the strengthening of the Public Order laws may create fear among the populace and could undermine the consultation process. Reverend Tavita Banivanua, an executive on the Fiji Methodist Church Assembly, argued that the interim government has continued to undermine the Methodist Church by refusing the Church a permit to hold their annual conference. The Executive Director of Fiji's Women's Rights Movement, Virisila Buadromo, also raised concerns on the new decree  stating that it "grants wider unfettered powers to the police and the military". Two other Fijian activists, unionist Daniel Urai and former politician Mere Samisoni have expressed similar views.

According to the Fiji Government, members of the civil society have nothing to fear from the Public Order Decree and they can make full contribution to the constitution consultation process without fear. However, the Government of Fiji has warned those who may want to instigate rebellion against the Government or engage in activities that could potentially sabotage the roadmap for democratic elections by 2014.

In an interview by journalist Graham Davies for Sky News Australia on 4 March 2012, Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama argued that there were racist elements in the Methodist Church hierarchy who wanted a return to the old political order where the Church influenced state policies and further argued that some unionists had similar agenda and that he would not allow these forces to prevail.

The objective of the constitutional review exercise would be to ensure that the military supports the constitution and  instead of  the military being on a war path with past Fiji constitutions, the military would become the guardians of the new constitution, hence no need for further military coups.


Also, the review will end communal representation and provide only common roll so that there are no ethnic seats as was the past. The proportional voting system will allow minority Fijians to have a greater voice in parliament in government and it is envisaged that youths, especially those over eighteen, will be represented in the new parliament as well.

Beyond the rhetoric, there is a more potent ideological schema that underpins contemporary Indo-Fijian political discourse in Fiji. The push for common roll or what the regime calls "one person one vote". The campaign for common roll started with the formation of the Federation Party in the 1960. The Indo-Fijian political leaders believed that a common roll will evict communal politics which was the prevailing political discourse among Indigenous Fijians but late Ratu Mara chose to structure his Alliance Party of Fiji along the Malaysian political model of communal political bargaining among Indo-Fijians, Indigenous Fijians and the small but influential Europeans who later mutated to form the General Electors and General Voters. The problem with the Federation common roll model of the 1960s was that Indigenous Fijians were a minority and many Indigenous leaders including Mara himself saw the Indo-Fijian demands as an affront to Indigenous land.

Post-independence Fiji saw late Ratu Mara and his challenger late Siddiq Koya engage in vitriolic debate on common roll and the issue came head on five years after Great Britain declared Fiji independent . The Street Commission Report validated the National Federation Party claim on common roll but Mara was aware of deep distrust of common roll within the Indigenous Fijian community and "Pacific Way" which formed the political cornerstone of Mara's independent Fiji came crumbling down when one of his own ministers broke ranks and formed the Fijian Nationalist Party. up til his death in 2000, Sakeasi Butadroka remained notorious but much loved among the Indigenous nationalists  for his commitment to Indigenous nationalism- that Fiji belongs to Indigenous Fijians and Indo-Fijians if they choose to live in Fiji must do so on Indigenous Fijian terms or else "go back to India".

In 1987, late Butadroka challenged Mara and called him a "hypocrite" as Sitiveni Rabuba, the young soldier from Cakaudrove, interpreted the fears and aspirations of Indigenous Fijians by bowing to the extremist elements of the Methodist Church and imposing the Sunday Observance Decree and then moved to challenge his own Indigenous nationalist assumptions by instituting the Joint Parliamentary Committee on Constitution and spearheading constitution changes via the 1997 Constitution Amendment Bill which was vigorously challenged by the Fiji Labour Party and the Fijian Nationalist Party and other Indigenous nationalist off-shoots such as Vanua Tako Lavo Party of 2000 coup supporter Illisea Duvuloco, who joined the George Speight team in the 2000 coup.

Back in 1996, it was the Fiji Labour Party pushing for the common roll. The National Federation Party which claimed to represent the voice of Indo-Fijians argued that Fiji was "not ready for common roll" and as a result the leader of the party Jai Ram Reddy was ready to make a deal with the General Voters to get the draft constitution over the line. In fact, the Reddy compromise on communal seats for the General Voters cost the National Federation Party the 1999 election together with Reddy's cosy relationship with the SVT and the Great Council of Chiefs (GCC) which were seen by Indo-Fijians as an unelected despots.

The common roll remained permanently embedded in the collectively Indo-Fijian pysche but the SDL was not interested in the common roll debate but more focused on Indigenous communal interest of "Indigenous political paramountcy". As a result, the SDL promoted and implemented the "blueprint on Indigenous Supremacy" much to the displeasure of Indo-Fijians and as a result, attempts to fix the multiparty governance proved futile and conflict prone.

If one is interested in the genealogy of common roll then the most bizarre turn happened when the common roll lobby switched from National Federation Party to the Fiji Labour Party and then to the Republic of the Fiji Military Forces. The SDL never wanted common roll but the Military Council which was instrumental in removing the SDL government adopted common roll as one of its pillars under the Peoples' Charter.  The irony was that an Indigenous Fijian nationalist institution was challenging the foundations of Indigenous nationalist discourse based on communal roll.

While the Voereqe Bainimarama political discourse is fraught with contradictions, it has , nonetheless, exposed the tensions between the common roll and communal roll and the extra-discursive touch points as Indigenous views during the 2012 constitution review called for retention of communal representation, Christian State and "positive discrimination" whereas Indo-Fijians individuals, organisations and groups called for common roll, common name and a secular state.

The Government of Fiji has responded to the SDL, the FLP, the NFP and the UGP, describing their calls for a return to the 1997 Constitution as untenable and has reiterated that the 1997 Constitution is dead, buried or cremated. But what will happen to common roll remains a concern as both political ends of politics including the military continue with the tug of war.

Dr. Sanjay Ramesh, Associate Fellow, Centre for Peace and Conflict Studies University of Sydney.

E-mail: sanjay.ramesh@sydney.edu.au


Click to set custom HTML

By Russell Hunter

1: Truth is the first casualty

That well-worn cliché of truth being the first casualty in any conflict refuses to die. But in Fiji’s case, the truth probably accounts for much of the casualty list. The half-truths, selective truths and outright lies began in earnest on December 5, 2006 and show no sign of abatement.

From (then) Captain Neumi  Leweni  the day following the takeover (“we have definite proof of corruption in the SDL government and will reveal it next week”) to the illegal attorney general in September 2012 (“the media is free to report”) there has been an unending stream of propaganda aimed at persuading the people of Fiji that Bainimarama’s thuggish regime is in reality some kind of benign enforced government that has the interests of the people at heart – even  if the same people have to be told where their interests lie.

With the hiring of some expertise, local and overseas, it has even succeeded to an extent. But it has yet to persuade people that what they read, see and hear in the media is in any way representative of the unvarnished truth.

The regime’s efforts to propagate the myth that the media is free founder on one major obstacle – The Media Development Authority (which in the regime newspeak exists to control rather than develop).  Peopled by hand-picked regime appointees chosen for their reliability, like so many other regime-constructed bodies, it makes a mockery of its title.

2: Media ownership rich man's playground

The days of the rich man who owns a media property purely to support his core interests are numbered. The audience is maturing and increasingly sees through the facade. All over the world the media barons are on the wane. The Packers are gone. The Murdochs surely cannot last must longer. But even the barons saw – and in Murdoch’s case still see - the media as their primary or only arena of operations.

In Fiji, however, the media in large part is owned by very wealthy entities that cannot see why a small part of their empire should not be used to support and leverage advantage for the whole. The concept of independence is foreign.
Picture
Picture
Deported Fiji Sun publisher Russell Hunter: victim of repulsive racist Anthony Report
The Anthony Report
Picture
FLP pulls out of the bag the highly questionable Anthony Report commissioned by regime collaborator Shaista Shameem

FLP Submission: "We oppose the rigorous censorship of the Fiji Media that was imposed under Public Emergency Regulations and we call for the repeal of the Media Industry Development Decree No. 29 of 2010. Three years of rigorous media censorship has had a grim impact on the industry – it has severely retarded journalistic skills and professionalism, and has created a mentality of fear and self-censorship from which the Media has still not emerged. While we welcome the emergence of a free and healthy Media, we wish to see one that is, at the same time, responsible and accountable for its actions. We, therefore, recommend the setting up of an independent Media Tribunal to adjudicate on complaints relating to the Media. The Tribunal should be a retired judge or a person qualified to be appointed a judge. The appointment should be made by the President on the advice of the Constitutional Offices Commission following consultation with the Minister. It may be important to digress here a little to provide background information on why media controls were imposed in the first place. Certain elements in the Fiji media have had a history of political bias – the Fiji Times for instance, has long been known for its anti-Indian stance going back to the colonial days... Such overt media bias and lack of balanced, responsible reporting was also confirmed by an independent inquiry into the Freedom and Independence of the Fiji Media commissioned by the Fiji Human Rights Commission in 2007..."

Picture
Leweni - full of hot-air press conferences
Picture
Murdoch: media empire under stress
Picture
Packer: vanished empire
Picture
Mahendra Motibhai: bitter purchase
This and regime censorship has led to an upsurge in blogsites which, in turn, have not served their readerships much better than the regime-aligned newspapers and broadcasters. They cover (if that’s the word) one side of the story while berating, for example, the regime’s “independent” propaganda sheet and broadcast media – or supporting them depending on their own alignment.

Let’s hope this site, i it has an allegiance, will declare it openly while taking care to distinguish opinion from fact.

3: Parties will fight over to wrest control of Fiji media

Just don’t expect the political parties to respect that when the rule of law returns to Fiji. The SDL attempted to gain control of the media and would very likely try again if given the opportunity.

Enter the FLP, that bastion of media freedom. In its submission to the Constitution Commission it calls for the Freedom of Information Act to be introduced as mandated by the 1997 constitution. The SDL ignored the requirement but the FLP returns to it in its submission saying it believes in media freedom.

Yes, yes, so do we all. But we wait for the inevitable qualifier and are not disappointed. “However” – the word that follows political statements on media as night follows day – it must be “responsible”. To whom or what it is to be responsible we are not told but it’s not so difficult to guess. The FLP submission then sets off into the la-la land of its leader’s agenda to settle perceived old scores, citing “independent” studies that showed how the media had it in for the People’s Coalition government as evidenced by an “independent” report that was later hugely discredited – but of course there’s no mention of this.

4: The Laughable Anthony Report and FLP

The submission then sets off into the realm of high farce via the laughable James Anthony “report” into the media which the FLP claims was commissioned by the Fiji Human Rights Organisation. Of course it was not. The commissioners didn’t even know about it, as was well known at the time (2007). In fact it was cobbled together after several attempts to find a reliable “investigator” by then “human rights” director and former coup collaborator Dr Shaista Shameem who since fell out with the junta in general and the illegal attorney-general in particular and who now resides in Auckland.

Anthony’s repulsively racist “report” claimed to have found that the media was controlled by a cabal of white (of course) businessmen who decided what would and would not be published - the very situation that, apart from the race element, would have prevailed had the “report” been implemented.The Anthony Report was massively disproved, discredited and rejected by the media in total – but this rates no mention in the FLP submission.

Mahen has lost the plot on this one. Yet none of this should be allowed to obscure the need for a genuine freedom of information law and a sensible and truly independent media ombudsman. This isn’t as easy as it might sound. The arguments are too many and diverse to rehearse here but for now, when we see the word “minister” in any submission on media regulation, the alarm bells should ring. Yes, it’s in the FLP submission and will doubtless crop up in others to come. The politicians can’t get away from the conviction that if they could only force the media to say all is well, then it will be. The perception, in the view of the body politic, will always be more important than the reality. Just ask Julia Gillard who is trying to introduce her own brand of media “responsibility” in Australia.

Meanwhile, attempts to preserve the myth of media freedom in Fiji can only fail while journalists and editors are under threat of cruel penalties though the decree seems to be interpreted more liberally for “reliable” media organisations than for those suspected of harbouring  aspirations to editorial independence.

It’s all very well for junta sycophants and appointees to proclaim the media is free. They don’t have to face massive fines and jail terms - at least not yet.
E-mail: russellfji@gmail.com
See also Russell Hunter and Victor Lal "Three Big Losers in forced sale of Fiji Times "

Frank's boat is sinking but he will paddle to Ride Out the Waves

By Russell Hunter

Picture

Commodore Frank Bainimarama on December 5 2006 deposed a lawfully elected government by force of arms. This was, as he and his inner circle are well aware, nothing short of treason for which the penalty is life imprisonment. So he now seeks to be somehow spirited from the tiger’s back by a promise of elections in 2014 and the construction of yet another constitution.

Even though, he has two overarching difficulties.

Part of his much-touted exit strategy is to stand for election in 2014. But the many thousands of Fiji  Islanders who eagerly await their chance to remove him by means of the ballot box are doomed to disappointment. He has no intention of ceding power -not to them or anyone else.

His first problem, then, is that he has conditioned the people of Fiji (and the wider region) to doubt his word. In his takeover address of December 6, 2006 he made eleven clear pledges to the nation, none of which – not a single one – have been honoured. 
Picture
Too scared to throw early party for his oppressed citizens
Frank Bainimarama's Race Card: The Great Paradox

He  famously remarked “I don’t trust the people” - a sentiment now widely reciprocated. This does little for his election prospects and the harder headed elements among the military are well aware of it. The buffoonery of its public mouthpieces only partly conceals a well organized planning and intelligence function that is much closer to the reality of Fiji than the public statements would have us believe.

Bainimarama’s second highest hurdle is the perennial one of race. His promise to end racism and racial voting has gained deserved support among the commentariat.  And deservedly so. The harsh reality, however, is that the majority of the people he illegally governs do not agree – and not just the ethnic Fijian majority. It will take more than a few decrees to end the politics of race in Fiji.

The Fijians strongly feel – with at least some justification – that they are the ones called upon to make all the concessions to a highly identifiable mono-cultural immigrant block that declines to assimilate. Why should it? Its culture has served it well since long before the Bible was thought of. The landless Indo-Fijian  community – again with some justification – feel ostracised and unwanted in the land of their birth.

Multiculturalism has proved to be a power for good in Australian and New Zealand. In Fiji, however, there are only two cultures that for the most part stand back to back. This needs to end – but Bainimarama will not be the one to end it. It won’t be achieved by decree or by force, the only weapons left to the dictator as his past catches up with him

The military over which he has complete control still comprises some 99 per cent ethnic Fijians and Rotumans, though precise figures are no longer available in the new transparent Fiji. The language of the military is Fijian. In addition his actions against Fijian institutions, for example the Great Council of Chiefs and the Methodist Church, have engendered a seething resentment among the indigenous population – which now constitutes a clear majority, adding further difficulties for his election campaign.

Again, the military planners are well aware of this and have already produced an outline series of measures to build bridges to the ethnic Fijian population. Its effectiveness is yet to be gauged.

Sadly, too, the indigenous population increasingly regard the Bainimarama coup as an Indo-Fijian  plot or, worse still, as a Muslim takeover organised by Bainimarama’s “eminence grise”, the illegal attorney general and minister for many things, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum.  The theory that Bainimarama, the honest though gullible Christian Fijian, has been exploited by a devious Indo-Fijian  Muslim is gaining traction in Fiji.

Of course nothing could be further from the truth. As we now know – Bainimarama’s routine denial notwithstanding – the coup of 2006 was his fourth attempt and was driven as much by his urgent need  to stay out of jail as by any “clean-up” desire. The potential for racial and religious mayhem should be obvious. Yet the dictator has done nothing to defuse this ticking bomb.
Picture
Indigenous Fijians told to dance to Bainimarama's tune
Picture
Culturally apart: many Indo-Fijians are burning with desire for change
Picture
His army is predominantly native Fijian to the boot

Immunity, Mutiny and Murder Charges

At the same time, any new constitution will have to contain an amnesty for Bainimarama and his collaborators. The crimes of treason and torture to name but two will be forgiven. But can it credibly afford to offer amnesty for the five murders that followed the mutiny of November 2, 2000, investigation of which the commander has steadfastly stonewalled? If the overwhelming reaction as expressed in submissions to the constitution commission is any guide, it’s clear that the population is set against any immunity arrangement.

That won’t stop Bainimarama.  He can’t afford to let it. The betting in Suva seems to be that he’ll simply impose immunity much as he imposed the People’s Charter by the simple device of declaring that 90 per cent of the people supported it. Where is it now?

Bainimarama's Fiji an economic cot case

Picture
Wrapping himself in amnesty
Picture
Picture
Cold blood murders: CRW soldiers beaten to death
But Krankie Frankie is no longer in charter territory. An election is a quite different matter with secret voting, international observers and the desire of the people to make a statement regarding their futures. Governments (and prime ministers) offering themselves to the voters need to stand on their records. If that is so, Bainimarama is unelectable. His record stinks. As Minister of Finance he has transformed Fiji from being the powerhouse of the Pacific to an economic cot case. As Minister for Sugar he continues to preside over the death throes of an industry on which 200,000 people depend for their livelihoods.

As Minister for Fijian Affairs he has dismantled institutions, alienated the Methodist Church, and angered landholders. Yes, when he arrives in the villages boasting and glad handing, they’ll tell him what he wants to hear. Some fear to do otherwise. But even he must know that they will not vote for him. He has alienated and angered the civil service by his policy of militarisation. At the same time his secret salaries remain a matter of extreme resentment. He has slashed people’s pensions for no apparent reason – the study on which this action was based remains, like much else in Fiji, secret. It’s no way to win an election and his efforts at hand-outs (for which he rightly castigated the SDL in the 2006 election) can never hope to clean up his record in the eyes of the voters.
Picture
Gatecrasher: an unwelcome but polite acceptance

Presidential ambition and this time it's no joking matter

If an election does take place, Bainimarama cannot allow a winner other than himself. Possibly his only viable survival option lies in the white house on the hill. The illegal president’s term expires in a few days and the dictator must be tempted to have himself appointed and continue to rule by decree while indulging his taste for luxury.

But who would be prime minister? Who could be trusted? Or could the position simply lapse? Certainly the option must look preferable to an election he cannot win without rigging it. He once told the world that general elections in Fiji would take place on March 13, 2009, if all necessary preparations can be accomplished in time. But some days later Sayed-Khaiyum, now also Minister for Elections, told the media Bainimarama had only been joking. But these are no joking matters. Neither is Operation Jericho. E-mail: russellfji@gmail.com