(o) Revisiting the International Bar Association's Damning Report

 I was never very happy with the IBA Report. There was an imbalance in those contacted. The Interim Government seemed to be blamed for all of Fiji's legal and custodial inadequacies, even those from before the Coup.

It was just too anti-Interim Government which, to some extent, could be expected. The Interim Government had denied the IBA Team entry to Fiji (as a result of their first visit when they interviewed mainly anti-Goverment people) and the Attorney-General's refusal to join their telecommunications did not help.

But others in the legal profession could have been contacted about Chief Justice Daniel Fatiaki's dismissal and other charges made by the IBA Team. Testimony did not have to rely on Graham Leung, Dor Sami Naidu and other anti-Government people.

Nonetheless, despite these misgivings I agreed with the Report that the dismissal of the Chief Justice was illegal.     Until today.     Read on ...........

IBA Member Disputes Fiji Report

Fiji Times 18 March 2009. Full text.

A counsel to the Tribunal which was looking into the removal of former Chief Justice Daniel Fatiaki has raised concern on the report released by the Human Rights Institute of the International Bar Association titled Dire Straits: A report on the rule of law in Fiji.

Clive Grossman, QC, a member of the International Bar Association, said the report contains grave misstatements, is highly misleading, and above all no attempts have apparently been made to verify any of the facts from sources other than from Fatiaki's solicitor Graham Leung. He confirmed he has made enquiries and has ascertained that no one concerned with the Tribunal was ever contacted by the delegation to obtain a balanced view of the facts.

Grossman said the report's statements are wrong which said the charges were "vague" and not particularized but in fact great care was taken in framing the charges and full detailed particulars were provided to Fatiaki's legal team in respect of all the charges, and there was certainly no complaint by them that they were prejudiced by any of the details, nor did they ask for the charges as framed to be better particularized.

According to the QC, he cannot imagine who imparted to the delegation the idea that the "general understanding" was that the charges laid before the tribunal were false or inappropriate. He said he can authoritatively state that no difficulty whatsoever was experienced in finding the evidence to underpin those charges.

He is concerned that the entire report brings the IBA to disrepute. He stressed that it is of course easy to bash Fiji as it is at present one of the international community's whipping boys, and he doesn't know whether it deserves to be.

The Interim Attorney General has supported the issues raised by the Queens Counsel. However, Fiji Law Society President Dor Sami Naidu believes the findings by the International Bar Association are factual.