9 Newspaper or Radio Accounts, 4 "Inside Sources", 1 Comment
(-) Fiji Democracy and Freedom Movement, NGO, Sydney
Waiting until 2012 to debate a new constitution is "a charade to ensure the military regime prolongs its hold on power" said spokesperson Usaia Waqatairewa, who wouldn’t be surprised if the election date was put back further.
(-) Prof. Brij Lal, ANU
"The new roadmap will prolong the suffering of the people unnecessarily ... it is an irony that on the day the Commodore has announced his road map, he has also extended the emergency regulations."
(-) Coupfourpointfive, Auckland
"Bainimarama tried to fool Fiji and the world when he delivered his strategic framework for change national address today ...it is basically to pull wool over people's eyes"[referring back to his failure to hold elections by March 2009, and then in 2010. Delaying work on the new Constitution until September 2012]"confirms that elections are the last thing on the mind's of Bainimarama's, the military council and the coup leader’s closest ally and adviser, interim Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum."
(-) Australia and New Zealand
Both governments have reacted negatively to the address, and called again for immediate elections.
(+) Fiji Police Commissioner Cde Esala Teleni
"The strategic framework ... is the best way for forward for Fiji. “The government’s priority now is the socio-economic life of people and it is important for me as commissioner of police to provide a conducive environment for that in terms of stability and security." [The police force will be strengthened with upgraded communications, transport and forensic tools.]
(+) Fiji Chamber of Commerce
President Swani Maharaj said the FCC was impressed with the new Fiji vision. "Bainimarama has been very committed especially on non-racial politics....I’ve always thought that the 1997 Constitution no matter what people say was a racist constitution.”
(+) Fiji Retailers Association
President Himmat Lodhia urged the business sector to throw their full support behind Government, now that it has indicated the direction it would take. “This is the first time the message from the government is clear in which direction they are moving, that is the most important thing ...As a business community we will support it,” he reiterated.
(+) Suva Chamber of Commerce
President Nur Bano Ali echoed similar sentiments. “Government has indicated the road they have chosen and all I can say is that these are very positive things so the private sector will have to play its part.”
But Perhaps Much Depends on Who is Asking the Question
A small research exercise I conducted at USP in the late 1990s sought to see whether the ethnicity of the interviewer affected answers . It did, and the results were statistically significant. Those interviewed by a person of the same ethnicity were more forthright in their answers; with people of a different ethnicity they more cautious, often I suspect answering in a way to please the interviewer. Thus, on the question "Should the military be more ethnically balanced", Fijians to Fijians said 'no', and to Indo-Fijians 'yes.' while Indo-Fijian to IF said 'yes' and to Fijians said 'no' or 'perhaps.'
I suspect something of this sort has influenced the 'business' responses cited above. One of my "inside sources", normally a government supporter, wrote:
Source 1. (-) "I was at the speech yesterday, it was very strange indeed in all honesty it lacked substance and was a waste of money. All [the business and other people] I have spoken to have very similar feelings, they have lost support for the government and feel the situation is now hopeless...They have all but walked away from the government, again citing the same reasons, nothing will be done, the wrong people are running the country, etc."
Source 2, who also attended the meeting.
(+) "The thing that amazed me was that the ... Centre was packed - absolutely packed with no seats left. ... I was surprised that it was rather short but, on reflection, I guess he just wanted to paint the big broad strokes for the future. All the comments I heard (mainly from the business people) were positive. There was a feeling that he was addressing the big issues that have not been addressed in the past. If anything the speech gave people a lost of assurance of a certain time frame. Some businessmen said the speech could well encourage investment because the processes were defined."
Source 3, who was not at the meeting but who earlier had some support for Bainimarama:
(-) "I am afraid I am very cynical about FB's promises and claims after what has transpired this far [restrictions on the media, the Emergency Regulations, alleged favouritism and nepotism in the senior public service, arbitrary imposition of the 55 year retirement age. As for...]"democracy will be given to the people in 2014 on a silver platter....Only naive people would believe this nonsense. Participatory democracy cannot emerge out of 8 years of military and 'coercive' rule ... I don't see any reason for the on-going imposition of PER."
"We should and can move more quickly to constitution-making and to the general election - the electoral provisions should be in the form of a separate law outside the constitution. Unfortunately ...FB and his cronies have their own personal agenda."
Source 4, who always opposed the coup but who originally thought Bainimama well intended:
(o-) "It all depends on the good faith and commitment of the regime. Neither is much in evidence ... electoral reform and a new Constitution are low on its priorities ....it is not apparent that the regime is ready to engage as yet." (June 18)
"The situation here continues to drift ... The road map announced today by the Commander is a beginning. Dialogue and engagement need to be commenced as soon as possible as the regime rules by decree. If one has elections by September 2014, and that is not a given, it will have governed for nearly eight years. Meanwhile institutions such as the courts, the public service, police, health services and the like are being weakened as arbitrariness and whim replace process and autonomy. The country will survive but at what cost?" (July 3)
My own comment
This mix of responses is a clear demonstration of the adverse effect of restricting media freedom, and freedom of association. Too few people are saying what they really think. Indeed some, publicly, seem to be saying the opposite. There is no opportunity to debate, consider alternatives, or dispute rumours and false allegations. The so-called Pacific "talanoa" way of decision-making and resolving disputes is inoperable.
Such a state of affairs constitutes a very serious threat to Government.
- It is denied good advice. It is only able to appoint non-critical people to its offices and boards.
- It is in danger of irretrievably "losing the middle ground" as more of its former supporters (and those willing to give it the benefit of the doubt) become disillusioned.
- With the "wrong people" running the country, the economy could falter, and all the Government's intended infrastructural and social reforms need money.
If Bainimarama has an eye on tomorrow's history books, he should know that unless his reforms succeed -- and are made permanent -- his grandchildren will be reading of his "failed coup" (and the backlash his opponents will exact). Good intentions are not enough. He must engage the middle ground. And the first, and most important step along this path is the full (or at least partial and progressive) relaxation of media controls.
No comments:
Post a Comment