(B) How Credible Is Peter Foster's "Fiji Truth"?

Thakur Ranjit Singh closely examines ten allegations made by convicted conman Peter Foster which, if true, implicate a number of prominent people opposed to the Bainimarama-led government in the planning and execution of the 2000 Speight coup, the murder of John Scott, and election fraud in the 2006 election.

Read more...

Fostering and Adding Credibility to Peter Foster’s “Fiji Truth”
Thakur Ranjit Singh

The mountainous scrap heaps of respectability, chastity, trust and reverence are littered with skeletons of priests, swamis, mullahs, Rabbis and other guardians of faith, godliness and goodliness on whose good character we are prepared to will our lives away. Despite this, at one time or the other, they end up betraying our trust.

Yet, we are so unprepared and unwilling to listen to people with shady past and who happen to be the other side of the chastity coin. We are so preconceived about such people who could deliver thoughts, opinions, view and revelations that strangely may hold great deal of water and credibility, had we not been blinded by their past.

One such person is the celebrated, and perhaps notorious Peter Foster who the New Zealand media in general and NZ Herald in particular has brushed aside as a mere “convicted conman” In a very unbalanced and unprofessional article, NZ Herald failed to elaborate on what Foster has said and only took comments from those who suited the paper’s line of thinking on Fiji. They failed to speak to anybody who may have contributed a bit of light on what he had said in his ‘Fiji Truth “article. I will try to do what a first world media failed to do.

I will pick excerpts of Peter Foster’s revelation in his article, “Fiji Truth” and attempt to link them to other independent sources to show their credibility and a plea to the supposed balanced first world media to dig the truth and accept that what Foster revealed are not only the ranting of a convicted fraud but some facts that have independent proof of credibility. I enumerate them as follows:

1) Foster revealed 2000 coup was all about forests and mahogany (p.9). This has been substantiated by other writers including Brij Lal and lately Susan Trnka in her book, State of Suffering: Political Violence and Community Survival in Fiji (p.40). The burning of the offices of Fiji Hardwoods and many writings and revelations reveal what Foster is saying on this issue is true, and they have been well covered by Fiji media. Dr Brij Lal adds: “But it would be grave mistake to see George Speight acting all on his own. If he were, the crisis would have had a limited and inconsequential life. Behind him, in the shadows, were individuals and groups, writing his speeches, devising position papers, building up the mass support base and orchestrating the crowds, people who had little to lose but everything to gain from the overthrow of the Chaudhry government. Among them were politicians defeated at the last elections or otherwise excluded from power, and seeking redress and probably revenge……“Speight was also supported by people like himself, young businessmen on the make, who rode the gravy train of the 1990s, benefitted from opportunistic access to power, secured large unsecured loans from the National Bank of Fiji, but then found their prospects for continued prosperity dimming upon the election of a new government.. Prominent local businessmen-cum politicians in the previous SVT government supported the destabilization campaign. Peter Foster merely repeated what reputed academics have already stated.

2) Foster’s claim that 2000 coup had to do with intra-Fijian struggles, (p.10) having to do more with confederacy rivalries– Fijian struggles rather than the racial issue. There was push by Speight to pass leadership of Fiji from Eastern chiefs to Kubuna leadership, hence his demand for Adi Samanunu to be made PM. When this was said and revealed in Fiji TV “Close-Up” programme by Jone Dakavula, Fiji TV was trashed during occupation of parliament by Speight’s thugs. This has been well documented and covered by Fiji media.

3) Foster’s claim of Savua’s involvement (p.11) is confirmed in Michael Field and Baba’s book, Speight of Violence (p. 264) where Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara, in Richard Broad bridge’s TV interview, named Savua as somebody tied up with events of 2000. This was also revealed in Savua Enquiry article in the Daily Post of 6 May, 2001(Liu Muri by Aage Picche). This article led to dismissal of yours truly as publisher of Daily Post for the article which called the then Chief Justice’s enquiry on Savua as a fraud on the nation, and refusing to apologize and retract the paper’s claim. Romanu Tikotikoca and Mesake Koroi are well aware of the push by Judge Tuvaga and the Lauan mafia on the Daily Post. The world cries when Anglo Saxon ( read “white”) publishers of The Fiji Times and the Fiji Sun get booted out but the sacking of the Indo-Fijian Daily Post publisher by Qarase regime was a muted event, both in media circles and in reaction by the international community.

4) Foster’s claim on involvement of Fijian Holding Limited (FHL) office for planning coup and involvement of Qarase in FHL corruption (p- 13) is substantiated by Hansard report of 1993. In the Senate sitting of 18 May, 1993 (pp. 731-748), Senator Manu Korovulavula moved a motion for the Senate to call on Government to carry out an investigation into the method adopted by the Board of the Fijian Holdings Limited to allow limited liability companies to buy shares into the company (FHL) without the knowledge of 14 Provinces. Senator Korovulavula had stated that the motion was brought on a point of principle to reveal less than honest dealings of people in position of power, knowledge and trust. This reveals the wheeling and dealing of the mighty and powerful including Qarase, Weleilakeba, Bakani, Vitusaqavulu, Yabaki and other big names. A widely circulated article by yours truly details the wrong-doing of the FDB/ NBF connection.

5) Foster’s claim on murder of John Scott and Savua’s involvement and cover-up (p.14) is quite intriguing. This was brought into light by a TV documentary by John Scott’s brother that raises more questions that it answers. This documentary was also shown in the Asia Pacific Journalism course by head of Pacific Media Centre and Associate Professor at AUT, Dr David Robie in the first semester of 2009. It links the killing to political leanings rather than to a supposed action of a religious anti-gay fanatic who was merely confined to a mental institution, and may soon be released.

6) Foster's claim of Qarase rewarding Savua and others who had given hand in the ultra-nationalist agenda, with diplomatic postings. Among others this included Savua, Adi Samanunu, Inoke Kubuobola, Anare Jale and Waqanisau. Yours truly had documented this in his opinion articles but no action was taken and Qarase was allowed to rape democracy under a supposed democratic regime.

7) Foster’s claim of Ratu Jope Seniloli’s release by disbarred Attorney General Qoriniasi Bale on medical grounds but the medical report went missing from the files. This has been substantiated by the newspaper reporting.

8) Foster’s claim that Chaudhry was charged, convicted and jailed for death driving. This is true and is substantiated by the newspaper reports.

9) Foster’s claim of election fraud (p. 4) and Agriculture scam are facts supported by court cases and newspaper reports. The then Permanent Secretary of Agriculture Peniasi Kunatuba became the fall guy who copped the blame for the fruits of fraud that Qarase gained as part of Agricultural scam. This has been well enumerated and detailed in J. Fraenkel and S Firth (eds) book, From Election to Coup in Fiji: the 2006 Campaign and its Aftermath. In the article titled,” Tainted Elections”, there is a long list of things that went wrong during 2006 election, and lends light to claims that things did not go well in 2006 elections and credibility of the observer team was brought into question. Father David Arms is quoted:” On the basis particularly of the ethnic bias which was so pervasive in the 2006 election; I cannot possibly give a verdict that they were” free and fair” “(p. 348) There is claim of vote-buying with $30m agricultural scam. “The FLP has consistently held that the 2001 general election was not free and fair – marred by vote-buying/bribery, defective electoral rolls, official bias and systematic vote-rigging. As a result, the FLP was deprived of victory in at least six marginal Open constituencies, which altered the results in favour of SDL” (p.348) He claims a detailed report listing the cases of malpractice were given to the then Supervisor of Election, Walter Rigamoto, but he failed to take any actions. Hence, there was no guarantee in fairness of 2006 elections.

10) Foster's claim of involvement of Methodist Church leaders in the instability and election is also revealed in the book mentioned above – The role of the Assembly of Christian Churches (ACCF) in Fiji in 2006 elections by Lynda Norton. (pp. 300-314). Norton outlines how the Methodist Church and their associates were directly involved in mobilizing Christian support for SDL by castigating non-Christians. In paid advertisement during elections, (The Fiji Times, 10 May, 2006) it virtually said that Fiji should be ruled by Christians and unless this was done, God’ wrath will be placed on people of Fiji (p.301). The intention of ACCF has been to declare Fiji a Christian state and solicit Fijian and Christian rule in Fiji.

Conclusion

From the 60-page document that the supposed convicted fraudster has written, I just enumerated some ten points which can be independently substantiated or verified. The claims by Peter Foster cannot be swept under the carpet just because of his reputation. New Zealand Herald just cannot pass the issues as insignificant just because Peter Foster is a convicted fraudster. They had gone and obtained only statements which they wanted to hear and failed to give the story any balance. I have in the past written perspective articles in NZ Herald and they have my contacts and are aware of my alternative views, but it suits the blinkered mainstream media of NZ not to talk to those who would shatter their myth on Fiji’s political problems and its failed democracy.