RNZI reported Sir Michael as saying post-coup Fiji is like any democratic country ... and Australia and New Zealand should stop shunning Bainimarama. Australia's Nine News had Somare saying "It will be difficult for them to change but with a lot of explanation and understanding, if Australia and New Zealand see what is happening in Fiji, there could be a change of mind and attitude." Nine News continued: Somare was upbeat on the situation in Fiji. "There is no feeling of military regime. Infrastructure is in place. The economy is picking up. Fiji is like any other democratic country." He added that Bainimarama was trying to end friction with the ethnic Indian minority. "What he wants to see is a real multiracial society."
One might think that Somare had made himself abundantly clear, but no, the foreign media decided some investigative journalism was required. As if to say, even though we reported this ourselves, it couldn't really be true, could it?
By Wednesday RNZI had PNG Foreign Minister Sam Abal saying PNG had not changed its stance on Fiji's suspension from the PI Forum (Sir Michael had not said it had) and that what Sir Michael really wanted (as if he could not say it himself, and as if the media had not already reported what he said) was "more conciliation shown by both sides...What our Prime Minister is trying to do is bring the conciliatory, in terms of bringing elections closer - that’s the wish of the PNG government to give the people of Fiji an opportunity as soon as possible for elections.”
But this is not what Somare said, and neither did he talk about "both sides." Somare was talking about change by Australia and New Zealand, and elections taking time. The emphasis is quite different from Abal's "as soon as possible."
RNZI continued to dig and not surprisingly found a PNG Opposition spokesman to comment. PNG Deputy Opposition Leader Bart Philemon said Sir Michael had "lost the plot." “Democracy is clear. This guy, Bainimarama, shouldn’t be there. And we’re trying to establish democracy in the Pacific countries and here is Somare trying to muddy the water as to what democracy is from dictatorship. He’s crazy!”
So there you have it. The media got its story right in the end.
POSTSCRIPT ON WHAT SOME KIWIS KNOW ABOUT PAPUA NEW GUINEA
I wonder how many New Zealanders think Papua New Guinea is "a tiny island in the Pacific." This is how the magazine New Idea (11 July) described it in an article on acquitted murderer David Bain who spent his childhood there. For the record -- and in case some of our politicans and their advisers may think similarly-- PNG's land area is 463,000km2 and its 2009 estimated population 6.7 million. New Zealand, for comparison, is 269,000km2 and its population 4.3 million.
11 comments:
So how could the media's biased commentary be any worse than your biased commentary?
You have underlined - "There is no feeling of military regime. Infrastructure is in place. The economy is picking up. Fiji is like any other democratic country." He added that Bainimarama was trying to end friction with the ethnic Indian minority.......'
Somare says it is, so it must be?
I, like many others, now look forward to seeing this sudden revelation manifesting itself in the removal of the PER, the reinstatement of the constitution, the recall of Parliament and the setting of an acceptable timeline for elections.
Oh and the reinstatement of all those officials who dared oppose military thugs, the return of that backpay, and perhaps the arrest of those pardoned for acts of murder committed in the name of the state.
Caromia, I did not write what was quoted. If bias is linking media items, and drawing a conclusion that the media sought out contrary views, I plead guilty. I see this as necessary, given the totally anti-Bainimarama stance of mainstream media and blogs. When there is more balance in their reporting, more of my postings will be critical of the Government.
Meantime, I think PER should be lifted and the Government should engage in dialogue, but not with the SDL unless they state their ideas on "reform" (and have said so several times) but the last thing required is "the recall of Parliament." Even the Australian judges did not recommend this!
I intend shortly to publish posts listing(and commenting on) Bainimarama's "sins" (including the backpay issue) and another one on dialogue and what others tell me is needed to "take Fiji forward."
I welcome your comments to this blog, and would welcome your views on my intended future postings. Most people only seem to read and comment on blogs with which they agree. This makes you different, and special. Kind regards, Croz
@ Caro Mio (Isn't that so?)
Every reader/commentator comes with a received opinion and then injects their own judgement and view. Nothing wrong about this at all. The situation in Fiji is very complex and diffuse. For this reason alone, the PER are still required, in my considered view, until substantive cases of corruption are through hearing in the courts. We are dealing with a 'cabal of corruption'- disseminated and wide-spread, aided and abetted by many layers of Fiji society (wittingly or unwittingly). Security comes first and foremost - yes, even ahead of democracy and all its demands. How else would you suppose that people will come forward as witnesses? How else do you think safety can be assured for anyone who has strong evidence of corruption to make their complaint? Would you expect them to each have a personal detail? Because that is what is needed in some instances. If you think not, then you have your head in the sand.
@ Caromio
The inability of some commentators to grasp what is underway and has been underway in Fiji over more than a decade is almost beyond belief. One cannot give credence to the seeming naivety of some of the remarks made by, one assumes, a 'media person'? Suffice to say that Dear Me! has a grip on the safety/security situation for many who must now be encouraged to come forward to the Courts. Never underestimate the dangers inherent in this for witnesses/court officers/society as a whole. By doing so, you completely undermine and detract from the immense courage it will take for some citizens to do their duty. Not unlike the Afghan people who choose to vote at the risk of losing their lives, in Fiji people must choose now to give evidence with a great deal of concern for their personal safety and that of their families and all associated with them. How will a removal of the PER assist in this? Democracy has only served to undermine safety and security in Fiji for many citizens over many years. Never assume that a restoration of democracy will result in......democracy as 'Caromio' understands it. There was never any such thing.
My suggestion of a compromise on the lifting of PER as it relates to the media and dialogue was made in an earlier post: "Football Shows a Possible Way to Easing PER and Renewing Dialogue." I asked readers to draw it to the attention of people in or close to Government and the Military Council. I've had absolutely no feedback since. What do you all think of my suggestion?
@ Croz Walsh
Your suggestions are well-intentioned but I must say that at this transition time with serious cases coming into the courts on a regular basis, the PER are best left in place. Why? Because if you will recall back in 2001/02/03 any case of this type always prompted the possibility of instability. People feel in the main more secure just now. Why undo this while we are dealing with all those who have allegedly mishandled/misappropriated/converted taxpayers money for their own purposes? Will the politicians assist? No, they will not. They were and are part of this problem. They have not all gone away: many are around. These cases must be successful in convicting those responsible for so much damage over the years. Historically, they have not always been so. Or, they achieved convictions only to have the perpetrators released in suspicious circumstances undermining the rule of law. That cannot continue. Will dialogue assist? Not too much now unless we can be sure that those who aided all this impunity in the past have changed their spots. Have they?
My view is that dialogue is a waste of time unless the parties come in to the process with a lack of hostility and are not trying to use dialogue to get back in to power so they can carry on with their old nefarious doings. Actually I think that this is why Chaudhery et al want dialogue. As a means to regain undemocratic power.
Caromio is right. Things are not normal in Fiji. Somare did not visit all parts of Fiji, and the ghosts of parliamentarians past still walk the corridors of Veiuto. Nor did he voice my greatest fear. That the seductive qualities of power are slowly but surely influencing Frank and all those around him. Keane, the back pay, his closeness to the old nationalist war horses from the SVT government, and the release of the soldiers convicted of murder.
I share Kiti's concerns. There are genuine concerns about the Interim Government's intentions, even by those supporting its stated objectives. These concerns cannot be addressed without dialogue. A politically sustainable future cannot be imposed on Fiji; it has to be talked through, and internalised, by all who seek a better future for Fiji.
@Anonymous and Dear Me
The PER assures the safety of witnesses in corruption cases?
Thats a bit of a stretch - even when used in tandem with the tired arguments that Fiji, being the most unique country in the world, faces extraordinary security threats that only the PER can prevent.
Whilst I wouldn't argue with the fact that corruption probably occurred during previous administrations, the sight of this regime pursuing corruption charges through the courts does at least confirm one thing - they have a sense of humour.
@ caromio
There has never been any intention to suggest that Fiji "is unique" in its 'political mayhem' (Sir Michael Somare's remark). However, one has just heard Ban Ki Moon speak about the Afghan election and how, apparently, the UN was surprised by the level of corruption. Surprised? What were they thinking of? No one was surprised in Fiji when corruption took place right under our noses from the time of registration to vote up to and including the actual poll. No need for surprise. We know all the signs of corrupt polling and they were on display, every day. We have worked in elections in Fiji, over 25 or more years (in many areas of the election). So, we have more than an inkling of what can be done. Sneer all you want. At the end of the day, we know better and, what is more, we have submitted to this effect. This knowledge is not erased. It is enhanced by the stance of those who should, like the UN in Afghanistan, done more to obviate malfeasance.
Post a Comment