Fiji: Getting it Right on ASK's "Sunset Clause"

pn187

In a number of ongoing postings to Fiji groups on Facebook reference is often made to Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum's "sunset clause" in which he is alleged to want to eliminate Taukei institutions. 

The now almost defunct blog Coupfourpointfive under the Hitler-inspired heading "Final Solution" writes  of "Bainimarama’s anti-Fijian policies driven by Khaiyum’s genocidal 'sunset clause' thesis on how to destroy Fijian cultural autonomy."

More recently, Lela Seruvakula writes of  "The reason for the stolen elections and SUNSET CLAUSE AGENDA... i.e., Dispossession and displacement or dismantling of any sovereignty that stands in the way of resource grab ..." 

A more partly balanced view was offered by a SODELPA candidate Niko Nawaikula who wrote: 

"Ethnic identity is important for how can we move froward or do anything for that matter without first knowing who we are. Our ethnicity defines us and the UN protects that self identification as our Human Rights under UNDRIP" 

With which few would disagree, and then he launches into FijiFirst:

"But the Fiji First Government is against it. It wants to create a new social order for Fiji by introducing its sunset clause measures to remove the things that bind us together as an ethnic group. To me, it is a form of ethnic cleansing. For instead of unity in diversity respecting ethnic identity , it wants equal citizenry that is devoid of ethnicity and ethnic referencing."  

With which others would disagree. He has misunderstood the context and argument of ASK's thesis which is strange for a lawyer. Click read here to download the thesis. 

This is what I wrote on the issue in the Fiji Sun four years ago.

Na Sala Cava New Website, Sun Rises Again, Aus-NZ-Fiji, Beddoes, Sugar Leases, Samoa "Pot"

NA SALA CAVA?  Two new "Way Forward" questions (#4-5)  will be posted tomorrow Friday at noon. Scroll down to see the first three questions and comments.

NEW BLOG SITE. Instead of summarizing the comments as previously intended,  I have opened a new blog site, Na Sala Cavu? Which Path Forward for Fiji? Click here here  to check it out how it looks for #1-3 .  More details tomorrow.

FIJI SUN RISES AGAIN. The Fiji Sun 'article' lauding the PM, criticized so strongly by this blog and readers, was not a hoax but neither was it an article. It was, in fact, a letter to the editor published by the Sun last Saturday and uploaded, more of less automatically, to the Sun's website.

AUSNZ OUT OF TOUCH WITH REALITY, FIJI, PACIFIC. PM Bainimarama has  condemned the PI Forum Secretariat for not including Fiji in trade and development talks being funded by the European Union. Bainimarama says the EU has provided funds through the Forum Secretariat for trade and development talks between Pacific Ministers and officials wanting to trade with the EU. He says Fiji should be part of these talks despite its suspension, but the Forum Secretariat is not including Fiji due to the influence of Australia and New Zealand.  The EU has not cut off relations with Fiji.

MIKE BEDDOES CHALLENGES GOVERNMENT. Speaking to RadioNZI, ousted opposition leader Mike Beddoes challenged Voqere Bainimarama to stand in the 2014 Elections. He said, “I’m assuming I’m one of the people that he (Bainimarama) would rather not see get elected to the House. For me there is a very simple way to sort it out. He can assign someone to stand against me or he might want to stand against me. Or he might want to form a party and go to the polls because it’s not my decision, it’s not the politicians’ decision. It’s the people’s decision.” The PM has said he wants a new generation of politicians to stand in the elections. [Why did RadioNZI ring Fiji to get this response? Mike said nothing he's not said before so it's hardly news.  The station can't even reply to my emails.]

SUGARCANE TALKS. A second round of consultations, involving the NLTB and landowners, to get leases renewed is expected soon.The first week-long round,  involving the Committee for Better Utilisation of Land (CBUL) and mataqali, the extended family landowning units,  concluded two weeks ago. Tavualevu mataqali in Ba Province  had held a joint meeting and had concluded they needed expert advice to resolve a few issues. The Turaga ni Koro said "There are some landowners who have debts with NLTB because of unpaid leases and there is also the issue of the amount of land owned by each mataqali. Three mataqali's in the village own huge pieces of land whose leases will soon be expired and the others have smaller pieces of land." The PM said that  if it previously took the NLTB two years to perform these tasks, he wanted it done in two months.

POT AND KETTLE. SAMOA MEDIA NOT FREE. With Samoan PM Tuilaepa berating Fiji on its media laws, this is what Savea Sano Malifa, founder and editor-in-chief of the Samoa Observer,  had to say about media freedom in Samoa:  "Tuilaepa should now turn those words of his into action, and remove all the restrictive policies threatening to stifle media freedom and freedom of information in his own country. He can start by repealing the Publishers and Printers Act 1992, declare defunct the policy allowing public funds to be used for the legal fees incurred by government leaders suing newspapers for defamation, and chuck out the ancient British law of criminal libel from Samoa’s law books. That would be a big improvement. And then to really convince (people that) he intends to make Samoa’s media “free, strong and robust” so that they can help him and his government 'tackle institutional corruption,' all he has to do is introduce an Official Information Act in his country."

(o-) Inclusive Dialogue Only Way Forward: Beddoes

In an phone interview with RNZI today, General Voters' UPP leader and former Leader of the Opposition Mike Beddoes (photo, centre) said the only way to resolve the political situation was the way we've always done it, by dialogue. He predicted Cde Bainimarama's "road map" will come to nothing unless the dialogue is inclusive, involving all parties. Without this, the changes sought by the Government will be reversed by the Government eventually elected. Speaking of PER, the Public Emergency Regulations, he said that it stifled pro-democracy voices and prevented moves towards dialogue. Even his comments on this interview put him at risk. "All it takes is one individual to [mis] interpret what I'm saying, and I'll end up in jail."

(+) Methodist Leaders in "Denial"

"It is time the Christian churches step away from politics once and for all for the benefit of the nation. For too long the failure of the churches to separate their pastoral role from national politics has fanned the flames of unrest." Fiji Times editorial March 17, 2009.

What a pity! There seemed to be some hope for a Government-Methodist rapprochement after Rev Akuila Yabaki's plea for dialogue (see previous post.)

But no. Fiji Live reports the Methodist Church's stance is unchanged.

I can understand the Church's refusal to sack Revs Lasaro and Kanailagi (photo), as requested by Government, but not for the reason given. I also have reservations about two other Church statements. My comments refer to elements within the Church; not the Church as a whole.

Gen.Sec.Rev.Tuikilakila Waqairatu said the Church does not believe the ministers have offended. If this is the case, members of the Standing Committee need to look very closely at the Church's Christian foundations. Their immediate offence is the use of the church to derail the Bainimarama government, and defying the Emergency Regulations. This is arguably an offence or not an offence, depending on your perspective. Their more general offence is the crime against humanity sort. Both men are extreme Fijian nationalists, far more than church ministers. They have been engaged in what most of today's Christians would say are immoral and unchristian acts: they have preached racism and supported racist causes for over 20 years. And during all, or most, of this time they have been senior officers of the Church.

The Rev.Waqairatu says, "The Church’s involvement in politics is for the spiritual and moral aspect." This is true, up to a point. The Methodist Church is the major part of the lotu of the lotu, vanua, matanitu trilogy. But the Church has allowed Lasaro and Kanailagi's decidedly unspiritual and immoral political preaching to go on unchecked for 20 years. It has helped-- or at least not stopped -- their election to high office within the Church. By not standing up against the racist taukei faction, the Church is thus seen to have supported three racist coups, and two political parties and two governments with racist policies. It is this brand of politics, not the spiritual or moral -- in which they have definitely been involved -- that the Government asks the Church to renounce. And it would insult the Church leaders' intelligence to pretend they did not know so.

The Rev.Waqairatu also called on the Government "to consider the spirit of love, compassion, morality and responsibility in the direction they move in." I find this "pot calling the kettle black" request ingenious. One must ask where were Lasaro and Kanailagi's love and compassion when they advocated actions and policies that, to varying degrees, insulted, hurt or impoverished thousands of innocent people between 1987 and 2006? Do they still excuse the desecrated temples? The refugee camps filled as Methodist Fijians threatened isolated Indo-Fijian farmers? The affirmative action policies that left one-half of Fiji's poor untouched? Or the displaced Indo-Fijians who moved into squatter areas when their cane farm leases were not renewed, as urged by taukei Fijians? Can they imagine how it feels to be a second class citizen, even when you are a sixth generation Indo-Fijian? Have they forgotten Qarase's proposed legislation that led to the 2006 Coup? Or the tens of thousands of Indo-Fijians who have emigrated? None of this, of course, was really about Indo-Fijians. They were merely the scapegoats. There were deeper causes and more devious reasons for the coups, but where was the Methodist Church then? Why were these human rights abuses not denounced from its pulpits? How can it allow two men so grievously marred to serve in the Church? How can it instruct Government on the spirit of love and compassion when its silence let the Laraso's and Kanailagi's have their way?

A Personal Note
For the record, I was at the receiving end of a Rev. Kanailagi attack in July 2002, a month before the Church's annual conference. Speaking to a public audience on poverty I said churches, and particularly the Methodist church, because of its numbers and its means of fund raising, needed to find ways of easing the poor's church donation burden, an issue then in the news because of similar remarks by MP Mike Beddoes. In 2002 Rev. Kanailagi was a Senator nominated by the Qarase Government. While speaking on the President's address to both Houses, he called "a Professor Walsh" every name under the sun: a fly-by-night expert, a person ignorant of the relationship between lotu, vanua and matanitu, ignorant of and insensitive to Fiji's cultures and faiths, a communist, an atheist ...

But that was nothing to what he called the Fiji Times and Five One. They were "agents of evil ... of some foreign agencies planning against Christianity and the indigenous people [note the coupling] ... poisoning the country with false accusations against the Methodist Church." How, he asked, could one expect fair reporting when "all the reporters were Indian?" He welcomed the Cabinet decision to review media laws.

What goes around, comes around. Reported in The Daily Post July 7, 2002. Need more be said! The Church had hoped to raise about $2.4 million at this year's Conference. Photo: : Matuvuvalu album.

STOP PRESS. METHODISTS MODERATE STANCE - A LITTLE
Rev.Ame Tugaue told FijiLive the Church will make a fresh attempt next week to meet with PM Bainimarama in a bid to convince the Government to allow the annual church conference to go ahead. He said political issues proposed on the agenda had been removed, but ...


The Church and Intellectual Accountability

"The problem is not that the Methodist Church is involved in politics but that it has failed to reason publicly its many intrusions in politics [or been] compelled to justify its ethno-nationalist ideologies within the context of a multicultural society. The Methodist Church in Fiji can once again meaningfully contribute to the ordering of society, but only if it is held intellectually accountable for its actions and inactions over the past twenty-two years."
-- Sudarsan Kant. Read his full comment by clicking "comment" under "Methodist Church Should Consider Dialogue."

(o) The Fiji Media Council and Government

The Fiji Media Council has 19 members comprising a representative of each contributing media organisation, an equal number of public members appointed by the Council, and an independent Chair. The Government is represented through the Department of Information. In February this year the FMC commissioned Australian Jack Herman, and Fiji citizens Suliana Sitawibau and Barrie Sweetman (l-r, photo) to review its work and make recommendations for improvement. The Review team received written submissions from 26 media, government and non-government organizations; interviews were conducted with a further 16, and an extraordinary meeting was held with the Media Council attended among others by Riyaz Sayed Khaiyum, CEO, Fiji Broadcasting Corp., and Peni Nonu and two associates of the Department of Information. Government representation is deliberately stressed. The Review report was released last week. (see full report here.)

The critical question was whether the media should be self-regulated or regulated by some arm of government. The Report concluded "The media have to be free to be critical of government and, while a media council is not the same thing as the media, it too needs to be free of government control. Any media regulatory body controlled by government runs the risk of government appointees who will see themselves as responsible to the government, not the people."

Most recommendations referred to the Council itself : the need for a higher profile; to be more active in promoting media standards ("it has appeared more frequently to be vocal about the need for media freedom, without a concomitant voice on media responsibility."); more commitment by media organizations ("need to commit themselves to a stronger observation of the Council’s pronouncements on questions of ethics and standards and to publish or broadcast outcomes of the Council’s complaints process promptly, and with due prominence.") The Report complimented FMC Chairperson Daryl Tarte and other unpaid volunteers for their excellent work in trying circumstances. It recommended the apointment of a paid administrator; the leasing of an office of its own; and the retention of both industry and non-industry representation on the Council.

The Review’s recommendations for the retention of, and improvements to, the Media Council are based on its understanding of the importance to civil society of a free and a responsible media. It believes that all campaigners for human rights should support a media free from government or other interference and free to report on matters of public interest and concern, as long as that media are subject to a regime of ethical principles that will ensure that their journalism is carried out in a responsible fashion, and that efforts are made constantly to raise those standards to a level commensurate with the place of the media in a free and civil society.

See also Josephine Latu's (Pacific Media Watch) commentary on the report.

Government and Media Need to Work on Relationship: Report Extract

"The relationship between a government and a free media is never an easy one. The adversarial nature of the relationship is exacerbated in Fiji where political instability has been a feature of the environment over the past twenty-five years. There is, as a result, a heightened sense of hostility between the government and the media, particularly when the media are seen as vocal opponents of government proposals.

"It is not the job of a media council to be a partisan of either side in this relationship. While it is connected to the media industry through its funding and membership, it has to be seen to be independent of it, arguing for both the freedom and the responsibility of the media. To achieve its object of keeping the media free, a media council needs to cultivate relationships with the executive, the legislature and the bureaucracy and use those relationships to be a strong advocate of press freedom. It needs the continued cooperation of the media industry to further its aim as a proponent of media responsibility.

"As an independent media council represents both the media industry and the general public who consume the media, it needs to be seen as a genuinely independent voice. To the extent that it may not have projected itself as a truly independent voice, pressing for both media freedom and an improvement in media standards, the Media Council has been perceived as not projecting itself sufficiently as a credible advocate for a free and a responsible media.

"Despite the level of the rhetoric from partisans on either side of the media-government adversarial relationship, it is the view of the Review that the Fiji Media Council has maintained a proper relationship with government. Certainly it has made strong comments when it has seen threats to press freedom emerging from government sources - but that is an important part of its brief, a fact that government needs to recognise.

"Given that the Department of Information, as a publisher, is a constituent member of the Media Council, the government has a direct voice in the development of policy within the Council. There is a suggestion that the Department has not used this opportunity to the extent that it might. This has meant that the government has not fostered its relationship with the Media Council to the extent that it might have.

"Both the government and the Media Council need to work on the relationship and it would be unfair of this Review to say that the Council needs to take the initiative. It is the Review’s belief that the government has no place in the regulation of the media and should encourage as far as possible, through its existing membership of the Fiji Media Council, the improved profile and more active attention to press responsibility recommended in this report."

(o) Beddoes Supports Driti's Call

Fiji Times 28 March. Full text. Ousted opposition leader Mick Beddoes supports Land Force Commander Colonel Pita Driti's call for restraint from political parties but he disagrees with his choice of words."However, any call for restraint and silence must apply equally to the military and (interim) regime leadership as well as their supporters," said Mr Beddoes said in a press statement today. He said if Colonel Driti could give him those assurances, then he would be silent  "for the duration of the political dialogue process". [Comment: I could not agree more.]

(o) Comment: What Fiji Needs is a Real "Period of Silence"

There's a pattern in Fiji kick-boxing. In each round one side (or the other) says something to which the other side reacts. Reaction follows reaction, until most gaskets are blown, exhaustion sets in -- and then it starts all over again. Nothing very new is said in these exchanges, no one modifies their previous position, no one feels any better, friends and enemies remain unchanged, and Fiji is not a better or happier or safer place. But that's the way it is as attitudes harden. In Fiji. In late March 2009. Over two years since December 2006. 

 

It's often difficult to identify the original  triggering comment because everyone's "luggage" is carried forward from the previous round. This week, if we take repeated finger-pointing against the military (as those behind the fire-bombings) as the starting point, Col. Pita Driti (photo) fired back with  threats to ban the SDL, NFP and certain NGO's from  Forum participation and close down the Fiji Times. "There is no place in the Forum for people who want to take Fiji backwards," he said, calling the repeated criticisms of the military and IG "incitement" and a threat to national security. 

 "...all the military is trying to do is  prevent Fiji fall(ing) into the abyss of lawlessness and disorder with mass genocides, ethnic cleansing and battle between warlords, let alone civil war now that is a national security angle that I am speaking from on behalf of the military as the final bastion of law and order". [Hey,where is this place? Ruanda? Bosnia? Afghanistan?] 

He was supported by acting PM Ratu Epeli Ganilau in more moderate words: "By criticising the media [Driti] is looking at what the media can influence in ensuring there is a stable and secure environment in the way they report ... If it is biased, obviously that has security implications that can create an atmosphere that will be inevitably hostile as we progress."

NFP president Raman Pratap Singh launched the first counter-attack, calling Driti's remarks "uncalled for". Mike Beddoes and Laisinea Qarase said they would comment later (and they did!). Media Council chairman Darryl Tarte (who earlier had said IG and military views were fairly reported) said he was unaware of any complaint.  "I thought the interim Prime Minister said they uphold media freedom as provided in the Constitution so how come Driti is talking about closing down the biggest media organisation in the country?" Fiji Women's Crisis Centre co-ordinator Shamima Ali asked on what authority is Driti threatening NGOs and political parties.  Driti told her to "stop getting involved in politics  (sic!) ... concentrate on tackling the rise in sex related offences, and stop blaming the events of December 2006 for the increasing statistics."

Rati Epeli and Darryl Tarte spoke reasonably, but you don't need to be very clever to see that all this gets Fiji absolutely nowhere. The only "wise" words in the whole round appeared to come from Col. Driti who called for a "period of silence ... to ensure the political Forum is successful."  I thought for one brief moment he'd seen a blinding light on the road to Nabua. But I was wrong. Insert the words "from the politicians and NGOs" between the ellipses ( ...) Only the IG's opponents were to be silent. 

Take your seats, ladies and gentlemen. The next round is about to commence. -- Crosbie Walsh [Based on items culled from all Fiji online newspapers.] 

Who Dunnit? Attar Singh's Car

All major English-medium newspapers ran articles on last week's night-time stoning of Attar Singh's car. All those invited to comment by the media (except Government spokesman Major Neumi Leweni) called upon the Interim Government and the Police to condemn this and other recent similar actions. The attacks would seem, as Mike Beddoes told the Fiji Sun, to be the work of "elements linked or sympathetic to the Interim Government."

The Police said the enquiry was especially difficult: it was dark and there were few witnesses.

Major Leweni said, "The Interim Government does not need to be told what to do." But I'm afraid it does, if it does or says nothing. The DepSec. of Information could have approved, condemned, or said he would respond later. The one thing he could not do was not answer the question. This could --and no doubt has-- been taken as approval. Showing no knowledge of (civilian) tactics, he has played straight into the hands of the IG's opponents.

Other comments included:

SDL party NatDir. Peceli Kinivuwai:
"The attacks are...typical of police states with no respect for law and order ... The incident is clearly part of a systematic campaign of intimidation aimed at critics of the interim regime,” Fiji Daily Post.

Former parliamentary Opposition leader, Mike Beddoes:
"... despicable and cowardly and was counter productive to the successful outcome of the President’s Political Dialogue Forum meeting last week ... the attacks were not random and come after similar incidents against Fiji Times Editor Netani Rika, unionist Kenneth Zinck and other known figures who have openly expressed their views against the military-backed government." Fiji Sun.

CCF ExecDir.Rev. Akuila Yabaki:
“The attacks are following a clear trend, targeting a particular group of civil society members members who may possess similar views on democracy ... Interim Prime Minister Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama should condemn these attacks as a matter of priority and assure civil society members of their safety.” Fiji Live.

Movement for Democracy Fiji DepChair., Emitai Boladuadua:
"The Movement will not be intimidated by those who use the cover of darkness to terrorise families of known advocates of democracy, human rights and rule of law in the country." Fiji Times.

My Comments

There would seem to be three possible lines of enquiry:

1. The attacks are by persons with pro-IG links. This seems the most probable explanation. If correct, I'd want to know whether they were officially approved (which seems most unlikely) or if anyone in Government or the military knows or suspects who these misguided culprits might be.

2. The attacks are not politically motivated. They were conducted by the same (or by different groups of) vandals for "kicks." This seems the least likely explanation but it should not be discarded too early.

3. The attacks are by persons with anti-Government links seeking to gain political mileage for acts which the public will --incorrectly-- blame the Government.

This last possibility is the least likely but the tactic has been used many times before throughout the world. Perhaps the most infamous example was when the Nazis set fire to the Reichstag (German parliament) and successfully passed the blame to their main opponents at the time, the Communists. The Nazis gained, and the Communists lost, public support.

If I were a Government adviser, I would immediately condemn these attacks, and do everything I could to bring the culprits to justice, starting with an enquiry among my supporters.

I would also ask why now? Could it have something to do with the PPDF? Who stands to gain most by these actions at this time? Surely it is NOT the Interim Government.

(o+) You Can't Please Everybody: Reactions to the pre-PPDF Meeting

Almost everyone (minor party GVP and CAMV party representatives excepted) seemed content with the agenda agreed upon by political leaders at Friday's Political Parties Leaders' Forum meeting. Former PM Laisenia Qarase spoke highly of the meeting. Former Opposition Leader Mike Beddoes was reported as saying the Forum went well and that everyone was presented an equal opportunity to express their views freely on all matters listed on the agenda. He added that the outcome of the Forum was significant considering how things had turned out in the past six months. Even the press was enthusiastic. "Political Leaders Find Some Common Ground" (Fiji Times); "Beddoes Happy with Forum Outcome" (Fiji Sun); "SDL Hails Political Party Meeting" (Fiji Live).

But not so the Fiji Daily Post. Its Saturday super-large front page banner headline read "No Change, No Polls". The paper went on to write about "an ultimatum issued to political leaders " ... by the Interim PM who was reported to have told the meeting that there would be no elections "if the participants failed to agree on a new electoral system." This may well be so but no reference to this statement was mentioned by any other paper; no participant mentioned it; it was not even given the status of a direct quotation by the Post; and since no journalist attended the meeting, one is left wondering what the Interim PM actually "told the meeting."And why spoil an otherwise happy day! [See "Bainimarama Urges Unity", below.]

Someone else not at the meeting, Professor Brij Lal, must have been phoned by the Fiji Sun for his comments on the agenda. The Sun (15 March) reports him as saying "This [the absence of direct reference to the military] is a glaring omission because unless the role of the military is publicly discussed, there can be no assurance of democratic rule in Fiji." I agree with him but the Constitution, that Bainimarama and many others want to see amended, was also not specifically mentioned. Those attending the meeting would ensure both topics will be discussed under item one of the agenda: The democratic experience in Fiji. [I'm wrong. It will be discussed under People's Charter.]

Prof. Lal warned a "set agenda would not be welcomed by the UN and Commonwealth, who had been requested to facilitate the PPDF. [They] will not sully their reputations by getting involved in a sullied process. The Commonwealth communiqué is clear: it wants the dialogue process to be open, transparent and unprejudiced about the final outcome. They will not come in to endorse a pre-arranged agenda," he said.

On this, I do not agree. Most agenda items are usually decided before meetings. Why should they not agree to a pre-arranged agenda? How can an agenda agreed to by all parties be "a sullied process"? The task of the UN/Commonwealth is to facilitate, not set the agenda. That is the sole responsibility of Fiji. I think Prof. Lal, presuming the worst, responded too quickly to a newspaper enquiry seeking a negative response. He could have waited until the dust had settled and a clearer, less ambiguous, view of what the agenda entailed had emerged.

Not to be outdone in "anticipatory negativity", Fiji Women's Crisis Centre Co-ordinator Shamima Ali, welcomed the decision to include 15 NGO and civil society groups in the PPDF, but then added "inclusion should not be conditional on who supports the coup and who doesn't." Fiji Times 15 March. [Of course. Why anticipate the worst?]

Bainimarama Urges Unity

Fiji Daily Post 13 March. Text in full.

Interim Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama is urging all political leaders to put their negativity aside and support the People’s Charter. Speaking at the Political Party Leaders Forum at the Parliamentary Complex in Nasese, Bainimarama called on leaders to unite and move forward. “Pointing fingers at one another and continuing to engage in the blame game is neither helpful nor constructive,” he said.“More than ever, now we must recognise that the only way to move forward is to tackle years of systematic problems by reforming. “To face our global economic challenges we must make paradigm shifts, be positive and resilient and promote equal citizenry, we must be one nation,” he added.

Bainimarama told the leaders at the forum that they must unite as one.“We must be creative and innovative to mitigate our risks and we must become self sufficient. “We can ill afford to view the situation through narrow religious, ethnic, political, personal vantage points or as advocates of foreign interests,” he said.

(o) Beddoes on Government of National Unity

Former Opposition leader and acting President of the General Voters United Peoples Party, Mick Beddoes is urging the Interim PM and political leaders to consider forming a Government of National Unity (GNU). Beddoes said such a government should be convened if a “timetable to parliamentary democracy” was not reached “within the next 12 months”.

He said getting the country back to democracy was urgent, citing the current state of the economy and worldwide financial crisis. He said while the recommencement of the dialogue process on March 13 was “most welcomed” there was a need for leaders, especially the interim PM, to consider “alternative options.”

“If the [PPDF] meeting is unable to reach agreement on a timetable that allows elections within a reasonable timeframe, then consideration for the formation of a government of national unity will allow more time for preparations, without putting at risk thousands of jobs and the collapse of businesses that would surely occur, if things remained as fragmented as they are today for another 12 months .... While it was important to address all of the issues in the Political Dialogue Process, it was also important to recognise the negative impact that the ongoing political instability was having on the economy and jobs." He added that a GNU would more “likely attract international support” and would quickly lead to a warming of relations with Australia, New Zealand, the Pacific Islands Forum and and the Commonwealth. Fiji Daily Post

(o) 1997 Constitution Did Not Stop Communalized Politics

(o) "Fiji's 1997 Constitution failed to stop the drift to more [ethnic] communalized politics, although this time its power-sharing provisions have produced a multi-party cabinet.* In the long term communalization will not enable political stability, although seeking to remove communalizaton is not likely to be immediately possible politically. Nonetheless, at least three amendments to the Constitution need to be addressed, the first being the adoption of a system of proportional representation instead of preferential voting to give scope to the increasing diversity of positions within all communal groupings, so that no one feels excluded; the second being the amendments to compulsory power sharing in government (guidelines for communal responsibilities in cabinet might be more effective); and the third being the ability to redistribute communal seats after each census on the basis of population without recourse to Constitutional change. These changes would allow Parliament to be more representative of Fiji's population as a whole." [Prof. Robbie Robertson, in Walsh 2006, Fiji: an Encylopaedic Atlas, p.383.]

* After the 2001 Election, PM Qarase refused to allocate cabinet posts to the Labour Opposition, as required in the Constitution. The "power sharing" after the 2006 election finally turned to farce when Mike Beddoes (whose General Voters party, the UPP, had two seats in Parliament) became Leader of the Opposition, and not Labour with its 31 seats. Personal animosity between Qarase and Chaudhry was partly responsible but whatever the causes, power-sharing had not worked.

Preferred PM, and Bainimarama's Performance : You've Got to Laugh

Most serious social scientists have doubts about the accuracy of public opinion polls. Their questions, questioning and sampling procedures and analysis are often faulty. In Fiji the ethnicity of the interviewer also influences replies. This may be the case with a Times-Tebutt poll put to 11256 (surely 1,256) Viti Levu people in December --- but the results are interesting nonetheless.

Preferred Prime Minister: Qarase 52% Fijians; Bainimarama 37% Indo-Fijians. Qarase 34% Females; Bainimarama 27%, Males 28% each. General Voters were 23% for Qarase and 20% for Bainimarama.

None of these figures added up to 100% because 18 other people were also mentioned as preferred PM (how much they polled was not disclosed) and 20% "did not know"(further reducing its value). But with Sevens rugby icon Waisale Serevi fourth behind former PM Mahendra Chaudhry (8%) one must suspect a sample bias towards humorous pollsters.

Possibly more reliable were the results on Bainimarama'a performance: Overall - Approved 48%, Disapproved 22%. Fijians - Approved 35%, Disapproved 34%. Indo-Fijians - Approved 64%, Disapproved 9%.

Mike Beddoes must have been asked to comment. He said Qarase is the "choice of the people" and Bainimarama's support is mainly from Indo-Fijians, adding, apparently quite seriously: "I am humbled and honoured to have my name up there with a legend like Serevi and all the other good citizens named in this poll." He polled 1%.

Others mentioned as preferred PM were Mahendra Chaudhry, Sitiveni Rabuka, Ratu Joni Madraiwiwi, Bernadette Rounds Ganilau, Poseci Bune, Ratu Epeli Nailatikau (or was it Ratu Epeli Ganilau?), Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, Wadan Narsey, Krishna Dutt, Vijay Singh (the golfer?), Kaliopate Tavola, Petero Mataca (the RC Archbishop), Ro Teimumu Kepa, Nazhat Shameem, Mere Samisoni.