Three weeks ago, I wrote on Facebook that the resumption of Grubsheet for 2021 was being postponed out of consideration for the national effort to assist the victims of Cyclone Yasa and Cyclone Ana. I made the observation that it was not the time for politics but for supporting the authorities to get help to those who needed it most. The inspiring sight of the estimable Inia Seruiratu leading the cyclone relief effort in the north with the help of the equally inspiring Australian servicemen and women from HMAS Adelaide was regrettably short lived. Because it didn’t take long in the public consciousness for politics as usual to rear its ugly head. So much so that I no longer feel bound by my decision of three weeks ago. I apologise that this article is so political and – at more than 6000 words – is so long, indeed the longest I have ever written in these columns. But it is my last one for some time and I have a lot to say. I also apologise that it is so personal, some might say self-indulgently so. But I have a lot to get off my chest.
We have just had a parliamentary session dominated by almost everything other than the needs of cyclone victims or the hundreds of thousands of people suffering because of the Covid-induced economic crisis. It was a spectacle that has triggered widespread community dismay and resentment at the apparent lack of empathy of fat-cat MPs and especially those on the FijiFirst government benches. Much of the nation that isn’t on the public teat is in deep distress. Yet as they struggle to find shelter, put food on the table, worry about disease outbreaks, cope with chronic interruptions to their power and water and make their way through Mumbai-style traffic jams over canyon-sized potholes, they find the public discourse dominated not by their concerns and challenges but the same old political valavala (fighting) and point scoring.
Despite the unprecedented national crisis, it was business as usual in the Parliament, led by the ever-preening Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum. Fresh from his “Gestapo-like” deportation of the USP Vice Chancellor, the AG was more than usually testy and belligerent. Perhaps he has given up even trying to manage the economic crash that has engulfed the nation. He is routinely seen signing fresh documents committing Fiji to further borrowing and portraying them as “strategic partnerships” rather than the loans and indebtedness that they are. One might reasonably have imagined the AG to be focussed exclusively on managing the economic firestorm and the challenges raging on every front. Yet there he was at a USP Council meeting helping his “Uncle Mahmood” resolve a crisis that he alone created and has done unprecedented damage to Fiji’s relations with the region.
How does it all “put food on the table?”, as the Prime Minister used to ask about every diversion before he too lost the plot. It doesn’t. But for the AG, winning at all costs is what matters. The articulate guy in the turban demanding accountability at USP got in his way and had to go, whatever the political fallout. As I’ve noted before, crash through or crash is the customary approach. Except that it’s much more likely to be crash on Wonder Boy’s horizon when the voting public finally get their say.
What did a weary nation make of the sight of impeccably-dressed MPs trading barbs and insults, the Speaker boasting about his unique ability to do his job and their elected representatives leaving the chamber laughing and joking with each other in the face of their collective suffering? No-one ever asks them, of course. Yet one thing is certain. A reckoning looms at the ballot box come election time. There’s an ever-yawning gulf between the haves and have-nots in Fiji – those living on government borrowings and those with no means of support. The government policy of “assisting” Fijians by allowing them to draw on their retirement savings – one of the most cynical exercises in spin I have ever witnessed – means that some 60,000 Fijians and counting now have zero balances in their FNPF accounts. Another crisis is already in the making – vast numbers of retirees with no means of support.
Yet there’s something just as disheartening that poses an equally serious threat to social cohesion and national unity. In my many years observing Fijian politics, I have never witnessed such a disconnect between the political elite and their struggling constituents. There has been no concession at all to appearances, let alone the substance of relative privilege. The political elite continue to speed around in their blacked-out Prados, trailed by their attendants and security guards, attending all manner of functions at which the food and drink is plentiful and fawning is invariably the currency of maintaining favour and influence. While outside on the streets, the burgeoning ranks of prostitutes and beggars – including children pleading for food – bears testament to the other face of Fiji. Unadulterated, pitiful despair. Away from the capital, increasing destitution, hunger and homelessness reflect a society that no longer seems to care or certainly doesn’t care enough. The only genuine Bula Bubble in Fiji is the one inhabited by the political and social elite. For much of the rest of the population, the bubble burst a long time ago.
It could and should have been a time when the government forged a national program of collective resilience – a back-to-basics grassroots movement led by the state in which shelter, food production and public health became the sole priorities. Instead, the government can’t even keep the power and water on, is consumed by hubris, obsesses about the unimportant and those charged with enforcing the law engage in all manner of criminal activity. The list of police offences detailed recently – everything from theft and assault to perverting the course of justice – is a sure sign of a nation in big trouble. The AG admitted as the cyclone crisis unfolded that he had only $3.5 million dollars on hand for the relief effort until the foreign cavalry arrived. Astonishingly, while $38 million a month is being allocated for aircraft leases and loans, there’s barely enough in the government’s contingent emergency funds to buy a couple of prestige houses in Suva.
With its obsession with seemingly everything but the immediate needs of ordinary Fijians, the FijiFirst government appears to have almost totally lost the plot. It isn’t just the chronic spin, media manipulation and continual protestations of “no crisis! Nothing to see here!” We now see normally straight-shooting ministers like Jone Usamate obliged to give misleading answers in the parliament. Usamate said Fiji had withdrawn Ratu Inoke Kubuabola as its candidate to lead the PIF out of deference to its Pacific neighbours when the truth is that it was to save the Prime Minister’s face when his handpicked candidate got little or no support.
Once again last week, Frank Bainimarama read out a speech written for him by Qorvis and the AG praising the AG and expressing his full support for him. Yes, Prime Minister, we know. You will both go down together, maybe not at the same election but sometime. And it has already happened in the estimation of those who once had high expectations of you but whose confidence you have since lost.
For its part, a cowering media – aside, of course, from the oleaginous flatterers at the CJ Patel Fiji Sun and the AG’s brother’s FBC – is starting to get creative. Creatively subversive. Did you notice that almost every photograph of the Prime Minister in the Fiji Times during the parliamentary sitting had him laughing uproariously with ministers like Faiyaz Koya and others around him? Yes, it’s the image of the local Nero fiddling while Rome burns. Laughing in the face of a nation’s suffering. A big joke. All up, I can’t recall a more depressing parliamentary week. And if it is to be business as usual in the bear pit of Fijian politics, I certainly no longer feel constrained by sensitivity to resume some serious mauling of my own. So here goes.
More than eight years ago, in September 2012, I wrote a Grubsheet article entitled “Methodist Church of Intolerance” in which I strongly criticised the church that my late father, the Reverend Peter Davis, once led in Fiji. One of his successors as president of the Methodist Church, the Reverend Tuikilakila Waqairatu, had stridently opposed the notion of Fiji being a secular state – an eventual provision of the 2013 Constitution – and had called for the declaration of a Christian state and for Christianity to have preference over other religions.
It gave me no pleasure to cast the otherwise distinguished churchman as a bigot. Indeed I wrote that confronting him head-on was “undoubtedly the toughest article I had ever written, and the saddest”. Until today. For however much it pained me to bite the official hand of the church in which I was reared, doing what I am about to do is much more painful. Because I am formally withdrawing my support for Frank Bainimarama and the FijiFirst government. And ending a 15-year relationship with the Prime Minister in which I am widely acknowledged to have played a significant role in assisting him, including in the role of principal communications advisor, speechwriter and advocate, not only in these columns but in the Fijian and international media.
In response to my recent articles echoing calls by the Military Council and members of his own cabinet for the reform of the FijiFirst government and in particular, the removal of Aiyaz Sayed Khaiyum, the PM responded – in statements written for him by Qorvis and the AG – by casting me as a disgruntled and relatively unimportant former employee. I am not in the business of big-noting myself personally in the way that has become customary at senior levels of government and the state. I leave it to others to judge whether I was important or not – though I appear to have been important enough to warrant a formal Prime Ministerial statement, in written and video form, attacking me for my Grubsheet posts that became the lead item in every news outlet in Fiji.
I fully expected the attempt by the PM to belittle me as a means of trying to blunt my attacks on the AG. It is common knowledge that every word uttered by the PM is written for him by Qorvis and the AG. So that when he speaks – whether it is in the parliament or to a village gathering – it is not Bainimarama speaking but Bainimarama reading out the AG’s script. He is, of course, a good reader and has mastered the TV autocue well enough for many people to believe that it is really him. But it is not. In reality, the PM is like a ventriloquist dummy on the AG’s knee who, unlike other dummies, happens to live and breathe but doesn’t have to think before he speaks. His thinking is done for him. His attack on me was the AG’s creation. And I know that because for six years – with the AG’s approval – I put the words into the PM’s mouth myself. As everyone at senior level knows, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum is the hand in the glove of the Bainimarama government. Which is why so many people loathe him and want him gone. Not only because of the power he wields and the fear he engenders but because he is the lightning rod in the community for growing disenchantment with the government and its increasingly disconnected leader.
Why this article is so hard and sad for me to write isn’t just the spectacle of the once admired Frank Bainimarama as the AG’s puppet and, increasingly, a figure of derision. It is what has gone before in my own relationship with the PM. Because the record shows that I have publicly sided with Bainimarama since his coup of 2006, continually played advocate for him, went to work as an advisor to his government in 2012 and played a role in all the major events leading to the restoration of parliamentary rule in 2014 – including the tortured passage of the 2013 Constitution. Indeed, I was instrumental in persuading the PM to proceed with the 2014 election when he told me he “was thinking of having a referendum about whether to have an election”, instead of holding the election itself. And I stayed with him well into his second term, writing hundreds of speeches and articles for him, shepherding him through multiple challenges – including in his relationship with the AG – and crafting Fiji’s overall messaging in multiple global forums, including its presidency of the COP23 climate negotiations. I even wrote the State Prayer that opens every parliamentary session on the instruction of the AG one night to “give me a prayer in 15 minutes”. So invoking the blessing of the secular Almighty was also among my duties. I certainly have ample material for a book on the Bainimarama era, though, as we know, it is so far a story without an ending.
Even as I was publicly attacked by the PM for my recent calls for reform of his government to protect his revolution, I kept faith with the man himself. Respect and friendship are not so easily jettisoned, especially when my late father had asked me before he died to do what I could to assist the Prime Minister. He and the PM’s father had been close friends in Lautoka in the 1960s and my father had described Frank to me as “a good boy” who deserved support in his effort to level the playing field in Fiji. While I was engaged for most of my time in government by Qorvis, I was not the usual hired PR gun, creating a narrative only because I was paid to do so. I was unapologetically a true believer in the Bainimarama revolution to eradicate ethnicity and religion as the defining factors in national life. That commitment predated my engagement in Fiji. Indeed, it was my advocacy for that revolution in these columns before 2012 that drew me to the attention of Qorvis and produced the invitation to join the company on its Fijian account.
When I did, I dedicated myself with the passion of a true believer to give Frank Bainimarama a voice with speeches that are widely credited with not only his election win in 2014 but establishing him as a regional and global statesman. In the deep divide of Fijian politics, it was not without personal cost to my own reputation. A year ago, the opposition MP, Lenora Qereqeretabua, wondered aloud to me whether I realised how hated I was in Fiji. I knew it but didn’t give it a moment’s thought. It was the cause that mattered, not me.
Yet regrettably I cannot support Frank Bainimarama and his government any longer. And the trigger is last week’s events in the Parliament, the unbridled assault by the AG – with the PM’s blessing – on Fiji’s institutions of state and the removal, without any consultation whatsoever let alone an election mandate, of a mechanism for public participation in the judicial system that has been in place for almost 130 years. The abolition without notice of the assessor system in Fiji’s courts and the setting up a special court for corruption offences separate from the mainstream judiciary – primarily a court to try the government’s opponents – is a gross betrayal of the people who put the FijiFirst government in power in the first place.
Even if the AG disputes my characterisation of the changes, none of it was put to the Fijian people in the FijiFirst election manifesto for the 2018 election to enable them to reflect on the merits of the policy. None of it was done in consultation with Fiji’s legal profession, other institutions of state or anyone else. It is without doubt, the biggest assault on Fijian democracy since the coup of 2006. And the difference is that while the 2006 coup was to level the playing field and protect the rights of Fiji’s minorities, this was an unashamed exercise in entrenching and protecting the government’s political position. Unforgivable, inexcusable and deserving of absolute censure, including the government’s removal at the first opportunity. Which is what I intend to campaign for from now on. Lest my last statement feed into the PM’s narrative about me being an overwrought, ageing drama queen, let’s examine in detail what happened in the parliament last week.
The speed with which the AG railroaded through two bills that fundamentally alter the criminal justice system in Fiji sent shock waves through the legal profession, the judiciary, the office of the DPP and anyone in Fiji who believes in the rule of law. His unilateral establishment of a specialised division of the High Court to hear corruption cases has raised grave fears that these will be “kangaroo courts” that give the impression of fairness but are weighted against those who appear before them and will be used against the government’s opponents. And his unilateral abolition of the assessor system in criminal trials ends nearly 130 years of public participation in the verdicts of those trials, leaving them solely in the hands of judges. I repeat: In neither case was there proper debate, no reference to any parliamentary committee and no consultations with the legal profession or the nation’s judges or prosecutors, let alone the public.
Astonishingly, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum – a “here today, gone tomorrow” politician – simply took it upon himself by bypass the institutions of state that comprise the criminal justice system and use the FijiFirst government’s numbers in the Parliament to pursue a personal preference and his own political agenda. He did so by using the expedited procedure under Order 51 of the Parliamentary Standing Orders to fast track his changes rather than Chapter 7 of the Standing Orders, which would have allowed for a proper process of public consultation. It is one of the most egregious abuses of power by an individual politician in Fijian history. These are fundamental assaults on democracy – in the case of the abolition of assessors – and on human rights and civil liberties – in the case of the corruption courts. Yet when the country’s lawyers had the temerity to question what had happened, the AG rounded on them, accusing them of being politically motivated and in league with the opposition.
BILL NO 1. OF 2021 (ANTI-CORRUPTION DIVISION)
When the Fiji Law Society said last week that “the proposal to create a “specialised” division of the High Court to consider corruption cases needs careful review”, it reflected widespread apprehension in the profession about how these courts will operate. I have already documented in these columns the sentiment of fear that exists about the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) – the shadowy corruption watchdog that has become a parallel prosecution arm to that of the Director of Public Prosecutions and gives every appearance of being only as independent as the AG tells it to be. This is what I wrote about FICAC last October in my posting “A Tangled Web of Secrecy and Control Part 2”:
“There is evidence that FICAC has, in fact, become something of a personal tonton macoutes for the AG – a Fijian version of the feared special operations unit set up by the Haitian dictator, “Papa Doc” Duvalier, to control his own country in the 1960s. Whereas the DPP only prosecutes after a formal police investigation and solely on the basis of the public interest and whether there is a reasonable chance of securing a conviction, FICAC is both investigator and prosecutor and has none of the same constraints.
There is no judicial or other independent oversight of its operations, nor even the most basic internal oversight for that matter. Since it was established in April 2007 soon after Frank Bainimarama seized power, it has never had a commissioner as the equivalent of chair to oversee its operations and act as a buffer between the FICAC deputy commissioner as CEO and the government. So the deputy commissioner has a great deal of power but little in the way of supervision and accountability.
The current FICAC Deputy Commissioner is Rashmi Aslam, a Sri Lankan who is obliged by a little-known clause in the 2013 Constitution to report directly to the Attorney General, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, in a way that doesn’t apply under the Constitution to the DPP. It’s worth citing the relevant section – Section 115, Clause 9 – to understand its importance and how the AG is in a position, with the force of law behind him, to influence the operations of FICAC to the extent of it being genuinely “independent” only in name. “The Commission shall provide regular updates and advice to the Attorney-General on any matter relating to its functions and responsibilities”, reads Clause 9.
So Rashmi Aslam and the AG have regular meetings that are prescribed under Fiji’s supreme law. Yet this constitutional provision is what is known among lawyers as the classic “reverse clause”. Because at these meetings, it is also reasonable to assume that as well as being provided with updates and advice, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum is also able to give advice and direction to Rashmi Aslam as FICAC Deputy Commissioner.
All this means that there is no judicial or other independent oversight to prevent the corruption watchdog from being sooled onto the government’s opponents for political purposes.”
At the time I wrote this, I was unaware that formal contact between the AG and FICAC isn’t only provided for under the 2013 Constitution but under the FICAC Act – the law setting up the corruption watchdog. As the Labour Party leader and former Prime Minister, Mahendra Chaudhry, pointed out in an article in last Saturday’s Fiji Times, section 5 (5) permits the Commissioner to “seek the assistance and input of the Attorney General”, which takes the constitutional provision much further. Mr Chaudhry called for the amendment of the FICAC Act to remove this provision, which he rightly said compromises the independence of the Commission.
FICAC has a history of failed prosecutions in the mainstream courts, most notably that against Sitiveni Rabuka, who survived a FICAC prosecution on election funding offences that was widely perceived as an attempt to prevent him from contesting the 2018 election. The case against Rabuka failed in the High Court and failed again on appeal in a dramatic “final hour” ruling by the former Chief Justice, Anthony Gates, that enabled Rabuka to take Frank Bainimarama to the brink of defeat. Would the same thing happen if such a case were referred to a specialist corruption judge? How much influence would the AG have on the selection of such judges? And is what happened in the Rabuka case the underlying motive for him to have railroaded through the changes he has made? These are all legitimate questions that deserve an answer and might have been canvassed in a proper consultation process. Alas, that is not going to happen. The AG has made sure of it.
BILL NO.2 OF 2021 (ABOLITION OF ASSESSORS)
The abolition of assessors also provoked a strong response from the Fiji Law Society. In its open letter to the AG and members of parliament, the Society described it as “a profound change in, and the dismantling of, a key part of the administration of criminal justice in Fiji”. Assessors, it said “are a fundamental protection of an accused person’s right to a fair trial”. “Removing public participation from criminal justice will reduce transparency and erode public confidence. Leaving the question of guilt or innocence in serious cases to a single judge, without an accused having a choice in the matter, is neither fair nor just”, it said.
While for any member of the community, the aforementioned statement is deeply concerning, it sent the AG into a rage. And on the margins of the parliament, he attacked the Law Society as a group of individual lawyers working in league with the opposition, even though the new President of the Law Society, Wylie Clark, has no overt political affiliation – so far as I know – and no record of partisan political statements. Unsurprisingly, a counter argument in relation to the issue of corruption courts came in the form of a public statement from FICAC. There is no way of knowing whether FICAC was instructed to issue that statement or took it upon itself to enter the political fray. But the mere fact that it said anything at all has reinforced concerns about its independence because this is a debate in which the Acting Chief Justice, Kamal Kumar, and the Director of Public Prosecutions, Christopher Pryde, have been noticeably absent.
25 years ago, in 1994, a Commission of Enquiry on the Fiji Courts was set up by the government of the then prime minister, Sitiveni Rabuka. It was headed by a distinguished Australian-born New Zealand judge, Sir David Beattie, who had been Governor-General of New Zealand. After extensive consultations with the legal profession and other interested parties, the Beattie Report recommended that the assessor system should be retained. Yet in a matter of hours last week, something that had been a key part of the administration of justice in Fiji since the 19th century – was abolished unilaterally by Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum.
Fast forward 25 years later and we know what the current DPP, Christopher Pryde, thinks from a speech he gave to the annual AG’s Conference in December 2017. A link to the address is still on the DPP’s website. In front of both the AG and the Prime Minister, Mr Pryde concluded that “Fiji’s assessor system has operated well for 125 years and should continue to do so. It is cost effective, it guards against elitism, it keeps the community engaged and it promotes democracy”. As unambiguous as it gets. So was the DPP consulted before the unilateral abolition of the assessor system? Was the Acting Chief Justice consulted? These are questions the public is entitled to know. Because an independent prosecution arm and an independent judiciary are cornerstones of our democracy. And while the Attorney General may have the numbers in the parliament to mess with our institutions, he has no right to impose his will unilaterally with the support of the Prime Minister. For me, it is the final straw, the final break with the Bainimarama government in which I have now lost all confidence.
So what happens next? I am going away to examine my options and wait to see what emerges in terms of a potential alternative government. As things stand, I am not committed to any particular course of action. Except that I will support any political party that like FijiFirst, embraces the multiracial, multi-faith agenda but unlike FijiFirst is more than a two-man dictatorship, isn’t repressive or prescriptive and genuinely respects pluralism – the notion of different groups, principles and beliefs co-existing in politics and the community. In short, which doesn’t continually treat the opposition as the enemy but recognises its legitimate role to keep the government accountable and honest and works with it for the common good. Above all, I will support a political party that puts the genuine needs of the people first and respects and defends the independence of the institutions of state, not subverts them as the FijiFirst government has so wilfully and demonstrably done.
So where are we in terms of a viable alternative to FijiFirst? The short answer is “not there yet”. But a great deal is happening behind the scenes, and especially in relation to Sitiveni Rabuka – the man the Prime Minister refers to as “the Snake”. Having parted ways with SODELPA in December after he lost the leadership to Bill Gavoka – the AG’s father-in-law – Rabuka is said to be working hard behind the scenes to establish his People’s Alliance. It is a potent name for a political party, the “People” part signalling inclusion and “Alliance” not only suggesting bringing together different elements but harking back in the minds of older Fijians to the golden days of the Alliance Party in which Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara presided over a long period of stability and prosperity that in a striking political irony, Rabuka brought to an end with his coup of 1987.
Grubsheet understands that Rabuka is engaged in discussions with Savenaca Narube – the former Reserve Bank Governor and leader of the Unity Party – to be part of the People’s Alliance and give him the economic credibility he needs in government. Despite the confidence of Bill Gavoka that the SODELPA brand name will carry it and him over the line, there are persistent rumours that up to 15 current SODELPA MPs are ready to jump ship to join the Alliance, including Lynda Tabuya, one of its brightest stars. And Biman Prasad – the leader of the National Federation Party – is evidently telling people that he can happily work with Rabuka if he makes the commitment to abandon the notion of iTaukei supremacy and genuinely embraces a multiracial, multi-faith agenda.
That is my own condition as well. I am prepared to take Rabuka at his word that he has had a Damascene conversion since 1987 and has come to accept the principle of one nation, with equal rights and opportunity for all. Not everyone will be prepared to accept the sincerity of that conversion. Far from it. The baggage Rabuka carries – his coups and the collapse of the National Bank – would make it nigh on impossible to stage a comeback anywhere else. Yet the notion of forgiveness and redemption is deeply ingrained in the Fijian psyche. And there is one compelling reason why I am personally willing to take Rabuka at his word. That leaving aside the events of 1987 – the rape of democracy and horrific victimisation of non iTaukei – his record subsequently as elected Prime Minister was that he respected the independence of the institutions of state, something that no longer can be said about Frank Bainimarama and Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum.
Rabuka continues to enjoy a great deal of support in the country and “snake” or not, I am certainly willing to consider the notion that he be given another chance to lead. Or be the principal vote-getter in a party led by someone younger who represents a transition to a new generation. And be available to impart his undoubted knowledge and experience to a People’s Alliance team. Part of me is willing him on to close the circle of his extraordinary political life. But that is largely down to him. He clearly needs to demonstrate more than he has – with inclusive policies and the credibility of the team he builds around him – that he has a competitive vision to take Fiji forward.
I would never have imagined until last week expressing the view that I have just written in the preceding paragraph. For a long time, many of the Prime Minister’s strongest supporters have hoped – indeed counted on him – to reform FijiFirst to bring some of his more talented ministers to the fore and end the AG’s stranglehold on the party and government policy. It long ago ceased to be Fiji first, as the name was meant to imply. It is the Prime Minister and the AG first. Their way or the highway. And I am far from being the only former supporter who has become convinced that they have not only lost their way but are a clear and present danger to the electoral prospects of their parliamentary colleagues and to genuine democracy in Fiji.
Internal dissent is invariably conducted in whispers at the present time because of the all- pervasive climate of fear. But it is capable of becoming more voluble whenever, if ever, the election approaches. Because the dominant political instinct is self-preservation and most FijiFirst ministers with their fingers genuinely on the nation’s pulse are already acutely aware that the opposition benches beckon. Will it lead to defections? In the words of the old cliché, only time will tell. There’s already a story doing the rounds that Parveen Bala – the FijiFirst minister who commands a Tamany Hall-style bloc of votes in the West – has approached the National Federation Party seeking a safer refuge. But that may be more to do with his lack of confidence in being endorsed again by FijiFirst because of his own baggage than his lack of confidence in another Party win.
In a country where the Coconut Radio has always been abuzz, more potent rumours abound that the Prime Minister may be about to assume the presidency that is being vacated later in the year by the current President, Major General (Ret’d) Jioji Konrote, and that he plans to install Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum as his successor. I have no inside knowledge of whether this is indeed the case. All I can say is that the second part of this rumour would be regarded with genuine alarm in government ranks, the military and in much of the country. It isn’t just that the AG is deeply unpopular and has no hope under the d’Hondt electoral system of acquiring the large number of votes needed to take other FijiFirst candidates over the line. The question is invariably whether he is sufficiently part of the mainstream to be acclaimed by consensus as Bainimarama’s legitimate successor.
The USP academic, Professor Konai Thaman, sparked a furore this week by questioning whether the deported Professor Pal Ahluwalia, was “Pasefikan” enough to be USP Vice Chancellor. Some may raise the same question about the AG. Whether a devout Muslim who interrupts the business of government five times a day to pray towards Mecca, consults an Imam and whose family is teaching its children Arabic so they can read the Koran in its original form, can ever be generally accepted as Fijian prime minister. It is not a question of religious tolerance but political reality. If one accepts the dictum that politics is the art of the possible, is it possible for Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum to win an election at the head of a mainstream party in a Christian and Hindu dominant Fiji? If the rumours are true, Frank Bainimarama may be about to test that proposition. Truly a crash through or crash proposition of epic proportions.
I personally don’t have a problem with the AG as PM on religious grounds. In fact, I have already recounted the story of how I told his father, Sayed, in 2012 that I one day hoped that his son could be prime minister. But that was before I experienced the hubris, arrogance, nepotism, cronyism, tribalism, vindictiveness and ruthlessness on the AG’s part that I witnessed at first hand for the best part of six years and eventually convinced me of his unsuitability to lead. His assault on the integrity of Fiji’s institutions of state – that began long before last week and his been endorsed by his patron, Frank Bainimarama – is merely the final straw.
But will there be an election at all? Rumours have also surfaced that the government may use the pandemic as an excuse to defer next year’s poll, emphasising the need for continuing stability and confidence rather than the unpredictability of an on-time election that doesn’t go its way. Certain military officers close to the Prime Minister privately express the view that if the “Snake”, Rabuka, ever rears his head again, another coup is inevitable. But the Fiji of the 2020s is not the Fiji of 2006, let alone of 2000 or 1987. Young people especially are just not as acquiescent these days as their predecessors and integrated schools have made the new generation of Fijians much more homogenous. As president, Bainimarama may conceivably have the power to prorogue the parliament and reintroduce rule by decree to keep Khaiyum in office. But doing so would destroy his legacy and a great deal of community goodwill towards him.
My own view is that things have come too far for anyone to again behave so recklessly. Leaving aside the disaster of Fiji again becoming a pariah nation – succoured only by other dictatorships – the RFMF, let alone the country as a whole, would be torn apart. Another coup would inevitably be seen not as entrenching the rights of a particular community but entrenching the power and privilege of Frank Bainimarama and Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum. Fiji is not yet Zimbabwe even if we have begun to take the Zimbabwe road. And we are certainly not China, with a population prepared to trade democracy for prosperity and kowtow to perpetual dictatorship. Some Fijians worry that the Australian and New Zealand governments might be tempted to turn a blind eye to another coup to keep Bainimarama out of the clutches of the Chinese. But given our dependence on the goodwill of ordinary Aussies and Kiwis to resume coming when the Covid nightmare ends, it’s a fair bet that whatever their governments do, it is they – if democracy dies in Fiji – who would drive the final nail into the coffin of the economy and the future prospects of a great many young Fijians.
Sadly, the old adage that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely could have been invented for the duo of Frank Bainimarama and Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum. They did some good things once. A lot of good things, in fact. But I have never forgotten what Pio Tikoduadua – someone I have always admired and who was once also close to them – said in frustration before he defected to the opposition: “For these guys, enough is never enough”. Sa dina sara ga. How true. The increasing petulance of both men as the public mood turns against them and their tin ear to the concerns of the people means that as far as I am concerned at least, their time is up. After 15 years in power, there’s a famous phrase used in the British Parliament in 1939 that applies as much to Bainimarama and Khaiyum as it did to the besieged Prime Minister, Neville Chamberlain, after his policy of appeasing Hitler failed: ”You have sat too long here for any good you have been doing. In the name of God, go!”
Bula and good to see you back with the pen.
I think you should not sit on the sidelines but keep on writing about how these two are wrecking havoc on every life of the ordinary Fijian people.
AG’s raking up up of huge debt in past 15 years with nothing to show for these debts being put to good use to grow the National pie but taking on debt to payoff existing debts is far more consequential the Rabuka NBF failure. I am surprised that Rabuka has not used this argument to counter the AG’s constant torture on the NBF issue.
I read with extreme disbelief that Minister Premila Kumar ( who I think is an overrated Minister who has no clue about her Ministry ) only seen to always visiting markets stalls instead of putting in the time to formulate future strategies to better the lives in Fijians and taking the municipalities to elections so that the city and towns can be run by people’s elected reps instead of appointed yes man and yes women strolling alongside the Minister at market stalls, the Minister talking about Fiji soon being a cashless society , I say “really” is this where the FFP priorities are when almost 30% or even more of the population live in poverty and don’t know where their next meal or “cash” will come from. I say that the Minister is right in that Fiji is now really “ cashless” in the real sense.
I still maintain while your intentions may have been good to help Frank usher in so called new era in Fiji you were still blind to the very fact that Frank and AG had no real intention to promote genuine democracy but in name only and as you have indicated both have ruled with an iron fist under the disguise of a democracy and the AG has run a mockery and weakened state institutions to promote his own agenda.
But you finally now see reality and better late then never to finally throw in the towel in supporting Frank and telling it as it is and as seen by most for past 15 years.
Please keep on writing and now is not the time to stop but through the power of the pen you now have a even bigger responsibility to convince people of Fiji to change Government in 2022 or else they deserve what they get if they are still bind sided in their support of the FFP.
Thank you, Rajiv. Of course, I expect a torrent of “I/we told you so”s”. I may have been naive but the return to parliamentary rule in 2014 was a big step forward, as were a whole lot of other reforms and Fiji’s leadership on oceans and climate change. I admit that I didn’t expect that the erosion of the independence of the institutions of state would be so brazen. As I say, last week was the final straw.
I am not in the business of running a constant stream of negative commentary. I wrote a great deal in terms of advocacy in the lead-up to 2014 and I resumed writing in earnest last August to try to get the PM to realise that he could only win again if he reformed the government. Clearly that agenda failed and has been accompanied instead by a fresh wave of authoritarianism and arrogance.
As I’ve said, I am going away in the hope that the opposition will get its act together to be able to provide a cogent alternative. And until that happens, I don’t really see a role for myself that isn’t already being played by Victor Lal and others. I can’t play advocate for a group of people who have yet to coalesce with a comprehensive blueprint to take the nation forward.
We have some credible figures in the opposition but no real structured momentum for change. The opposition is still too splintered and lacking in direction. It isn’t enough to just stumble into government because everyone is sick of the sight of FijiFirst. So a great deal of work needs to be done. Yet as you will have read, I am hoping that such a force emerges over the coming months and will deserve my support, though more importantly the support of the majority of Fijians.
For a little while there, I thought: “Oh no, they’ve confiscated the great grubsheet pencil!” 😆 . Great to have you back, coffee’s poured, time now to sit back for a great read. Bula vinaka… 🇫🇯
Vinaka, William. I think that was several coffee’s worth! But great to hear from you.
I’m confused. I thought your main point, repeated over and over again in our 2011 ABC Radio National debate, was that you were not a Bainimarama coup supporter. But your main point now seems to be that you are renouncing the position you then claimed not to hold. https://abcmedia.akamaized.net/rn/podcast/2011/08/nit_20110805_1830.mp3. Jon Fraenkel
Sigh. Oh dear. The academic sage doesn’t understand the difference between clamouring for someone to seize power at the point of a gun and acquiescing to the reality of it after it happens, understanding why and trying to make the best of things. Trust you to think the “main point of my article is to renounce a position I then claimed not to hold” in a single radio encounter with you a decade ago. Of course nothing else matters. Without wanting to rake over dead coals, I recall your argument at the time was to keep piling on the sanctions, as if that would make any difference. Even the Australian and New Zealand governments eventually accepted the logic of my own argument and the rest is history. At least the passage of time doesn’t alter some things. Confusion appears to be still your natural state.
In 2010 you slammed Col Jone Baledrokadroka and Suliasi Daunitutu for their pro democracy stance. Both are banned from returning to Fiji because of their views.
Are you now saying they were right all along in their criticims of Bai and Khai?
If your answer is Yes, will you now join the pro-democracy movement in Australia and eslewhere?
Ajax, I am already pro-democracy. The difference is that I was not pro-Qarase or pro-SODELPA, while their agenda was pretty much exclusively pro-iTaukei. Which is the point of difference.
The only time I met Jone Baledrokadroka – which was as we were both about to board a plane at Nausori Airport – I found him very charming and liked him a lot. Suli Daunitutu I haven’t met.
But to answer your question, no, I won’t to be formally joining the pro-democracy movement as such. But you can rest assured that I will share any agenda they have that is genuinely democratic and above all, inclusive. As I’ve stated, I will support anyone who stands for a multiracial, multi-faith Fiji and protects the independence of the institutions of state, especially the judiciary. Because I believe that it is the only viable future for the country.
Graham
Genuine democracy never only hinges on a country being multiracial but also based on a country having respect for the rule of law and separation of powers and respect for an independent judiciary and state institutions.
Fiji’s so called genuine democracy was only based on Frank’s preached idea of everyone is a Fijian and that national interest decisions were not based along ethnic lines. That I will always give him credit for BUT while he preached multiracialism he through the AG also directly controlled and heavily compromised independent state institutions, judiciary, turned a blind eye on numerous conflicts of interest on Board appointments and oversaw the roll out of the 2013 constitution which DOES NOT have 3/4 public support through a referendum.
Vacancies in Parliament are filled through those in a party who has the next highest votes, as you know in a real democracy that is NOT genuine democracy as in genuine democracies Govts get tested in a free and fair By-election.
They still control city and town council through their appointed administrators, that is NOT genuine democracy as true democracies let the people eject their local governments.
During your stint with them you saw the slow and steady dismantling of good Governance and direct interference in everything and a highly compromised judiciary through the Minister of Everything yet you stayed silent a d only now you are announcing your support for independent state institutions and judiciary.
Where were you past 10 years?
I guess you have now realized that enough is enough and I do admire you for this realization, I guess as they say better late then never.
You now have a greater obligation to voice your support towards a new Fiji and the principles of genuine democracy that you really believe in and the way you can do that is to keep on writing and exposing Frank and AG.
Well said Rajiv.
The problem with Bai and Khai’s idea of multiracialism that Graham supported is that it is based on the dangerous assumption that for one race to have equal opportunity and equal say in government then the majority race must be deprived of it.
This policy is reflected in the boards of State Owned Enterprises and statutory organisations which the AG has stacked with his own relos and apologists. The Water Authority of Fiji for example has no indigenous Fijian member on its Board. Yet the i’taukei own the water catchment areas. How unfair is that?
Self determination for the indigenous Fijian population has been ignored, indeed shoved aside, by the Bai and Khai regime.
Mickey Beddoes come on down!
Rajiv, you ask where was I for the past ten years? Well until I resigned from Qorvis in the middle of 2018, I was behind the scenes giving a great deal of advice to the leadership, some of which was accepted and some of which was unwelcome.
Why else do you think Frank Bainimarama made the following reference to me in the ill-tempered public statement written for him by Qorvis and the AG: “I don’t know why he’s dealing in gossip these days, but I also remember even in the best of times he always seemed to find drama. And if he couldn’t find it, he’d make it up”.
What does it mean? “Drama” for the PM and AG is invariably someone asking awkward questions about their decisions and arguing vigorously for an alternative course of action. The fact is that I was one of the very few people around them who was prepared to stick their neck out and say what needed to be said. Often this was at the urging of senior people in the government who couldn’t be as forthright.
There are two prevailing dominant conditions at the top of government in Fiji. Fawning and fear. And I can assure you I was afflicted by neither. Partly because of my age, professional experience and experience of Fiji but also because I didn’t work directly for them and wasn’t fearful of retribution. So I could speak my mind and did. Very vociferously at times, which the PM and AG might have regarded as “drama” but was sometimes needed to have any hope of cutting through.
Of course, it suits you politically for me to “keep on writing and exposing Frank and the AG”. But I do not regard myself as being obliged to do the opposition’s work for them. I have said that I will keep my counsel until a credible alternative emerges to the current government. And that’s what I intend to do.
Bula Graham
Just to clarify, I dont have any political interest in Fiji so your writings do not suite me politically. In fact I left Fiji over 40 years ago and enjoying my retirement so I have no political or any other interest in Fiji. I am just an ordinary ex citizen bystander not happy with what’s all happening in Fiji with two men rule ( more realistically one man rule) continues to peel and destroy every layer of democracy yet they preach a united and multiracial Fiji.
No one is asking you to do the work for the opposition as there are many experienced opposition politicians (MPC, SLR, Biman, Narube to name afew) out there who knows what they are doing and I dont think they need your writings to formulate their strategy.
Waiting for credible alternative in my opinion is being selfish as you can continue writing your op ed based on your many years in Fiji and last few being with AG and Frank. Fact based op eds does not need to wait for credible opposition.
My argument is not with you as we all loose out on the real issue if we point a finger at each other which is ensuring good governance and rule of law prevails in Fiji whether its with a FFP, NFP, SODELPA, FLP Government.
As already stated I do applause you for your writings and stating some facts from an insider so that the ordinary people of Fiji are better informed about the reality on the ground rather then the spin coming from Qorvis.
Anyways enjoy your hiatus and best wishes and look forward to reading your pen to paper whenever that resumes
Vinaka
Welcome back and well done Graham.
They have certainly lost the plot and blown the dough, and continue to take the Country down with them.
Is their a name or phase that could relate to a terrorist gone full circle?
Thank you, Jim. Yes, it’s a striking irony that three decades after the 1987 coups, the AG is a ticking time bomb under Frank Bainimarama.
I actually wrote to the Prime Minister when the term ‘Bainimarama Boom” was first used pointing out that booms are invariably followed by busts and suggesting that he avoid the reference. Advice he didn’t take.
Ka-boom.
Only two countries in the world where the military has a country, one is Pakistan and the next Fiji
Thank you for continuing to care about our collective beloved Fiji Graham, and spending your time researching, thinking, connecting and writing.
Do not stop.
This is a fantastic article and really convicts the reader to say “Enough is Enough”.
The unilateral decision by the AG with the creation of these 2 bills on our Court System is also a blessing.
It’s where I also have reached “Enough is Enough”. I will continue to pray for the leadership of those over me, but it is clear, that unless stopped, this matter will repeat itself.
“That which has been is what will be,
That which is done is what will be done,
And there is nothing new under the sun.”
(Ecclesiastes 1:9)
We must change things, or more of this will happen again, and again, and again.
Enough is enough.
Vinaka vakalevu, Kalara. Appreciate your sentiments and hope that all is well with you.
Perhaps the entire USP could do a thesis on how to fix a broken Country.
Just to add on to that, also how to “remove” a whistleblower while they’re at it for exposing the rot that’s been rife in the administration itself in order to nationalize the university in a vain attempt.
Who’s writing the PM’s speeches now?
Julie, young American/s working to the AG.
Not surprised at the amount of “we told you so” messages you’re getting GD, because unsurprisingly we’re edging close to the likes of China, Myanmar, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe like you said.
It’s too late now for Frankie unfortunately, as him and his “master” are slowly but surely embracing communist/socialist ideologies in addition to making the dictatorship/authoritarian government more apparent.
It’s clear Aiyarse is trying to make himself godlike in a way, as if trampling on democratic freedoms will hinder the people from rioting.
Hi Graham,
An outsider with no connection to Fiji, and someone who has an interest in politics, please allow me to offer my thoughts. Fiji is a fragile country, experimenting with democracy, but alas not succeeding, because it doesn’t have “a government of national unity.” Without a government of national unity, Fiji, in my opinion, is unlikely to succeed. Meanwhile, the present government is the best hope of keeping the country together from further ethnic tensions and potential coups, as I explain below.
When Fiji gained its independence, the population comprised 49% Asian/Indians and 46% Fijian (iTaukei). There have always been tensions between the two ethnic groups, despite the minority iTaukei population enjoying many benefits; such as land rights, education, and so on, compared to the majority, Asian/Indians. The iTaukei governments have introduced many racially discriminately provisions after the first coup, which had led to mass migration by the majority of Asian/Indians and changing the balance of the population. The root cause of Fiji’s political controversies are related to the ethnic fault line which imposed discrimination on a group Asian/Indians that constituted a large part of the population – thus causing an exodus of (Asian/ Indians) who until the late 1980s were a majority in Fiji.
Today, Fiji is a land far from ethnic peace and political inclusion. The iTaukei has been in power for more than five decades, chief among them is the military, presidents and prime ministers dominated by the iTaukei, an ethnic group, and the fear of an open democracy in which the “Asian/Indians”, roughly some 40% or so of the population, might gain too much power, to the detriment of the iTaukei.
Frankly, it would be a disaster, in my opinion, for the current government to go, because there are no alternatives in the horizon, and if this government were to go, there would be chaos, unpredictability, ethnic tensions, and gutter politics. Leading to the US, Australia, NZ, India placing sanctions against a racially divisive government.
Jonathan, creating a credible alternative to the current government is the most pressing challenge in Fiji right now. You say it would be a disaster for the present government to go. While this was also once my view, we have reached the stage where it will be a bigger disaster if it stays.
The assault on the independence of the institutions of state in Fiji for political benefit is an assault on democracy and on every Fijian.
I agree that another FFP term will be disastrous for Fiji. If and when the opposition wins and forms Govt they will inherit a big economic mess, Govt with no money, huge unemployment, increased poverty, huge debt levels so it will be a Herculean job to turn ship around and that will take time and more then one term.
I have never seen Fiji in such a big mess economically and all the blame lies squarely at the feet of two men, Bainimarama for too much globe trotting and not paying enough attention to domestic issues and the AG, who has had absolutely no clue on how to run an economy. You see him (AG) at the helm of the economy he has not diversified the economy but always relied on tourism and COVID just proved the vulnerabilities of tourism. All the external borrowings the AG has done has not increased economic output , borrowings are a good thing if it increases economic output which increases the tax base which in turn helps pay back the borrowings.
You have a Minister touring market stalls, Agriculture Minister giving out seeds and herding goats, Infrastructure Minister blaming old infrastructure for lack of water supply, you have $600 million spent on roads past 5 years with nothing but potholes to show for and Commerce Minister giving out roadside stall leases.
That’s not how you build an economy, you need to think big and run the country like a business with social safety net for the less fortunate and have economic growth policies that will eventually lift them out of poverty.
Now that is what we call progress . So many missed opportunities .
These guys are going in the opposite direction with huge ever increasing debts, high unemployment , increased poverty and lack of investor confidence. Yes COVID bears partial responsibility for some of these things but anyone with a little bit of sense knew Fiji’s economy was already in real trouble years ago.
These guys need to go as too long at the helm, SODELPA needs to get their act together and move away from racial politics and get their house in order and come up with policies that will better the lives in Fijians, they need to be seen as a credible Govt in waiting and right now they are not credible.
While NFP seems to be the only party taking sense in Parliament they are struggling nationally to attract votes. Narube makes sense and speaks in common terms that people can understand and some good policies but not yet politically tested. Chaudhry is smart but a big question mark still hangs over him.
At this rate Fiji is heading towards a economic mess like Venezuela and Zimbabwe and Greece where a huge Greek style bail out will be needed.
Well said Rajiv.
The stark economic facts speak for themselves. Its the economy that should be the criterion by which we should judge the effectiveness of this government, and not some blissful commitment to multiracialism.
The multi-racial model in Fiji as pushed by Fiji First was/is a dangerous facade anyway in that it is based on assumption that in order for it to flourish, the rights of the indigenous population had to be suppressed, even removed.
The Fiji First government promulgated 17 decrees that did just that. The self-determination rights of the indigenous population have wilfully suppressed by these decrees. Yet the high school dropout we have as a PM is telling everyone that ‘no one will be left behind’. Obviously reading from a preapred text that Graham Davis drafted. Isa Viti
Moving forward the independence of institutions should be prioritised. The public perception of a lack of independence is just as bad as a real lack of independence, because people’s confidence in these institutions matters. If not, their decisions and actions will always spark controversy, regardless of merits. In Fiji, the perception of a lack of independence grows with the greying of the lines grounding the doctrine of separation of powers between the three branches of government: legislative, executive, and judiciary. The perception of a lack of independence is aggravated by the high turnover rates of Permanent Secretaries, prosecutions being expedited against political opponents so close to elections, open statement by the Chief Justice undermining a decision on Covid-19 restrictions delivered by a Magistrate after a public outburst by the AG, to name a few examples. Even within the legislature itself, the permitting of an expedited process under Order 51 of the Parliamentary Standing Orders for the adoption of legislation in circumstances where there is no apparent need to expedite e.g. (1) abolition of assessors, what is the urgency warranting an expedited process when the assessor system has existed for over a century and (2) the establishment of the corruption Court, what is the urgency especially when the quantum of cases prosecuted by FICAC annually are few comparatively, you can literally count the convictions and successful High Court appeals they have secured over the last 4 years and they are not substantial or extraordinary. These actions give rise to a growing perception of a lack independence and the damage done is in the public’s lack of confidence in the independance of these systems. A lack of confidence in the Rule of Law and democracy. The danger being that someone may be sitting brewing on these events say “enough is enough”, others may be sitting elsewhere saying “enough is enough”, if enough of these people get together there could be an uprising. It would be great if that uprising took place in the polls during elections, but things could just as easily go the other way with a violent reckoning. That is my fear. I guess this places responsibility on advocates and leaders out there with far reaching voices. Voices like yours Graham, to guide people to reflect their disappointments at the polls on election day and not resort to undemocratic processes. Appreciate the reflections outlined in your post, which has provided a lot to ponder while hoping and praying for a better Fiji. God bless.
Thank you Tin2. A very thoughtful and considered posting. And I couldn’t agree more.
Bula vinaka and welcome back Graham! I truly hope that you continue with your blogs! Ni kalougata tiko.
Vinaka, Vakacegu. Precisely the state I intend to be in myself. Like General MacArthur, I shall return but not yet. Though very much appreciate your sentiments.
Vinaka vakalevu Mr Davis, you’re penmanship will surely influence the elections. Nu Kalougata tiko.
Independent thoughts.
Unfortunately, as with many countries who have become independent, where there are no victors, infighting ensues, history globally has shown us this. Whereas countries who have fought for independence militarily, where there is a victor, and their mandate is endorsed by the vast majority of the population.
Fiji is trying, personally, and incorrectly at times, to balance its problems to the detriment of the indigenous population. I truly understand your inclusive requirements, of region and race, but the fact remains the islands belong to the indigenous Fijians, of whom have little voice in this debate, and are down trodden by the dominant industrious race in these lands. Sacking the council of chiefs, being a huge step in the wrong direction, and now the unilateral abolition of the assessor system in criminal trials can only increase the disenchantment felt with the government.
Whether this be due to the lack of communication, and or education, either way the FFP seem to taking advantage to this.
I believe that this will, and heaven forbid, have a disastrous outcome for these beautiful islands. I say this, with out fear or favor to either side, as a casual observer living here, worried about the future of these isles.
Vinaka Graham. I agree with you totally and like you, the FF party, to me, initially reflected what we needed in Fiji – inclusiveness and multiculturalism. I also liked the policies that encouraged iTaukei people to make an effort to help themselves rather than rely on handouts and to be encouraged by the hard work of the Indian population rather than be threatened by them. Sadly, it has come to the point now that this government cares for no one but itself and has shown an arrogance that defies belief. The two recent changes to the law are also the last straw for me.
Welcome back Graham great to have you back online.
Quick question and this might be for the legal eagles in your readership if they can just help us understand.
Im trying to wrap my head around understanding how govt or parliament in its current operational form can repeal or remove this change that the AG railroaded through to get passed. Is it not possible even if the opposition were to form govt after the next election to remove something that’s been passed into law because theyve deliberately built into the 2013 constitution provisions to make it hard to reverse any changes theyve made. If I understand correctly youd require two third majority. Is this true?
Great to have you back mate!!
@ Vitivou.
Very good question. What we have in Fiji now is an illiberal democracy. The Fiji First government have shoved a Constitution down our throats and made sure that it is virtually impossible to change.
In doing so they have filed to heed the lessons of other countries. Some countries in Africa did the same i.e they entrenched themselves via a coup and made sure that it was imposdible to change the rules they introduced for themselves.
The only way to change the rules is by a violent revolution or a coup!
So here we have a high schoo dropout as a PM saying he has ended the need for another coup in Fiji. In reality, he has created the conditions for another coup which no doubt will be welcomed by many in Fiji who want to see the end of Frank and Khaiyum’s two man rule.
Even now with a controversial draft bill for police, it’s like it will be a last hurrah to hold on to power prior to next year’s elections while the mastermind himself is ill that Frankie will have no one to turn to.
FFP right now is falling apart with various resignations because the brainless PM may have lost the opportunity to regain control and get rid of Khaiyum.
As for that bill in question, FFP is now proudly and unapologetically admitting to embracing communism, socialism, and a bit of fascism if that bill is somehow gazetted into law.
Don’t like to wish the health of Minister for Everything to worsen, but every non-FFP person is obviously wishing for that to happen in addition to a new government.
What do you do when you are in a situaton where it is impossible to change the rules of the game that others have shoved down your throats and made it impossible to change?
And then you bring in laws to increase surveillance of the population and impose draconian penalties on those who object?
Thats not s democracy! Its a Police state! Wake up Fiji.