The Opposition Leader, Sitiveni Rabuka, has embarked on an intriguing course of action by lodging a formal complaint with the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) about campaign donations made to the ruling FijiFirst Party. The action is not only going to test the genuine independence, transparency and accountability of FICAC but of the Registrar of Political Parties and Supervisor of Elections, Mohammed Saneem. Under the 2013 Constitution, FICAC is required to consult the FijiFirst General Secretary – the Attorney General and “Minister for Everything”, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum – which makes it difficult for it to investigate FijiFirst without informing him of its progress. And in the case of Mohammed Saneem, he owes his position to the AG, who appointed him, and the AG is his line minister in his role as Minister Responsible for Elections. Saneem is already under fire for being allegedly partisan and I recounted last month how, in my experience, he treats Aiyaz Sayed- Khaiyum with extreme deference and a degree of trepidation.
At face value, the prospects of a free and fair FICAC investigation don’t look good. Because as I witnessed myself at first hand in government, both supposedly independent institutions – FICAC and the Elections Office – were compromised right from their inception because of the way they are structured. They are effectively agents of the Attorney General, secretly doing his bidding beneath a veneer of “independence” that would not survive proper scrutiny from parliaments or the media in other democracies and especially in our larger neighbours, Australia and New Zealand. See “Brown Owl. Neither Wise nor Judicious (Oct 22) and A Tangled Web of Secrecy and Control Part 2 (Oct 1).
With the clock ticking towards the SODELPA leadership contest on November 28 that will determine whether Sitiveni Rabuka goes head-to-head with Frank Bainimarama at the next election in 2022, Rabuka has cleverly decided to test the independence of FICAC and the Elections Office by requesting official scrutiny of the donations made to FijiFirst at the last two elections in 2014 and 2018. And there are clear signs that he has good reason to be suspicious that the Elections Office under Mohammed Saneem has been less vigilant in policing alleged breaches of the electoral laws by FijiFirst than it has about pursuing alleged breaches by the opposition parties.
Without pre-empting whatever findings may eventually emerge, the Fijian people already have ample reason to suspect that there is one rule for the government and the AG as its chief legal advisor – who has a clear conflict of interest in his dual role of FijiFirst General Secretary and Minister Responsible for Elections – and quite another for SODELPA and the National Federation Party. The Elections Office and FICAC have already worked hand-in-hand on a failed prosecution of Sitiveni Rabuka that, had it been successful, would have prevented him from contesting the last election. And the Elections Office recently referred the NFP leader, Biman Prasad, to FICAC over alleged donation irregularities that if successful, would bar him from contesting the 2022 election. Yet at no stage whatsoever has the same level of scrutiny been applied to Mohammed Saneem’s patron, the AG, as FijiFirst General Secretary despite what appears, at face value, to be serious irregularities on the part of the ruling party that are starting to emerge publicly and obviously warrant thorough investigation.
A number of alleged breaches of the electoral laws by FijiFirst have been progressively highlighted over recent weeks by the British-based Fijian academic and journalist, Victor Lal, on his Fijileaks website, including multiple donations by individuals in excess of the legal limit and donors trying to circumvent scrutiny by not providing their full identities. A favoured tactic is evidently for some FijiFirst donors to use their second names rather than their surnames when they submit donations so that they remain below the radar in any casual examination of the donor records.
Before we go into detail, it’s worth examining some of the features of the relevant legislation – the Political Parties (Registration, Conduct, Funding and Disclosures) Act, that governs donations to the parties. No funding may come from a foreign government, a foreign national or intergovernmental of non-governmental organisation. And the Act limits the amount that a Fijian citizen or former citizen can donate to $F10,000 in any one year.
It doesn’t define “year” so a donor could conceivably make a donation of $10,000 on December 31 and another $10,000 on Jan 1. There is also no age restriction on donors. So it is perfectly conceivable that even the youngest children of Fijian citizens or former citizens can each give $10,000 along with both of their parents and other family members. Which in extended families can, and does, involve substantial sums being donated far in excess of the individual $10,000 limit.
An even more murky provision of the legislation allows a political party to receive funding from “the proceeds of any investment, project or undertaking in which the party has an interest”. The Act does not define “investment, project or undertaking”. So it appears to be perfectly permissible for a political party to invest in or conduct joint projects with companies or other entities and receive a return on that investment. Which obviously raises questions about the probity of any such arrangement if the political party is in a business venture with private companies and that party happens to be the government of the day. Vinod Patel, RC Manubhai or Tappoo in business with FijiFirst? It is entirely possible under the legislation. Which raises all sorts of questions about how those businesses might be treated by the regulatory authorities that also come under the government’s direction.
Victor Lal – who has made a name for himself over the years as Fiji’s foremost investigative journalist – has obtained the FijiFirst donor lists and has applied his forensic skills to uncovering alleged irregularities. Lal is no fan of Sitiveni Rabuka because of the events of 1987 and there is no suggestion of them working in tandem. But what he has uncovered so far has given Rabuka a solid basis on which to challenge the Elections Office and FICAC and put pressure on them to finally bring their powers of scrutiny to bear on the governing party.
Among Victor Lal’s latest revelations is evidence that the builder of Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum’s apartment block in Wailoaloa, Nadi, allegedly made two donations to FijiFirst in 2018, one of $10,000 under his real name, Shailendra Paliachi Kumar, and another of $5000 as Shalend Tulsi. According to Lal, Tulsi is Shailendra Kumar’s fathers name and his company undertaking the building work for the AG and his wife, Ela, is called Tulsi Construction. The allegation is in addition to Lal’s previous claim that Dickson Peng – a director of the Freesoul company that is currently before the courts over the environmental damage it caused at its development in the Mamanucas – made two donations to FijiFirst on the same day for the 2014 election, one for $10,000 and another for $3000. Lal has called on FICAC to investigate both cases but there has so far been no response from FICAC itself.
It all begs the question as to why Mohammed Saneem and his team have been either unable or unwilling to do what Victor Lal has been able to do. Yet in going to FICAC as Opposition Leader, Sitiveni Rabuka is clearly intent on testing the integrity of the system and forcing the parties into a corner. Assuming it accedes to Rabuka’s request, FICAC will presumably now have to examine not just whether the donations to FijiFirst were lawful but the Election Office’s conduct in dealing with alleged breaches. The spotlight is now firmly on both institutions and especially their relationship with the AG. And what eventually emerges has all sorts of implications for public confidence in the system and the government’s electoral prospects two years out from an election that the latest polls show most Fijians expect FijiFirst to lose.
In our first two instalments of A Tangled Web of Secrecy and Control, we demonstrated how Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum has used his power as Frank Bainimarama’s number two, along with his longevity in office, to gain control of almost every aspect of government and the majority of Fiji’s supposedly independent institutions. He has done so with the authority of just one man – Bainimarama – who increasingly gives the appearance of being a figurehead, leaving the day-to-day running of the government to the AG.
How long the Prime Minister can continue to protect his “sidekick” and de-facto deputy from a powerful coalition of those who want the AG gone is the dominant political discussion behind the scenes in Fiji. This coalition includes – by the AG’s own account – the iTaukei ministers in the government plus Mahendra Reddy and the Military Council, which assisted Bainimarama to seize power in 2006 but has been pressing for fundamental reform of the government since its disastrous near-loss in the 2018 election. The rumblings have intensified as the police and military investigate the AG’s alleged links to a bombing campaign in 1987. And for Frank Bainimarama, those rumblings are starting to erode his own position, with frustrated mutterings that if he doesn’t act soon, it may also be time for him to reassess his own position. He has a high degree of personal loyalty and still has time to turn the situation around. And his supporters hope that he does so sooner rather than later to preserve his own political legacy.
In this, Part 3 of our series, we examine some of the AG’s handpicked appointments to the boards of government entities, some of whom have serious conflicts of interest that would debar them – on the grounds of probity – from holding board memberships of government enterprises in other democracies. Given the current attention being given to donations to political parties, we identify – to the best of our ability – which of these board members appointed by the AG have contributed to FijiFirst, the political party of which he is General Secretary. As far as can be ascertained, they have done so within the law and there is no suggestion of wrongdoing. Yet as any lawyer will tell you, there is a difference between legality and probity, not only adherence to the law but “evidence of ethical behaviour and complete and confirmed integrity, uprightness and honesty in any particular process”.
The first board and the first individual to come under the Grubsheet spotlight is the national superannuation scheme, the Fiji National Provident Fund, and its chair, Daksesh Patel, whose glaring conflict of interest in also being Chair of Energy Fiji Limited we have highlighted in previous postings. That conflict of interest arises from Daksesh Patel having been chair of EFL at the time when $220-million of EFL shares were sold to the FNPF in a revenue raising exercise for government to meet the AG’s half-billion dollar budget shortfall.
Under the previous FNPF chair, Ajith Kodagoda, the FNPF declined to agree to the AG’s original request to buy double that amount – $440-million worth of EFL shares. Yet soon afterwards, Ajith Kodagoda’s term as Chair expired and Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum appointed Daksesh Patel in his place. Patel now chairs both seller and buyer and is clearly in a position to have a decisive influence on future FNPF spending decisions, including, perhaps, further FNPF purchases of EFL shares to raise more revenue for the AG at a time of acute budgetary distress. Daksesh Patel – the Executive Chairman of the Vinod Patel group as well as CEO of Australia’s Infrabuild steel group – is not only close to Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum personally to the extent of entertaining him on the AG’s visits to Sydney but is a donor to the FijiFirst Party, with a sum of $10,000 listed in the records obtained by Fijileaks.
As I have also detailed previously, another member of the FNPF board, structural engineer Sanjay Kaba, is also a close associate of the AG and has been both a significant fundraiser for FijiFirst and a donor to the party. The records show that Sanjay Kaba gave $10,000 to the party on April 13 2017. But in a highly questionable occurrence, the records show that he appears to have done so under the name of Sanjay Lal, Kaba’s middle name.
A third member of the FNPF board also known to be close to the AG – the Fijian-born Californian banker Mukhtar Ali – is recorded as having donated $5000 to FijiFirst. Which means that three of the most influential of the six directors who sit on the FNPF are not only associates of the AG but direct financial benefactors to the FijiFirst Party. Of the other three, two are civil servants, Makereta Konrote and Joel Abraham and the third, Kalpana Lal, works for the German aid agency GIZ. Yet the fact that the custodians of the retirement savings of the Fijian people with substantial business experience are all close to the AG and donors to the ruling party is a matter of legitimate public concern. And especially at a time when the AG is using the FNPF to prop up the economy and the Fund is being used as the principal vehicle to keep Fijian families afloat during the Covid-19 crisis. This includes the FNPF “assistance” for mortgage repayments that Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum intends to announce next week.
It is not possible in the space available here to detail every member of every government board but the lists are readily accessible on the Fijian government website directory.digital.gov.fj/ by clicking on the particular enterprise and then “board members”. On even the most casual perusal, you will find some of the biggest corporate names in Fiji, including some who also happen to be suppliers of good and services to the government and whose membership of particular boards already raises the issue of potential conflict of interest. But when that is coupled with the fact that some of those board members have been donors to the FijiFirst Party, then that level of concern goes to an entirely new level.
Without alleging any specific impropriety or wrongdoing, here is a list of those board members – aside from the aforementioned Daksesh Patel, Sanjay Kaba and Mukhtar Ali – who Fijileaks has identified as donors to the FijiFirst Party.
1/ Rajesh Punja, the Chairperson of Fiji Airways and Director of the Punja Group of companies: $45,000 in separate instalments.
2/ Bavesh Kumar Patel, Chairman of the Water Authority of Fiji and member of the R.C Manubhai business family: $35,000 in separate instalments.
3/ Ajay Raniga, board member of Tourism Fiji and Co-founder of Sunergise International and owner of Budget Pharmacy, Denarau Medispa and Spa Maya: $25,000 in separate instalments. Ajay Raniga’s wife, Kavita Raniga – now a member of Fiji’s Electoral Commission – also donated $10,000.
4/ Ashok Patel, Deputy Chair of the Land Transport Authority, board member of the Accident Compensation Commission and Director of R.C Manubhai and associated companies: a total of $20,000 in 2015 and 2018.
5/ Hemant Kumar, board member of Water Authority of Fiji and Director of Maisuria Design, architect: $17,000 in separate instalments (with his wife) in 2014 and 2017.
6/ Sunil Sharma, Chairperson of the Fiji Public Trustee Corporation and Senior Partner at PKF Aliz Pacific, the accounting firm owned by the AG’s aunt, Nur Bano Ali: $10,000 on 3/10/18.
7/ Manjula Dayal, board member of Post Fiji Limited and member of the Dayal industrial family: $10,000.
8/ Ratu Wiliame Katonivere, Tui Macuata and Chairman of the Pine Group of Companies, board member of Fiji Airports, Fiji Coconut Millers, Fiji Rice and the Fiji Sugar Corporation: $5000.
9/ Lawrence Tikaram, Chairman Post Fiji Limited: $3000.
Unless individual board members have also provided funding to other political parties (and some business figures do so to remain apolitical), securing a government appointment at the same time as those appointees are contributors to the ruling party’s coffers is questionable on a number of levels.
1/ It gives the appearance that these board appointments may be contingent on that support or be construed as a reward for services rendered.
2/ It gives the appearance that in carrying out their duties, board members may be driven less by the public interest than preserving the ruling party’s political fortunes.
3/ It gives the appearance that board decisions, especially when it comes to the procurement of goods and services, may favour those appointees who have given the government money to enable it to win office.
So that even if no laws are broken, it is the appearance of influence peddling or conflicts of interest that are enough to question the probity of such appointments. Board members of statutory enterprises and government businesses who make donations to FijiFirst are giving it the means to contest elections and stay in office, which axiomatically preserves and benefits their own positions and influence. Only the highest level of transparency and accountability can ensure public confidence in the integrity of the election donation process. And as Sitiveni Rabuka’s complaint to FICAC amply demonstrates, that confidence is sorely lacking in Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum’s Fiji.
Next time: The SODELPA leadership showdown. Who will emerge as victor?
Another very informative write up confirming the dubious nature of AG which I always suspected since he came on the scene. The lies and cheating he represents will only worsen the bad omen he has single handedly brought on our beloved country. There is no other option for this country to proceed but to flush him and his cronies out of our government system as soon as possible. Again, vinaka vakalevu Graham. All the best.
It is incredulous and incredible both, how the Minister for Everything seems to have infiltrated literally every sphere and arm of government. He is despicable at best.
Ha ha ha Graham
Do you still maintain that Fiji is a genuine democracy , I have always stated that it is not and maybe you want to reconsider this as your writing over last few months does not indicate that Fiji is a genuine democracy.
There was not this level of corrupt practices during the Mara and Rabuka Governments , compared to now Mara Government was more transparent and more genuine in democracy when compared to this current Govt
Remember the Royal Commission of inquiry into the elections after the 1982 elections? That is what genuine democracies do, try getting a simple bipartisan parliamentary committee out of this Govt , it will go nowhere
I am hopeful you will now admit that Fiji is NOT a genuine democracy but some version of a two men or one man dictatorship
There is no such thing as a genuine democracy – Not even in the United States, let alone Fiji. All democracies are compromised, one way or another. A perfect democracy is a pipe dream.
We must remove all these corruption people from Fiji for the betterment of our country
Corruption comes in many forms and is present and has been present in all countries for many years and Fiji is not unique in that sense. I am sure that there was corrupt practices by past Fiji Governments but at least the system was fair in addressing these issues, I mean the the state institutions and judiciary were never compromised.
Same cannot be said about the current state of affairs where such practices goes unchecked with all the institutions of the state including the judiciary heavily compromised and a one man rule.
Graham has already written extensively about this where statutory board members and chairmanship of state institutions have their YES men sitting in such position but the trigger is controlled by ASK.
The SOE position is a big joke where he only reports to the AG and the AG is the General Secretary of FFP, like they say “only in Fiji”.
Fiji needs to turn a corner and vote directly good governance and the end of two men rule, like Joe Biden says
“ This is a fight for the soul of the nation”.
Paula, there is no evidence of overt corruption and, indeed, some of the business figures who have been identified as FijiFirst donors are people with solid reputations. It is a question of probity and appearances, not illegality.
None of the board members identified so far has contravened the election laws, so far as I am aware. And we must be careful not to accuse anyone of corruption, not least because of the defamation laws but also on the grounds of fairness.
Some people accept board positions for the most noble of motives – to assist Fiji and its economy. But where there are conflicts of interest, the Fijian people are naturally entitled to be made aware of them.
Davis
The reason I said corruption is very simple because they (these business people) knew it very well that this regime is an autocracy in its fullest sense, and I think you should know better because you slept with the regime and was at one time its mouthpiece? didn’t you? so when I said corruption they have a choice not to give and stand their ground for the sake of the poor, the ordinary people, the unfortunate ones, the handicaps, indigenous Fijians who have been marginalized in the land of their forefathers without any consultations to them, the poor Indo-Fijians & urban under-employment Indigenous Fijians who are struggling because they cannot afford housings, healthy food, and low pays…so to say that they are not corrupted is naive of you…why should you donate to the regime? is it simply because they want the favour in return and you do not have to be a rock-scientist to know this, isn’t it? My point is simply to remove all these corrupted people from Fiji’s political arena, hopefully when the majority of it people vote this regime in 2022. That’s my point if you believe in the God Almighty then do the right thing don’t support and collaborate with a regime that is illegal in the first place and continue to tell them the TRUTH because the TRUTH will always PREVAIL! You’re now telling the TRUTH after all the time you have been sleeping with an evil regime…so I am glad that you have realized the TRUTH! The TRUTH is Jesus Christ and to know HIM is simply to be obedience and follow ALL His commandments! God Bless you!
Graham
You are correct currently there is no evidence of corruption but you are actually contradicting yourself , you have written extensively about the people sitting on boards or strategically placed on boards with no check and balance and often in a conflict of interest. Let’s take one example; the chair of water authority runs a big hardware chain, isn’t that a conflict of interest ?
While there maybe no evidence of corruption do you not think that the regime will just hide and push this under the carpet if indeed there was corruption.
Sanjay Kaba the lead financier of FFP fundraising and an engineer and he gets all the Govt engineering consultancy work?
COME ON MEN
Perception is just as bad
While I admire your courage to write and shed light about the regime you also have to call a spade a spade
Yes maybe no evidence of corruption but we all can conclude what’s actually happening and as long as they are in control there will be no evidence as it all is buried deep and no one for now can touch ang evidence, they control the books a d they control the judiciary and all state institutions
Thank you Rajiv concurred with your comment
Let’s try to eradicate corruption from Fiji by simply doing the right thing and say no to corruption, full stop!
The eradication of corruption was one of the declared objectives of Frank’s coup in 2006. Instead of eradicating it he has allowed it to worsen.
Paula, I’m sorry but for legal reasons, I have had to remove your most recent comment ascribing corruption to named individuals. It is defamatory and history shows that these particular individuals sue.
Graham, I recommend a Netflix movie about getting rid of dictators. It’s called UNDERGROUND 6.
The long and short of it is that the power of dictators comes from the army generals who prop them up. Without these generals, the dictators become like Muammar Gadafi and Saddam Hussein, lonely and on the run. The movie says to kill the generals and the dictators will be like the two esteemed dictators of yore……running for dear life.
The problem is that the dictators are protected by overpaid excuses for soldiers who at the sight of camel riders in pyjamas give up their weapons and their liberty to these camel drivers.
The generals are the problem in Fiji , not the dictators.
Vinaka Davis for the moderation of my comment…but that’s the reality brother Davis!
ITS VERY PATHETIC IN FIJI. U JUST DO SEVU SEVU , TAKE TABUA, YAGONA AND OVER THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS IN HARD CASH TO CHIEFS, THOSE IN POSITIONS, U GET WHAT U WANT.
SEE HOW YR KAIPALAGIS DECEIVED THE INNOCENT KAIVITIS BY GETTING THOUSANDS OF ACRES OF LAND AS FREE HOLDS BY PAYING PEANUTS.
HOW INDIANS WERE DECEIVED, BROUGHT BY BRITISH AND CSR (GOVERNMENT WITHIN THE GOVERNMENT) TO FIJI. THEY TURNED JUNGLES IN TO MANGALS. FIJI BECAME PARADISE BECAUSE OF THE GIRMITIYAS.
BUT NO RECOGNISATION TO THEM. RATU MARA, KOYA AND OTHERS WENT TO MALBROUGH HOUSE IN MAY 1970 AND GOT INDEPENDENCE FOR FIJI FROM BRITISH AFTER 94 YEARS OF BRITISH RULE ON 10TH OCTOBER 1970 BUT THEY NEVER RECOGNISED THE GIRMITIYAS AS UNDER THE 1970 CONSTITUTION THEY SHOULD AT
AUTOMATICALLY BECAME FIJI CITIZENS ON INDEPENDENCE,
UNFORTUNATELY THE POOR INNOCENT GIRMITIYAS WERE GIVEN UNTIL 10/10/1972 TO APPLY FOR FIJI CITIZENSHIPS AND PAY THE FEES WHICH WAS LATER WAIVED BUT MARA AND KOYA THOSE DAYS WERE EATING IN THE SAME PLATE COULD HAVE PASSED A BILL IN PARLIAMENT THAT ALL INDENTURED LABOURERS TO SUBMIT THEIR LANDING PASSES AND THEY WILL BE AUTOMETICALLY GRANTED THE FIJI CITIZENSHIPS AND FIJI PASSPORTS.
WE MUST THANK BANI & ASK WHEN THEY INTRODUCED THE DEGREE 23 FOR MULTIPLE CITIZENSHIPS WEF 9 APRIL 2009.
YOU MUST BE FAIR TO GIVE CREDIT WHERE IT IS DUE. CAN U ASK THE CROOK MAHENDRA PAL CHAUDHARY WHY HE HASTED THE QARASE BILL TO RETURN ALL THE SCHEDULE A & B LAND FROM ESTATE LAND TO NLTB WHEN MARA VERY CLEARLY TOLD HIM TO JUST GOVERN, GAIN CONFIDENCE OF THE NATIVES AND NOT TO TOUCH THE LAND MATTERS.
HE WAS MOST IDIOT IN PASSING THE BILL, REMOVED LATE QARAKAU, NLTB MANAGER NOT TO BE A BOARD MEMBER FOR FDB WHEN THE NATIVES HELD OVER 85% OF THE LAND.
HE WITH OTHERS STARTED THE CAMPAIGN ” BAKADUA KAI INDIANS” AND OUR PEOPLE LEASES WERE CANCELLED, THEY BECOME LANDLESS OVER NITE AND REFUGEES INTHEIR OWN COUNTRY.
DURING 1987 MILITARY COUP WHICH IS ALLEGED MARA HAD A HAND AND THE GEORGE SPEIGHT CIVILIAN COUP WHICH BANI ALLEGED RABO HAD A HAND, WHEN HE AS THE COMMANDER WAS NEARLY KILLED AT THE BARACK.
LUCKILY HE WITH OTHERS JUMPED THE FENCE, RAN FOR THEIR LIVES OR ELSE THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN KILLED.
RABO WENT TO RATU IN FULL MILITARY UNIFORM WITH MEDALS TO MARA THEN PRESIDENT AND SAID” SIR I AM READY”, MARA ASKED HIM READY FOR WHAT. HE SHOULD HAVE BOLD ENOUGH TO TELL HIM BECAUSE OF HIS COUP, MARA BECAME PM AGAIN.
BANI GOVERNMENT GAVE ONE NAME TO ALL FIJI PEOPLE AS”FIJIANS”. 99 YEARS LEASES, TO THE FARMERS SO MUCH GRANTS TO FARMERS, FSC, RESERVED PRICE OF $85 PER TON FOR CANE. WE SHOULD THANK FF GOVERNMENT FOR WHAT THEY DID FOR THE PEOPLE OF FIJI.
MARA TIME DO U KNOW HOW HARRY PUNJA GOT APPROVAL TO SET UP THE COCONUT MILL IN SAVU SAVU
IT IS ALLEGED HE TOOK HARD CASH OF $30,000.00 IN 3 TIN SCHOOL BAGS FULL OF CASH IN 20 DOLLARS FIJI NOTES ( THOSE DAYS $20 WAS THE LARGEST FIJI NOTES AND TOLD MARA THEY R SEVU SEVU.
MARA ACCEPTED, VINAKA, ASKED HARRY WHAT HE WANT. IT IS ALLEGED THATS THE WAY HE GOT APPROVAL TO BUILD THE COCONUT MILL IN SAVU SAVU WAS THROUGH THIS SEVU SEVU.
IF A FIJIAN BOY RAPES A GIRL FROM THE VILLAGE, HIS PARENTS PROVIDE SEVU SEVU TO THE GIRL FAMILY IF THEY ACCEPT, THE BOY IS FORGIVEN, NO COURT CASE. BUT THE POOR GIRL LOST HER VIGINITY, SO WHAT WHO CARES.
SO IN FIJIAN CULTURE THE SEVU SEVU IS VERY IMPORTANT AND ACCEPTED.
IT HAS BEEN IN THE FIJIAN CULTURE FOR TONKEYS YEARS AND WILL CONTINUE.
IF CHAUDHARY IS MAN OF PRINCIPLE AND TRUITHFUL, HE CAN KEEP AU$2 MILLION AND RETURN THE OTHER AU$2 MILLION TO COMPENSATE THOSE SERIOUSLY AFFECTED BY GEORGE SPEIGHT COUP AND LADIES RAPED. ACCORDING TO ASK, THEY WERE RAPED WITH CASAVA STICKS.
THE OTHER ILLEGAL HAPPENING IS PS AND THOSE IN HIGHER OFFICE HOLD NUMBER OF POSITIONS.
THE RETIREMENT AGE FOR CIVIL SERVANTS WAS REDUCED TO 55 FROM 60 SO THAT MORE JOBS CAN BE CREATED BUT EFFICENCY HAVE DRASTICALLY REDUCED.
UNDER THE CURRENT CONSTITUTION, ONE MAN ONE VOTE BUT THERE SHOULD BE 51 CONSTITUENCIES AS PREVIOUSLY.
THE 51 CONSTITUENCY BOUNDARIES SHOULD HAVE AT LEAST EQUAL NUMBER OF VOTES AND PARTIES/ INDEPENDENT CAN APPOINT THEIR CANDIDATES. WHO EVER GETS THE HIGHEST NUMBER OF VOTES SHOULD BE DECLARED THE WINNER.
THAT WAY THERE IS A CHANCE TO HAVE A COLIATION GOVERNMENT.
HI GRAHAM THE CEO,FSC & INDUSTRIAL COMMISSIONER, TRIBUNAL NOT PERFORMING THEIR DUTIES FOR THE INTERST OF THE FARMERS. HOW THEY CAN BE CHANGED.
WHO THEIR BOARD MEMBERS, PLEASE URGENTLY PROVIDE THEIR NAMES AND CONTACTS.
UPTO 1972 BEFORE CSR PULLED OUT OF FIJI BECAUSE OF THE FAMOUS LORD DENNING AWARD, THEY USED 8 TONS OF CANE TO PRODUCE 1 TON OF SUGAR (TCTS).AND THE ANNUAL PRODUCTION USED TO BE 4 MILLION TONS OF CANE,
THIS YEAR, FSC, CEO BLAMED THE WEATHER FOR THEIR FAILURES TSTC HAS BEEN 11.5 TO 1 AND PRODUCTION LESS THAN 2 MILLION TONS OF CANE.
HOW FARMERS CAN DEMAND FSC TO COMPENSATE THEM FOR THE EXTRA 3.5 TONS USED TO PRODUCE 1 TON OF SUGAR. NEED OTHER EXPERTS TO ADVISE,
GRAHAM CONTACT YOUR AUSSIE PM, MORRISON THAT THOSE SAS ARMY OFFICERS WHO ILLEGALLY KILLED THE INNOCENT AFGHAN INNOCENT CIVILIANS, THE SHOULD BE EXTRADITED TO AFGHANISTAN AND TRIED IN THEIR COURT UNDER THEIR LAWS. AUSTRALIA MUST PAY HEAFTY COMPENSATION TO THOSE ALL KILLED OR AFFECTED.
SIMILARLY THOSE KILLED BY USA AND UK SOLDIERS.
WHAT THEIR LIVES ARE SO CHEAP THAN THE WHITES. BEAUTY IS ONLY SKIN DEEP MIX MY BLOOD WITH YOURS BOTH WILL BE RED AND UCANNOT DIFFERENTIATE.
ASK DONALD DUCK TO HONOURABLE ACCEPT DEFEAT TO SAVE AMERICANS FROM FURTHER DEATHS AND COVEC 19 INFECTIONS.
GOD SAVE OUR BELOVED FIJI. FIJI THE WAY THE WORLD SHOULD BE.
IF I HAVE HURT ANY ONE PLEASE I PLEAD TO FORGIVE ME AS THAT IS NOT MY INTENTION.
WE R ALL FIJIANS, WE MUST JOIN HANDS TOGETHER, NOT POINT FINGERS TO OTHERS AS 3 FINGERS ARE POINTING TO U AND ONE TO THE ALMIGHTY LORD. AMEEN.
FOOD FOR THOUGHT.
Wot you smoking bro?
Wow , you are all over the map, I suggest you first of all learn how to write, therefore the first lesson, STOP writing in all caps, are you screaming mad??
Secondly all caps on the eyes to read.
So what was your point ?
You lost me after “PATHETIC”…. You’re all over the place – and, you don’t have to keep shouting!
Are you tripping?
No need to “scream it out” loud with the upper caps, it just makes you sound like you’re full of hot air while trying to make a point.
Kaiviti, I am allowing your comment to stand in the interests of free expression and because except for one sentence, which I have edited, it does not contain defamatory or racist material. But I too wonder why the whole thing is in upper case.
As VT indicates, in terms of Internet etiquette, posting something in capitals is the equivalent of shouting. And we don’t need to be shouted at to get your various points.
So its basically nepotism with a bit of cronyism in disguise as I’ve always known from following FijiLeaks courtesy of investigative journalist Lal himself. Yes, its technically “legal” on the surface but as you pointed out GD, any lawyer would point out the inconsistencies as to why not everything is what it seems with the toddler AG himself “disposing” of people who won’t help him just to put in one of his own lackeys.
Rambo’s plea to FICAC should be a real test on whether or not they’ll comply despite my doubts, especially with recent news from the grapevine about Frankie being pissed off with Khaiyum about certain things currently out in the open. Things are just not looking good at the moment for FFP with the internal scandal going on that could derail them at the next elections unless Frankie uses his head for once.
Graham, I just started reading your blog and it is quite revealing although not all views expressed are factually correct. Nonetheless, it is informative so thank you very much for your effort. Challenging any views and having the freedom to express views based on ones believe or ideology is our right.
I read with great interest with regards to the subject of conflict of interest. I did my findings based on company law as well as corporate governance guidelines per Australian Institute of Company Directors. The point to find out is if the Chairman of EFL was also the Chairman of FNPF at the time of sale of EFL shares to FNPF? Even in case if this was the case (not ideal) than did the Chairman declared his conflict and excused himself from this sale and purchase process….if the answer is a yes than he did not act conflictingly – both from a legal and ethical perspective the Chairman declaring conflict did the right thing. If in the event he was not the Chairman of both the Boards at the time of sale of shares than there is no conflict and simply no case to answer. Finally it is also not the Board who are selling the shares…the shares in EFL belongs to the shareholder in this case the Government.
Perceptions are subjective and always bias based on ones viewpoint. Reality is we must always follow rules (law) and code of conduct to determine conflict. The problem we have in Fiji is that people always indulge in rumours which are not always factually correct. Also in terms of political donations – it is the democratic right of an individual just like the right to vote. We should never discriminate people on this.
With regards to control by one particular politician; it is absolutely NOT Ideal for a functioning democracy. Even if this politician (in this case Hon AG) works with the best intentions it is simply not humanely possible to have the required focus to manage the portfolios effectively. This is not good for an effective and functioning democracy. The good governments are one who promotes accountability, transparency, consultations and promotes inclusiveness.
Finally on appointments of leading business people in various Boards; this have been practiced by all previous Governments since independence. This is an indisputable fact. However, appointment should be based on merit. Fortunately we have one of the best superfund balance sheet in the world bestowed to Sir Mara Government who laid a very strong foundation. I also have seen online EFL financials which looks outstanding; again bestowed to Sir Mara Government who had the vision to build hydro power generation and thereby putting long term downward pressure on electricity cost. EFL today has strong liquidity and balance sheet. Particularly if you look at the last several years result under the current Chairman the EFL performed remarkably well. Yes I understand it is a monopoly etc but we have seen many failed state owned enterprises in spite of monopoly and special preferences given by the Government eg NBF.
Therefore, well done to some of the state owned enterprises which maintained the momentum and achieved growth. We must give credit where it is due.
Let’s critique fairly and encourage this Government to become more inclusive and consultative.
Long live the Democracy and God Bless my beautiful and culturally rich Fiji.
(Graham, not sure if you received my comments as above, as it was posted via mobile, thus resending. thanks)
Hi Ashwin, thank you for your thoughtful comment. When you say “not all views are factually correct”, it would be helpful for everyone to know the ones to which you refer.
Disagree with you on the issue of conflict of interest in relation to the chair of the FNPF and EFL. Have sought independent advice on this and that advice is that the situation as I outlined it would not meet the corporate probity test in Oz and certainly fails any “pub test” as well. (ie. what ordinary people would generally regard as proper and correct).
I guess we will soon find out if the superannuation fund purchases an extra tranche of EFL shares, as the AG originally wanted. Yet in my view and the view of many others, stacking the FNPF board with appointees who are so demonstrably not independent doesn’t pass the probity or pub test set against traditional standards of corporate governance.
The FNPF board is the custodian of the retirement savings of ordinary Fijian workers. As things stand, the AG has a great deal of influence over its deliberations – three members who are close associates and FijiFirst donors, two civil servants who owe their positions to his patronage and only one of the remaining six members who could be remotely classified as nominally independent. And that is patently not in the interests of the FNPF and its members.
Dear Graham,
Factually correct is that Government is the seller of shares in EFL and not the Board of the EFL. I am told from a senior executive of EFL that the Government appointed the transaction lawyers and advisors. From little I understand it is not the Boards prerogative. Board will follow shareholders resolution; of course resolution that is lawfully compliant.
Another point raised to me by a learned friend is that factually C J Patel is not the shareholder / owners of Fiji Sun. I feel it is best you verify; I stand to be corrected if you are correct.
With regards to probity test; I totally understand your point of view but probity test can not be determined by ones feelings or thoughts it is merely a view. What will determine conflict is actions and code of conduct. If what you are saying is correct than it seems ASIC is not doing it’s job thoroughly here in Australia by allowing cross shareholders to maintain Directorships and Chairmanship of hundreds of private and listed companies in Australia.
One is absolutely entitled to have a view point. Your points are not invalid but a little harsh if Directors are carrying out it’s fiduciary duty per good governance and acting lawfully such as making appropriate declarations and do not participate in decisions where the Directors are of the view that they are in conflict situation.
Finally, I totally support that State Owned Enterprises Board should thoroughly be held accountable. FNPF should regularly allow independent audits and have open dialogue with all stakeholders. My view is there should not be anything hidden or what is more commonly referred to as “secrets” and equally important a good Government should encourage this. The Board should be encouraged and allowed to hold town hall sessions where all stakeholders can be informed and allowed to seek any clarification from the Board.
I am sure you will also agree and so will other readers that, we should never politicise but promote transparency and good governance for the greater betterment of the whole society.
Thank you.
Ashwin, CJ Patel IS the ultimate owner of the Fiji Sun, so on that you are wrong. Its owner is officially listed as Sun News Limited but that company is part of the CJ Patel group.
EFL’s ultimate shareholders are the Fijian people and the board of EFL has a fiduciary duty to them in the conduct of the company’s affairs in the same way as the board of the FNPF has a fiduciary duty as the custodian of the retirement savings of the Fijian people.
We can argue about probity for as long as you like. But the central issue with the sale of EFL shares to the FNPF was that Fijians were obliged to buy something with their retirement savings that they already own without any consultation and a woeful absence of transparency.
One of the great untold stories in Fiji is that the FNPF was prevailed upon to buy a share of EFL only because the AG was desperate for money and couldn’t conclude a sale with a foreign buyer as part of his grand privatisation strategy in time to get hold of that money. Hence the raid on the FNPF piggy bank in the hope that a foreign buyer will eventually still emerge and FNPF shareholders will hopefully make a profit when their holding is sold on. But none of it is guaranteed.