The upheaval in FijiFirst triggered by the rebellion of more than half of its MPs against a party directive to vote against the parliamentary pay rise is causing concern in Australian policy circles, according to an article in the journal of the country’s foremost foreign affairs think-tank – the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI).
The article – by the long-time academic commentator on regional affairs, Professor Richard Herr – predicts that the split in FijiFirst will eventually come down to a legal argument about the meaning of the word “leader” and is likely to be fought out in the High Court sitting as the Court of Disputed Returns.
All of which means FijiFirst, parliament and the nation are set for another period of instability which coupled with the chaos in the Coalition, is causing heightened concern in Fiji’s bigger neighbours.
Read on for an outside perspective on the issue that has torn the biggest grouping in the parliament apart and has weakened FijiFirst chances of being able to form an alternative government. And all because the majority of its MPs were self interested enough to defy Frank Bainimarama and vote with the People’s Alliance and SODELPA to line their own pockets.
Where is Inia? Is he in the country or has he done a runner? Does he have any balls or is he a soft cock?
Moving on from my first comment…..
Maybe the first job for the new Attorney General will be to provide legal advice to the Speaker Ratu Naiqama Lalabalavu on the situation involving the 17 Fiji First members of Parliament and the attempt by their party to have them removed from Parliament. The request to the Speaker being in a letter signed by Frank Bainimarama and Faiyaz Koya. Which is amazing given that Frank is in jail!
My reading is that the leader of Fiji First, Frank Bainimarama has been convicted of Attempting to Pervert the course of Justice and was sentenced to 1 year in jail. That would mean he could no longer be an elector as you can’t be on the roll if you have been convicted and serving a sentence of one year or longer. If he can’t be on the Electoral Roll then he can’t be a member of a political party and then he could not be the leader of the party.
The new Attorney General will I am sure be able to advise the Speaker, if asked.
The legal status of the party leader could be a matter of timing, perhaps.
As such: If after conviction his name was not immediately removed from the electoral role then IS he still a legitimate leader if going by the letter of the law, until such time as the responsible entity ie electrol office removes him from the roll, thereby commencing his ineligibility to hold office thereon.
So if his ineligibility after the relevant conviction and 12 month jail term to be or remain a leader is determined at the point whereby he is removed from the electrol roll, then he was still the leader when the letter to the president was signed. My thoughts as a non lawyer but since lawyers or other qualified persons have recently dropped the ball on crucial matters, I as a non lawyer but critical thinker back my thoughts on this !! If these thoughts are on track it means the SOE was sleeping on the job after the conviction was announced but jolted into necessary action much later after the event by the recent questioning of the 17 FF members on their leaders eligibility to be leader and expel them.