We shall not be seeing Charlie Charters – the bête noire of the Supreme Court Commission of Inquiry into the Malimali affair – back in Fiji anytime soon. Because he now faces the prospect of a two year jail sentence for insulting the Commissioner, Justice David Ashton-Lewis, and the Counsel Assisting the COI, Janet Mason.
This is what Section 16 of the Commissions of Inquiry Act 1946 says about insulting a Commissioner and his “Secretary”, which Janet Mason undoubtedly was. And the penalty goes beyond the term of any inquiry itself.
So has Charlie Charters insulted Justice David Ashton-Lewis by describing him as a “conman” and “fantasist”? What do you think, Fiji? Nothing wrong with road-testing it first in the Court of Public Opinion.
Dear, dear, dear, Charlie. And to think I sail close to the wind with my comments about the Chief Justice, Salesi Temo, being “rogue” and “corrupt” when that is defensible because there is ample evidence of the fact.
Better lawyer up, old chap, if you’re intending to return to Fiji to see your old mates, Wylie Coyote and Richie Rich. Oh I forgot. They are lawyers. The rest of your Samisoni clan can certainly ensure that there’s plenty of madrai and keke for you and your new gang in orange if you do wind up in Naboro.
For Old Peculier’s full posting, see our previous article and below, in which Charlie also makes an enemy of Lynda Tabuya, someone who has always been presumed to be a “friend”. With friends like these, as the old saying goes.
And never mind the insults. Claiming that this was a “crocodile hunt with no crocodiles” is just plain wrong.
Two MPs have sworn on oath and were cross-examined on their testimony that the Deputy Prime Minister, Manoa Kamikamica, offered to use his friendship with Barbara Malimali to abort a FICAC investigation. Of course, Mr Sweet deserves his day in court like everyone else. But you know that old saying: Acts like a crocodile, is a crocodile! That’s the conclusion Justice Ashton-Lewis certainly reached.
And you’re saying there are “no crocodiles” and the $2-3 million spent on the COI was a waste of taxpayer funds? You can tell that to a court yourself.
Don’t worry Charlie. Permanent exile isn’t too bad. After all, I should know.
Cheers, Big Ears!
The full posting repeated:
UPDATE THURS AM:
Charlie Charters has responded in the comments section below that his attack on Justice David Ashton-Lewis came after the Judge’s mandate as Commissioner had expired.
And my response:
It is a narrative of singular, almost classical tragedy that now surrounds the figure of Mr. Charles Charters. He has become, in effect, a latter-day Captain Nemo; a brooding anti-hero who has voluntarily withdrawn from the society he views with profound cynicism. Like Verne’s enigmatic captain, who commanded the depths from his withdrawn sanctuary, Charters has operated from a self-imposed exile some 15,000 miles distant, emerging from the mists of Yorkshire to pass judgment on the proceedings in Suva.
Yet, in a critical divergence from his literary counterpart, this modern Nemo has chosen a most peculiar crusade. Where the original sought to expose the world’s corruptions, this captain has instead trained his sights upon those attempting to navigate the murky waters of the Malimali affair. Justice David Ashton-Lewis and Counsel Assisting Janet Mason, in their diligent efforts to drain the proverbial pond of this entanglement, have found themselves opposed by this solitary figure from the deep. He has emerged not to assist in the cleansing, but to defend the very creatures that inhabit the muck—the so-called crocodiles whose existence he publicly denies, even in the face of sworn testimony.
There is a profound tragedy in this stance. The anti-hero, often noble in his isolation, is here recast as a defender of the status quo’s most shadowy elements. His weapons are not harpoons of truth, but broadsides of insult—“conman,” “fantasist”—launched across oceans against a duly constituted Commission of Inquiry. This is not the act of a revolutionary, but of a man so profoundly alienated that he has aligned himself against the very processes of scrutiny and accountability.
The consequence of this quixotic campaign is not a triumphant return to port, but a stark ultimatum. The law, that most terrestrial of powers, has answered his challenge. Section 16 of the Commissions of Inquiry Act 1946 presents a two-year sentence as the price for his insults, transforming his chosen exile into a state of permanent banishment upon pain of imprisonment. Thus, the tragic arc completes itself: the captain who retreated from society to defy it from afar is ultimately ensnared by its longest-reaching rules, his fate a cautionary tale on the perils of defending the swamp from those who would dare to drain it.
Ballad of Charlie’s Crocodile Capers
Oh, Charlie Charters, Fiji’s Captain Nemo king,
Your pond submarine is amiss, and it’s starting to sink!
While Ashton-Lewis and Mason did toil,
To drain the swamp of its crocodile oil,
You called them names, oh, what a lark,
Now jail’s looming like a croc in the dark!
No Nemo’s flair with a sub so grand,
Just you and your crocs in a murky stand.
“Conman!” you jeered, with a wink and a grin,
But Section 16 says your luck’s wearing thin.
With Wylie and Richie Rich Rich brewing keke so sweet,
You’ll munch in the clink with sore, soggy feet.
So “hey ho” sail away, Charlie, don’t look behind,
Those crocs you love might not be so kind.
Exile’s your mate, or so folks decree,
But watch for those jaws—they snap Rabuka decree.
Lorraine does it again! Bravo! Hear! Hear!
Just a bit of fun one could change this “…have found themselves opposed by this solitary figure from the deep.”
To…have found themselves opposed by this solitary figure with his head deep in his ass.
The “conman,” and “fantasist” reminds us of one George Santos -a conman fantasist extraordinaire.
Poetic Justice at its best!
Where are the Lynda supporters/Monkey Bots now, not say something to Charlie, is he right, are u all confused – you seem to have an opinion on everybody if one speaks against Mata Hari, what about Charlie speaking against your sex queen – why are you so quiet, Lynda Supporters?
Hold your horses.
They’re rolling a bong.
Charlie should learn from those who became victims as cheerleaders of the Govt – Shailen Gopal Raju, Kundan Singh, Nirmal Singh, Rajesh Singh etc etc – bitten by the snake you were nurturing.
All still cravenly craving diplomatic postings. Or at the least, all wanna be permanent secretaries. Poor vulagis don’t and won’t realize the monkey headed snake won’t have any more vulagi than absolutely necessary. Keep slurping balls!
Coup daddy does not want to attend the forum meeting most likely because his backbone needs a surgery.
Having positioned himself in a disrespectful sleeping back position with a hard on pointed towards Palki Sharma the Indian interviewer in a Sari; he has given the excuse to Modi that it was actually his backup that has been giving up since 1987.
Modi appears to have instructed him to re-construct a backbone whilst apologising to Palki on coup daddy’s behalf.
Does Charlie Chaplin really has that wide ( respectful use of word) cheeks, or is this a photoshop?
Two words for you Graham.
Functus officio.
I didn’t start writing about Ashton-Lewis’s CV until June 6, long after the COI term had expired.
June 6 was ten days after Ashton-Lewis’ infamous 4CRB interview which he justified [and his supporters did as well] by saying his comments were protected as Functus officio.
What’s good for the goose is good for gander.
Poor Charlie, your lack of attention to detail is also your undoing. Functus officio refers to an official whose mandate has expired. But here’s what Section 16 of the Act says:
“Any person who uses…insulting language to… a Commissioner… at any sitting of the Commission, or… at any other time or place in relation to or on account of his or her proceedings in the capacity of Commissioner… is guilty of an offence.”
” at any other time”. Geddit?
Of course, it is open for you to run such a defence but from where I sit, your goose is cooked.
Don’t worry about the Goose for the gander, go work on helping lift women/men out of poverty and providing Fiji with ample supply of white long loaf.
If Charlie Charters can’t ensure Fijians have access to sufficient white long loaf, then how can he ever be taken seriously regarding more complex matters?
But there is a pattern here. A rich and well connected person going out of his way to defend his own. If he put similar interests in the women/men working at the bakery, none of them would be living in poverty.