Fiji’s deposed prime minister, Laisenia Qarase, has been sentenced to a jail term of 12 months after being convicted earlier in the week on corruption charges. He was pronounced guilty on six counts of abuse of office and three counts of discharge of duty with respect to a property in which he had a private interest. The charges related to the period before he became prime minister when he was a director of Fijian Holdings Limited, a company set up to advance indigenous enterprise. Qarase was accused of benefiting either family companies or those representing the interests of communities in his home province of Lau. The sentence comes at the end of a month- long trial in the High Court in Suva before Sri Lankan judge Justice Priyantha Fernando.
Zaynah says
Thanks.. No other local news site has anything on the sentence yet.
Disappointing as always though :/
Proud Fijian says
Qarase was the key person in the three bodies that made it possible for the three companies (one of which his wife was a beneficiary) to own shares in FHL. He was in FAB and presented to the GCC that Class A shares should be made available to iTaukei individuals. When approved by GCC he then approached the FHL (Of which he was a board member and key in the decision making process) to approve shares to the three companies. But where did the company get the money from – FDB in which he was the head and facilitated the loan.
He had conflict of interest and did not declare that as proved in court. The case was clear. Please all Fijians learn from this.
Ram Sami says
Good summary of facts.
Poor Qarase says
Used position to loot of Fijians and deny them their dues. Fijian investment companies were set up to benefit common fijians in name only. They were really set up by elite Fijians to benefit elite Fijians.
The games people like Qarase, Siti Waleilakeba, siti rabuka, qoriniasi bale, Navi Naisoro, methodist church, chiefs and others have played with us Fijians – it is new form os canabalism.
I have no sympathy for this man.
Benjamin Seduadua says
Dina Bro Ira nanuma keda nai taukei eda lialia o iran na varorogo tu i valeniveilewai ira na dau kana tiko vata Qarase mai na nona teveli e lai via kila se na toso tale se sega……….Now they know the truth..Dau Tukuna o ira na Vasu Kalua sa raida tiko na kemudou kitaka…kaila…
Sara qai kila qo sana warai na kana free…
In Arizona says
Navi is staying at my house now. Is this guy really on the run? What exactly did he do? I know this post is 5 years old but I felt the need to research this guy and now post as well. Any information on him would be appreciated.
Thank you
The ravings of Victor Lal says
Astonishing claims by VICTOR LAL in c.4.5 today, which won’t publish this response, so here it is:
After exposing Mahen for corruption, Victor fiercely defends Qarase’s corrupt activities. It shows double standards, inconsistency and confusion on Victor’s part. He claims the Qarase charges were “trumped up”. Really Victor? Then, based on the same argument, your charges against Mahen can also be deemed to be trumped up.
Victor insists Yang should disclose her fees in the Qarase Trial. Is this man really reading law at Oxford? Does he understand court cases? He can’t even tell who is on trial, or that there is no legal basis for Yang to disclose her fees during this trial. I have no legal background but even I know this. Why bother wasting ‘ink’/space on this non-issue? Is this ignorance, or are you clutching at straws to support a weak argument, Victor?
On Yang, Victor says: “If she has the gall to demand that Qarase should be sent to prison for allegedly not disclosing his interest some twenty years ago, she should be sent to prison for conspiring with the illegal regime in 2008.” Now we are into jailing prosecutors for doing their job! How ridiculous and vacuous can this guy get? Not satisfied with being lawyer, he is playing judge. This ‘legal scholar’ does not seem to understand a basic fact – you can be charged and sentenced for an offence, even if occurred 20yrs ago.
According to Victor, “…the once proud Fijian judiciary has become a theatre for Hong Kong and Sri Lankan lawyers to treat it as their own fiefdoms”. What proud Fiji judiciary Mr Lal? Where the hell were you when your friends Qarase and Qoriniase Bale were hounding the prosecution for being too successful in the Speight coup cases? Where were you when Ridgeway was illegally deported overnight? How come we didn’t hear a peep from you?
It is you Victor who is ridiculing the once-proud Fiji judiciary by trying to engage the prosecution in your silly pretend lawyer games. Is it a symptom of failed ambitions, jealousy and envy? Seems like it.
After going to great lengths to disclose mahen’s tax dealings, victor is critical of the the AG’s office for pursuing Fatiaki over tax irregularities. Victor was right to pursue mahen’s case, but the AG is wrong to do the same in Fatiaki’s case – Victor’s inflated sense of self and worth is staggering – talk about thinking the sun shines out of there every morning!
Victor accuses others of ‘trumped up charges’, then proceeds to do exactly that, and more. He insists that “Yang should be put on trial for conspiring to pervert the course of justice in the Fatiaki’s tax case”. This man freely quotes unnamed sources and makes wild, unsubstantiated allegations – then he has the gall to call into question the legitimacy of the court proceedings: does the expression, ‘pot calling the kettle black’ ring a bell Victor?
And none of that tired claptrap about this being an illegal regime. It has been effectively in power since 2006. I do not like it. But that is the truth. Someone has to run the country: life has to go on. We have to move forward – a basic fact that escapes Victor’s ‘sharp’ legal mind.
Victor’s article is a litany of trumped up, unsubstantiated charges and rants. It shows that Victor is a small, petty-minded man; a failure as a scholar, journalist and thinker. He can’t even write clearly, consistently and honestly. His agenda is plain to see.
A bit of professional jealously is also at play.
I am not a shrink, but anyone can see that Victor may have unfulfilled ambitions about fighting legal cases in court – he is living out this fantasy by challenging the prosecution’s case in the only way he can – via a blog article. One has to credit Victor for finding another use for social media: pretend lawyers like him, who are not qualified, or lack confidence to fight cases court, can do it in cyberspace.
His article is all about “I”: I did that; I investigated this; I got an email from this person; during the course of “my investigation, I made friends”… and so forth and so forth…boastful, boring, empty, unsubstantiated rubbish from a so-called oxford scholar.
He says: “The gall of …Elizabeth Yang beggars belief. There she was, up before Judge Priyantha Fernando in the Suva High Court, calling on the Sri Lankan judge to lock up Laisenia” – this smacks of the legal version of ‘penis envy’ from Victor. Poor boy so wants to be a lawyer. He has resorted to the next best thing – playing Qarase’s defence lawyer in cyberspace – hahaha, what a joke this guy is.
Get help Victor. Go, see a shrink.
Ram Sami says
Some very relevant and thought provoking comments here.
Thank you for this very good post.
Benjamin Seduadua says
Well said bro …
Irony of ironies says
Victor Lal produced evidence of mahen chaudhry corruption but mahen’s die-hard supporters turned a blind eye to evidence of his alleged corruption Now staunch Qarase supporter Victor is doing same thing – turning blind eye to evidence of Qarase’s corruption.
Talk about irony of ironies!
Bushmoko says
Yes Victor has been away so long he can no longer see the web of intrigue and thieves of whom Qarase was only one and asides from his political role was not the main bagman
That was Navi Naisoro who managed to elude the authorities and now divides his time between a house in Malibu and a house in Arizona (the success of his Western Union franchise obviously) Navi was one of the go betweens from all of those businesses that needed political favours and support and were prepared to make monthly cash payments to the go betweens which meant that the likes of LQ didn’t have to get their hands dirty and could take the proceeeds from the go betweens and third party accounts when and how it suited them.
I heard one story of a group in Fiji paying $10k/month in cash which went straight into the chain.
If anything Qarase’s greed got the better of him. He definitely wasn’t as shrewd as Navi who was happy to pull the strings, take the cash and stay out of the limelight.
One small victory for honesty and decency, but there are still plenty of thieves remaining untouched.
In Arizona says
Navi is staying at my house now. Is this guy really on the run? What exactly did he do? I know this post is 5 years old but I felt the need to research this guy and now post as well. Any information on him would be appreciated.
Thank you
Satish Chand says
I have no sympathy for this crook, he should have got the maximum sentence,
Bula Mada says
I wrote this about 3 times about Victor Lal’s story to 4.5 and finally got through after calling for free speech. “victor; for you it’s damn if you do and damn if you don’t. You embrace democracy and yet you don’t. Chill out man; it is so obvious in your writings that you really have a BIG BONE TO PICK;really with all of us; all Fijians living in Fiji and not in Britain. Get a life man… You are beginning to come out as a man who needs to be remitted to St Giles where your work can be read to the mentally ill. (no offense to the mentally ill)
Jemesa says
Didn’t realize what acon man he was. Tricked his own people. Shameless thief!!!!!!!
Jemesa says
Wonder whats he gonna be doing inside!!!!!! Coolker?? Grave digger?? grass cutter?? massager?? OR…….. financial adviser to the other convicts????? More like the latter will surely suit him.
Jonetani says
Osobo Qarase, I always thought you were an honest guy, but I dont know that you are a crook and a liar. What kind of dauvunau are you.
Jemesa says
Dua na qase butako levu o kia.
Benjamin Seduadua says
Dina sara every dog has its day…
Jemesa says
You know…. today I am ashamed to have links to the vanua ko Lau.
Jemesa says
I hope they leave Mahen. He too is a thief…. but a much clever one than LQ. Mahen hoodwinked my fijian brothers of Indian descent by the millions….. remeber, after Speight’s coup….. mahen went begging around the world for money to help the cane farmers and the fijians of indian descent. He siphoned it to Australian banks.
Mahen is the human HYENA………………. He should be guilotined together with LQ so that Fiji will never be able to see their faces again.
Here’s another bit of info:
When Mahen and LQ was in parliament, they were constantly at each others throats blaming each other for everything.
Mahen was “trying” to safeguard the indo- fijians aspirations , while Lai was espousing Fijian supremacy.
But get this guys……….
Occasionalyy the two, with their families, would get together for dinner.
One would say…”Thanks Mahen, for keeping the Indians on your side”
And the other clown would go on to say….” Hey, Tthanks Lai…. for fueling the fijian anger against the Indians.”
This was all done to keep their office intact and continue to fill their pockets——————- all in the name of politics.
These two scoundrels should never be allowed to enter politics again…………… NEVER EVER.
Jemesa says
Dina saraga Ben…………… another dog will very soon have his day too, bro.
Lai and Mahen says
Mahen ‘Fiji ke Robin Hood’ Chaudhry should be next. Like Qarase, he is a wolf in sheep’s hide’; a parasite who deviously uses and preys on his people.
varanitabua says
There are those who are still waiting in the wings that new of all these dealings-one by the name of BAKANI! One of those close to Qarase and was involved in several major issues which hopefuly will come out. For Qarase to have come this far especially with th Agriculture Scam etc there were those who supported and and made the moves for these scams to come to light, but not only that Bakani also is well aware of the share buying and selling that was going on because several of his mates from school got conned by him-pity they don’t want to talk.
Sideline Spectator says
I have read all your comments with great interest – and I am not defending Victor at all – he has done more than any of us to expose and condemn peoples and policies through his writings – yes, we want accountability on the part of those in power today – we dont know how much are all these expats being paid when we are eking out mere existence – not to mention since the 2006 coup, there has not been one Auditor-General’s report?
Chand says
@ Sideline Spectator ,
Please remain on the sidelines and be a spectator.
Shout, kick and punch in the air all you can but in the field the game and the players have changed.
Oh yea I know of those spectators..especially the ones hiding behind and making the most noise and fading away behind women and children when called for accountability…..oh yes we know.
Ok here’s a thought…why not contribute your pennys worth so you can make a difference in the game.
Or forever remain a spectator looking over the shoulders of others.
Blog Reader says
C4/5 is notorious for putting up stories – and I wonder if it put Victor Lal’s byline to give the story “punch” – knowing Victor hardly responds to criticisms or comments against him I avidly read his pieces, and have read them for nearly 25 years in Fijian newspapers and various blogs – the present piece does not have his style and flair – I maybe wrong but C4/5 would not exist if the regime was transparent and open, especially on the financial side. Do any of you know how much is the salary or salaries of Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama?
Tracy says
Banks is an absolute cetteinrythan quoting that piece of shit trotter: “Waitakere Man values highly those parts of the welfare state that he and his family use – like the public education and health systems – but has no time at all for ‘welfare bludgers’,” he wroteLook at the figures, Nippert & Trotter. Private Health Insurance, Private Hospitals & private schools (yep, especially Christian schools) have rebounded and just keep growing faster and faster.Face facts: scum using the public health and education systems are bludgers just as much as those on the dole or DBP or super. And that’s what “Waitakere Man” thinks today. Steven Joyce, National’s election maestro in 2008, says there are plans to stop Auckland ever tipping back in to the hands of Labour If Key, Joyce, and co play their cards right NZ should never have to suffer another Labour government.Labour’s only funding now is from the unions. A little work on the employment laws in the new term – and that means no more funding for Labour for ever. Done. And where Auckland goes the country. As Nippert puts it: “They’re aspiring people, and they work hard,”..and people like that will never, ever vote Labour.Especially with Do-Nothing-Key in charge, there is clear space on the right for an economic party like ACT, but with real principles – you know, one that would never ever vote for tax increases as ACT did last year and will do again this year.And, perhaps the other obvious party, especially with Winston our of the way, a real “Blue Collar Hard Right” party, full of battlers who came up their own way, who hate bludgers, unions, and Labour most of all, who believe crims should be hung, cops need guns, and that the best way to deal with Labour organisers or union plays is with a baseball bat to the back of the head. “Our thinking is ‘Time for a change, chuck these guys out’,” Gosche says. “I don’t think we’ll ever change from that culture of thinking in New Zealand.”Well you and your red mates are in for a big, long surprise, drift to irrelevance, and, we can only hope, criminal sanctions for the damage you did to NZ in the last ever Labour government
Blog Reader says
I hope Victor will forgive me for sending this pre-published piece (which he had let me see in advance) in 2004 which came out in the Fiji SUN that year – sorry folks, the photos cant be loaded up that went with the story
Tell Me, How is the former Vice-President Ratu Jope Seniloli?
‘I hope he has not done the great Pinochet ‘Escape Act’ of 2000?’
General Augusto Pinochet in wheelchair, London,
March 2000
A rejuvenated Pinochet stands up, grabs his cane and
walks into the arms of Chilean military chiefs, family
and friends in Chile, March 2000.
By VICTOR LAL
The last time I saw and spoke to the former convicted Vice-President of Fiji, Ratu Jope Seniloli, was in the Fiji Court of Appeal on 12 November 2004, when his appeal against his conviction for taking an unlawful oath during the coup of 2000, and the four-year prison sentence, was thrown out by the President of the FCA, Justice Gordon Ward. Ratu Jope showed no visible sign of stress, anxiety, or ill-health, and took the judgment on the chin. Was he aware of the next course of action: that he would be released after serving only three months of the four-year sentence? If I remember correctly, his co-accomplices were visibly shaken, notably the Deputy Speaker, Ratu Rakuita Vakalalabure, who had his hands in his face throughout the court proceedings. The former Vice-President, on the other hand, was ‘a jolly, old, laughing fellow’. He even briskly walked down the flight of court steps unaided.
The interesting question one may ask is whether the Fiji Court of Appeal judges were informed by the Attorney-General Qoriniasi Bale that the convicted Bauan chief had already put an application in September for Compulsory Supervision Order (CSO)? The FCA judgment was delivered in November.
Strip him of privileges
It is equally legitimate to ask why he should be receiving perks, privileges, and pensions, when he has now publicly accepted guilt for his illegal actions. As far as the law goes, he is a convicted prisoner, out on a CSO with limited human rights. He did not resign from office, strictly speaking. His conviction and admission of guilt has forced him out of office. In fact, once he had accepted to be released on CSO, he should have been sacked from his office. He had forfeited his legal right of appeal to the Supreme Court.
He, therefore, in my opinion, as a convicted person has no right to even 30 per cent of the salary. If he is entitled to the salary, than the law has to be changed. We have to send a clear message to the present and future holders of high office that crime does not pay. The law should also be changed to bar convicted holders of high office from living off the poor taxpayer.
The Great Council of Chiefs should also consider his expulsion from the august body. If, for example, he is too ill to comfortably sit in prison with all the respect that was accorded to him as a high chief, how on earth can he tough out some of the boat journeys that he might be forced to take to attend Great Council of Chiefs meetings in outer islands? After all, he was released from Suva jail on November 26 to serve the rest of his jail term at home under strict supervision.
Perhaps the disgraced convicted former Vice-President should be subjected to an international medical test, probably by experts from Australia and New Zealand, to verify the report of the Fiji doctors.
Moreover, Ratu Jope’s admission of guilt in order to obtain the CSO, now puts enormous strain on the appeals of his co-accomplices left behind in prison.
Seniloli and Pinochet- Health Grounds
The decision to release the Ratu Jope on CSO was based on merit, the Minister for Justice and Attorney-General Qoriniasi Bale claims. ‘My decision was not influenced by issues such as his position as Vice President,’ the Attorney-General said. Bale clarified that when he considered Ratu Jope’s application for release on CSO, he took into account and made a decision only on the medical reports made available to him. In fact, after he received the application in mid September, he was concerned about having his ground of seeking release verified by an independent panel of top physicians in Fiji. The team, he said, jointly carried out a fresh examination of Ratu Jope and submitted its joint report to him. This report he said made medical findings and not recommendations.
Bale said Ratu Jope’s medical condition was confidential between him and the doctors and should not be disclosed without their consent. This he said, was the law. He said he knew his decision would be subject to scrutiny and criticism but said that whatever he had done was completely in accordance with the law and only related to Ratu Jope’s application. It was not intended and would not be indicative of the way in which he would rule on pending applications for release on CSO. He said Ratu Jope would have been entitled to be released even if he was an ordinary person and each case would be decided on its own merits. Those who opposed this decision, he said, should ask themselves about their real and true motive for opposing.
The outgoing Leader of Opposition, Mick Beddoes, wants the names of the doctors who advised the release of Ratu Jope disclosed. Beddoes says he has no problems with the release of Ratu Jope, 67, on CSO. But he says the Attorney General must now disclose the names of the top three doctors who concluded that the vice president’s illness was serious enough to warrant his release. Beddoes also called on the attorney general to disclose the illness. He says people have a right to know the truth because they may conclude that Ratu Jope’s resignation and subsequent decision not to contest his guilt was a trade off for his release. AG Bale maintains he cannot divulge details citing patient-doctor confidentiality.
We are reminded of the furore surrounding the health of the former Chilean dictator Pincohet, the former Chilean dictator who spent 16 months under house arrest in England fighting extradition to Spain. Pinochet, South America’s most notorious ex-strongman, was arrested on 16 October 1998, while recovering from back surgery in London. He was taken into custody on an extradition request from a Spanish judge who wanted to try him for atrocities committed during his 17-year rule, from 1973 to 1990. Authorities in Belgium, Switzerland and France quickly filed similar requests.
Pinochet’s lawyers twice appealed to the British House of Lords for the old dictator’s release but each time the legal walls seemed to close in further. Then late in 1999, the Chilean government and Pinochet’s attorneys changed tactics, seeking a humanitarian release by asking Britain to consider the findings of Pinochet’s private medical exams.
The British Home Secretary Jack Straw, Britain’s chief legal officer, agreed, and in January 2000, he said that the exam results made him of a mind to release Pinochet. Despite challenges to the findings, Straw ultimately dismissed Spanish, French, Swiss and Belgian authorities’ requests for more thorough tests. Straw said Pinochet should be set free because he is mentally unfit to stand trial abroad.
A Spanish human rights activist sought an injunction in London to block Pinochet’s flight, but by the time the case could be heard, the murderous general was soaring high above the Atlantic. ‘Nothing would be served by continuing the current extradition process in England,’ Straw said in a statement, referring to exams by British doctors that concluded that Pinochet suffers from brain damage and could not fully participate in a trial.
Straw recognized his controversial decision but said the case ‘has established, beyond question, the principle that those who commit human rights abuses in one country cannot assume that they are safe elsewhere.’ ‘That will be the lasting legacy of this case,’ he declared. Already, the case has had international repercussions. Current and former officials from Yugoslavia, Africa and South America reportedly have rethought travel plans, fearing the ‘Pinochet effect’. Our own military strongman, Sitiveni Rabuka is no exception from the reach of the long arm of international law.
But Straw’s decision, like that of Bale’s, nevertheless brought immediate rancour from human rights groups and authorities in several countries who said Straw too easily dismissed comments by doctors in Europe that Pinochet’s medical exams were inconclusive and that Straw had not allowed enough time for appeals.
’This is a decision taken over the blood of the victims,’ said Sophie Thonon, a lawyer representing two French nationals who were among more than 3,000 people reported killed or ‘disappeared’ in a campaign against leftist activists and their sympathizers during Pinochet’s rule.
The Great PINOCHEAT
On 3 March 2000, Pincohet arrived back in Chile. The military jet carrying the reportedly ailing Pinochet touched down at an airstrip near Santiago’s International Airport, and Pinochet, 84, was lowered from the plane in a wheelchair. But as if somehow rejuvenated by being back on home soil, Pinochet then stood up, grabbed his cane and walked into the arms of Chilean military chiefs, family and friends. Some 200 well-wishers cheered and a military band played. He beamed a smile as he watched his wheelchair be stowed in a corner.
He then stepped forward, raising his hand to the crowd before walking steadily toward a waiting helicopter. He climbed the steps of the helicopter unaided before being flown to a military hospital in an upscale neighbourhood of Santiago.
Pinochet had basically feigned his illness. The British medical experts were wrong in their diagnosis, so claimed Pinochet’s opponents and European doctors. In other words, has a British newspaper, The Sun, captioned its front page, Pinochet had become Pinocheat. The two photographs confirmed their suspicion. In a cruel twist of fate, his immunity from prosecution was recently stripped, and Pinochet has been ordered to stand trial for his crimes.
Maybe, the disgraced convicted former Vice-President should be subjected to an international medical test, probably by experts from Australia and New Zealand, to verify the report of the Fiji doctors.
The Vice-Presidency: How about a Non-Fijian?
When Fiji was negotiating independence, the Alliance Party led by Ratu Mara and other high chiefs, favoured Dominion status, with the Queen as constitutional monarch, represented in Fiji by a Governor-General. The National Federation Party, led by Siddiq Koya and others, envisaged Fiji as an independent state, with an elected President of Fijian origin. In the end, Ratu Mara and the chiefs had their way. In 1988, following Rabuka’s racist 1987 coups, they hastily got rid of the Queen, and turned Fiji into a republic to achieve their racial and political aspirations. Thereafter followed the racist 1990 Constitution, and the re-jigging and the politicization of the Great Council of Chiefs.
The image and standing of the Council was fatally damaged in the eyes of many non-Fijians and urban and liberal minded Fijians, when the Father of the Two Coups in Fiji, Sitiveni Rabuka, became its chairman, and is now a life member. He was the first person to be rewarded by the chiefs for his treasonous action in overthrowing the Bavadra government.
The racist and unconstitutional 1990 Constitution also handed the power to the Council to appoint the President and the Vice-President. It is not surprising to hear from another Bauan chief, Ratu Apenisa Cakobau, that the position of the vice president should be rotated amongst the confederacies instead of remaining with Kubuna. Ratu Apenisa also says it doesn’t matter if the new vice president isn’t a chief. ‘I think it should be a person that is responsible, a person that is capable and a respected person. And it doesn’t really matter whether he’s a chief or not. As long as he’s capable. I think what we need is a person that will be able to steer the country into the right direction. We need the person that everybody would look up to. Right now Fiji is in a very difficult situation and the choice would be with the Great Council of Chiefs, but whomever they decide we’ll just have to support.’
I would venture to suggest that it is time the Great Council of Chiefs appointed a non-Fijian to the Vice-Presidency, for both chiefs and commoners have brought nothing but disgrace to high political offices since the 1987 coups, and to the good name of FIJI.
The words of the Fiji Court of Appeals Judge Gordon Ward still rings in my ears when he dismissed Ratu Jope and his co-accomplices appeals.
He said that as traditional chiefs the men (Ratu Jope and Ratu Rakuita) must exercise their powers within the law. ‘The mistake of the appellants was to allow their status and position in society to be used to give strength to people who stepped outside the law,’ he said, adding that the men had committed serious offences.
‘They took place at a time of profound disturbance and armed challenge to the legitimate government,’ Justice Ward said.
Maybe, it is high time non-Fijians were allowed to set a better example to the citizens of Fiji.
Blog Reader says
May 13, 2007, Fiji SUN
Chiefs, Church, and Coup Culture
The “Tagi ni Taukei” mantra the root of all evil in Fiji
By VICTOR LAL
“Sit down everybody, sit down. This is a takeover. We apologise for any inconvenience caused. You are requested to stay cool, stay down, sit down and listen to what we are going to tell you. Please stay calm, ladies and gentlemen,” announced a man cowardly hiding behind a mask. Another man who was sitting down quietly in the public gallery soon joined the masked man: “Mr Prime Minister, please lead your team down and remain calm. Mr Prime Minister, Sir, will you lead your team down to the right…”
One Captain X, and a 38-year-old Lieutenant-Colonel Sitiveni Rabuka, twenty years ago, at 10am on 14 May 1987, spoke these treasonous words as a “hit squad” of ten soldiers toppled Dr Timoci Bavadra’s NFP/FLP Coalition government in the first military coup in the South Pacific. As the parliamentarians were being detained, one Cabinet minister Dr Tupeni Baba, related to Rabuka, naively but defiantly, shouted, “What kind of a joke is this?” What was being played out in Parliament was no joking game; it was part of a fulfilment of an obnoxious prayer, “The Tagi ni Taukei – Cry of the Taukei”, that had been earlier recited in the home of Methodist Church minister (once the head of the Methodist Dilkusha Indian Circuit), Reverend Tomasi Raikivi, a cousin of Rabuka’s: “Save us, and save our land. You saved the Israelites, when foreigners took their land from them. Dear God, please answer our prayer and do the same for us. Amen”. Although the prayer ended with “Amen”, what should have been intoned was “Amin” – for the plan was to hunt and hound out fellow Indo-Fijians like Idi Amin did in Uganda.
The other so-called “Man of God” beseeching his Heavenly Lord for guidance was Ratu Inoke Kubuabola, a cousin of the late President Ratu Sir Penaia Ganilau. Kubuabola was President of the Fiji Council of Churches and Secretary General of the Bible Society of the South Pacific. It was Kubuabola, who had first termed the extreme Fijian nationalist organization that had sprung up following Dr Bavadra’s election victory as the Taukei Movement, and he was its direct link with Mr Rabuka leading up to the coup.
The two men of the robe were not alone. At the prayer meeting were others, who would later carve out respectable standing and careers from the debris of the 1987 coups: Ratu Finau Mara, the son of the late President Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara; Ratu George Kadavulevu, son of the Paramount Chief of Fiji, the late Ratu George Cakobau; Ratu Keni Viuyasawa, the brother of Brigadier Ratu Epeli Nailatikau; Daniel Veitata, Apisai Tora, the late Jone Veisamasama, Qoriniasi Bale and Filipe Bole. There were other countless and faceless chiefs, thieves, and others who were part of Rabuka’s Operation Kidacala (Surprise) plan to seize power.
Some other bogus nationalist taukeis would later crawl out of the shadows, among them Isikeli Mataitoga, a legal officer under the Director of Public Prosecutions and a Captain in the Territorials. He is today ensconced in the Foreign Ministry, charged with making the world understand another coup – “Frank’s 2006 Coup”. Looking back at the 1987 television tapes from Britain’s Channel Four television, in which he (a spokesman for Rabuka) and I prominently featured during the 1987 coups on the opposite sides of the racial divide, I had asked one forthright question: “How many generation does it take for one to become a native?”
A sixth generation Indo-Fijian from my father’s side on Viti Levu, I had angrily pointed out to the world television viewers in 1987 that most of those running around beating up Indo-Fijians and claiming to be “indigenous” were themselves “bloody foreigners” – from outer islands of Fiji, from Lau and Bau, which are not connected to the mainland, and from Vanua Levu. “These Fijians have been the cause of all our racial and political problems on the mainland which houses the Parliament. Just look at the western division of Viti Levu – a model of peaceful existence to be emulated by the world.” Of course, it was an exaggeration to blame all the so-called “bloody foreigners”, but the backgrounds of most of the key players surely pointed to in that direction, except maybe for the backgrounds of Apisai Tora, Sakiasi Butadroka, and the assistant Roko Tui Naitasiri, Ratu Meli Vesikula. An examination of the key players in the 1987 coups does reveal that the majority had come from Navatu-Natewa in Vanua Levu. Dr Baba later observed: “A lot of them, when we were released, took off their masks and came over and actually shook hands with me. They come from my part of the island.”
“They arrive on the mainland of Viti Levu, and in order to stay put, raise the chant – the Cry of the Fijians”, I told Channel Four and BBC television viewers. Their principal target has always been Indo-Fijians, as expressed by coup executioner Rabuka, I said. Just listen to his racist nonsense about his coup: “It was a matter of cultural survival. Sink or Swim. There was no way we were going to go down. The Indians had become an unbearable presence in Fiji. The Hindus and Muslims are pagans who must be converted to Christianity.” We could say the same about him and other non-Viti Levu born Fijians, I told BBC: “Send these bloody foreigners, including their paramount chiefs, back to their islands and villagers, like the British did in the old colonial days. Rabuka should swim back to his village, Nakobo, or wherever he has come from, in Vanua Levu. He has become an unbearable presence and a disgrace on mainland Viti Levu. But no, we believe that Fiji belongs to all. We should be judged by the content of our character, and not by the colour of our skin.” Race, I argued, was a mere smokescreen for Fijian chiefs, thieves, and other taukei who just want to reach the economic and political mountaintop.
Meanwhile, if the coup was planned in a pastor’s house, it was to be eventually sanctioned in the house of the chiefs – the Great Council of Chiefs – all in the name of “Tagi ni Taukei”. Shockingly, the prominent chiefs had other racial agendas, including Ratu Mara and Ratu Penaia. Instead of criminalizing the coup, they constitutionalized post-coup racism in the new 1990 Constitution that was now being drafted to ensure Fijian paramountcy, irrespective of the fact that the coup was introducing a culture of violence and violations, and terror and terrorism. To be sure, their own chiefly, political, and economic survivals, was their primary agenda.
In fact, Mr Rabuka would later argue that Ratu Mara, despite his protestations, had sanctioned Rabuka’s coup. It seems poor Babu Singh, an Indo-Fijian and life-long personal bodyguard to Ratu Mara, had been more faithful to his oath than his boss to parliamentary democracy, multi-racialism, and the rule of law. In the interim, Fiji would become another country, for the taukei to plunder and prosper from the blood, toil, tears, and taxes of non-taukei, all disguised under the rubric of affirmative action and chiefly rule.
The Tagi ni Taukei slogan again found expression in the 2000 Speight coup, with Ratu Mara, now as President, sacking Mahendra Chaudhry as Prime Minister and appointing a caretaker administration. While describing George Speight and his gang as terrorists, Ratu Mara however noted the concerns of those holding the Chaudhry government hostage, stating “These will be thoroughly examined and solutions considered to further protect and enhance the position of the indigenous Fijian community”. In the late 1960s Ratu Mara notoriously claimed that if the Indo-Fijians ever gained political power in Fiji, then “Suva would burn to the ground, and all the indigenous Fijians would lose would be the Indians’ records of their debts”. He had never envisaged that he might be consumed in those bogus nationalist flames. Forty years later, in 2000, the Fijians did burn down Suva. Ironically, he lost his own presidency, with the looter’s leader George Speight remarking that, “From where I sit he [Ratu Mara] has no legal claim to the title of president”. In the end the great chief was forced to make a humiliating exit to Lau, a broken and bitter man, blaming among others, the coup godfather Sitiveni Rabuka, for being involved in the 2000 coup.
And yet Ratu Mara’s downfall did not discourage another of his clansman Laisenia Qarase to once again take up the “Tagi ni Taukei” slogan, as he told the UN General Assembly in 2000 in his capacity as the military installed Prime Minister: “The crux of our political crisis in Fiji is that indigenous Fijians and Rotuman communities felt threatened by certain policies which non-indigenous leadership of the Peoples Coalition Government had implemented following their decisive victory in our national elections in May 1999. It was this fear and anxiety about their future that led to mass demonstrations and ultimately the coup d’etat on May 19th this year. It manifested itself also in the mass looting of shops, destruction of property, and threats to people and their families, and unfortunately and tragically, the victims were mainly members of our Indian community.” The Rotumans had also joined in the unmusical Tagi ni Taukei hymn.
Even Commodore Bainimarama had been temporarily sucked into the nationalist cause, for he had refused to allow Mr Chaudhry and his Peoples Coalition government back into power after ending the hostage crisis. His court affidavits to the High Court had similar nationalistic tune. He had even signed away Speight’s freedom, subject to conditions, in the Muanikau Accord. The military high command, supported by the chiefs, went on to openly embrace Mr Qarase’s racialist demands for political and economic supremacy for the taukei. His regime, despite his racist rhetoric, became the darling of Australia, New Zealand, the Commonwealth, the United Nations and the United States.
Now, poor Mr Qarase wants to return to Suva from his self-imposed exile in Mavana. He wants to earn a living and be with his family. During the 2000 crisis, he had told the UN and the Commonwealth to stay out of Fiji, for it was an internal matter for the Fijians to sort it out. Mr Qarase must be allowed to return to Suva. But Commodore Bainimarama’s clean up campaign must continue. He should even ask Mr Tevita Fa, the lawyer now representing Mr Qarase, to hand over tape recorded evidence which Mr Fa claimed in April 2002 that he (Mr Fa) had which shows that Mr Qarase and his entire team were involved in the vote buying scheme in the 2001 elections. Mr Fa had made the claims while representing his client Peniasi Kunatuba long before Kunatoba’s trial and conviction over the agriculture scam.
As for Mr Rabuka, the godfather of the coup culture in Fiji, he should be expelled from the Great Council of Chiefs, which had made Mr Rabuka its only life member to honour him for staging his two military coups in 1987. It will be a fitting punishment, although it is twenty years too late. After all, the chiefs are now saying that they do not recognise Commodore Frank Bainimarama’s coup because they do not believe in coups. To recall Mr Rabuka’s own words in his book “No Other Way”: “I respect chiefs. I do not like the composition of the Great Council of Chiefs. There are so many non-Chiefs there who will try to dictate the resolutions of the Great Council of Chiefs. The Chiefs are so humble, their personalities and their character do not make them forceful enough when they discuss matters. They will agree, they will compromise…whereas those who are not Chiefs in there tend to very, very selfish.” Whether Mr Rabuka sees himself as one of those self-seeking commoners is another matter, but he only recently indicated that he was willing to lead any reconstituted Great Council of Chiefs.
A complex set of domestic and foreign variables account for the 1987 and 2000 coups. The most prominent has been the Tagi ni Taukei slogan from the chiefs, the church and a vast majority of native Fijians. Now when they are at the receiving end, the mantra of the day is the rule of law, democracy, human rights, and elections. The way forward, as I proposed previously, is Government of National Unity, made up of those who genuinely have Fiji and not merely taukei Fijians, at heart.
There is also no room for the obnoxious views of Mr Rabuka who told his official biographer in 2000: “My hope is that Indians will migrate. We tighten the controls, then Fiji is no longer attractive to the Indian settler as it has been over the last 120 years.” Reflecting on the 1987 coups he declared: “I have no regrets about the coup. I apologised in the recent (1999) election campaign for the suffering it caused and I am sorry for that, not for the coup. If I was in that situation, I would do it again. It was right. I conducted the coup to seal off the threat of sustained and widespread violence, and to move the country to a form of civilian rule that would be acceptable first to the Fijians. I am at peace with the coup. The history of Fiji would have been tragically different had I not “lanced the boil”.
Let us hope that never again will we hear the Tagi ni Taukei nonsense, that has been the root of all evil and coups in the country, beginning with the 1987 Rabuka coups, which took place on 14 May, 108 years to the day the Indians were introduced as indentured labourers to toil the sugar, copra and tea plantations of Fiji.
Curious Indo-Fijian Cat says
Many thanks, Blog Reader. I am still puzzled, as Graham Davis remarked recently, we can’t understand why Victor Lal, as Graham has eloquently put it, “one of the finest investigative journalists Fiji has ever produced” writes for the crap Coup Four Point Five.
Victor Lal’s writings also disclose that he has not hesitated to pull punches, and is a staunch defender of Indo-Fijians rights.
He should be up there with us, up there with Frank Bainimarama, instead of C4/5? I am lost for words, unless as the Blog Reader hinted, C4/5 has tagged Victor’s name to the Yang piece.
Chand says
…and what killed the cat????
Victor LAl, Wadan,Brij and a host of other Indo-Fijians……lets leave them in the dust bins of history……so be it if these guys were good in their field of work…but me says what good is anyones work if it only serves its paymasters..if it’s only selfserving….
Let them be the poster boys of c4.5…..the least said the better for we don’t wan’t to give them prominance in this blogsite…
It is quite simple…there will be people who would subscribe to their views and you will through disection, know who these guys are…and Grubsheet being balanced will publish…that is ok.
Our job is to discredit them and link it to c4.5…its is simple….lets see who wins…
And if we don’t, the question that I posed in my opening sentence will forever hang around like a noose…
Curious to know the answer..???
Sallyanne says
@curious etc
If so then why hasn’t Viictor Lal publicly dissociated himself from the articles?