Radio Australia and the historian Brij Lal didn’t believe it. Their doubts set off a firestorm in anti-regime circles, accusing Grubsheet and others of being wrong and even fabrication when we reported that the former governing party in Fiji, the SDL, had called for the introduction of a Christian state in a submission to the country’s Constitutional Commission. Well here’s the proof – a direct copy of the document presented to the Commission in Suva last Friday by a delegation that included the SDL’s President, Solomoni Naivalu.
It now transpires that this is just one of a number of SDL submissions being made in advance of the main version to be presented next month. Naivalu has since explained to the Fiji Sun that the party’s various “constituency committees” around the country are putting forward summaries of the main submission before the full detail is outlined at a final session. It explains why the same summary presented at the Suva Civic Centre was identical to one presented at a separate session in Nasinu. It gives the appearance of a grassroots “tagi ni vanua”, a cry from ordinary members of the i’Taukei. But it stands to reason that both summary and final document will include the same contentious proposals.
The “summary” clearly states that “Fiji is to be a Christian State” and that “Christianity is to be the state religion”. It also states that “Fijian is to be the national language of the state”. The document also confirms the other provisions reported by Grubsheet earlier this week; that the term Fijian only apply to indigenous people and the rest be known as Fiji Islanders, that dual citizenship be abolished, that the rights of gays and lesbians no longer be constitutionally protected and that the Great Council of Chiefs be restored and have the sole power to appoint the president and vice president.
Quite why the story was thrown into doubt is a lesson for a credulous media, notably Radio Australia and its Pacific Beat reporter, Bruce Hill. He reported that when he telephoned the SDL offices in Suva, he was told by an unnamed person that the party had yet to present its submission and the stories that it had were wrong. Yes, the main submission is still to come. But what the spokesman failed to tell Hill was that a summary of it was presented and contained the call for a Christian state and the other contentious provisions.
Evidently accepting that nothing had happened, Bruce Hill then sought comment from the exiled Indo-Fijian historian, Brij Lal, who opined on air that he very much doubted that the SDL would ever call for a Christian state in Fiji because – among other things – it had accepted the principle of one man, one vote. He maintained that the original reports must have been based on comments to the Commission by one or two individuals, who might have said what was claimed, but that it was unlikely to have been an official SDL submission. The entire tenor of the Radio Australia report was that the original report was wrong.
The story had been broken first by one of Fiji’s most senior journalists – Vijay Narayan, the news director of the radio stations of Communications Fiji Limited, and carried on CFL’s widely read website, Fiji Village. It first went on the site soon after 5.00pm on Monday evening local time. The first outlet to give it wider publicity was the New Zealand website of the academic blogger, Crosbie Walsh. Later in the evening, Grubsheet also published its own pungent commentary on the submission. The stories set off a firestorm of criticism of the SDL and the controversy raged for 24 hours without any denial from the SDL that the contents were true. That only came in the denial given to Bruce Hill when he rang the Party’s Suva headquarters. He clearly didn’t realise that the spokesman was being disingenuous, a denial that the final official submission had been lodged, not about whether the party had called for a Christian state. But with that denial and Brij Lal’s “it can’t possibly be”, it was enough to run with on the international airwaves. Journalist and historian have been dealt a very harsh lesson about the veracity of SDL statements.
When contacted the following morning, Vijay Narayan said he “stood by his story 100 per cent” and gave the precise details of what happened at Friday’s Commission hearing, including the presence of the SDL President, Solomoni Nailavu. A number of questions now arise. Why didn’t Bruce Hill contact Vijay Narayan before he ran the story? Why did he seek comment from an exiled academic, in the form of Brij Lal, who lives in Canberra, thousands of kilometers from the action? Lal wasn’t issuing a denial because he had no idea what had happened in Suva. He was merely opining that in his judgment, the original story must have been wrong. How on earth would be know? And why would Bruce Hill use such an opinion to broadcast a story casting doubt on the report, especially when it appears that he made no real effort to discover the facts from those closest to what had happened? Judge for yourself but we think Bruce Hill and Radio Australia were far too ready to take the word of the SDL over those who actually witnessed the submission being presented. Brij Lal might also finally start thinking a bit more critically about the circles he moves in.
Fiji SDL party deny calling for a Christian state
Fiji’s opposition SDL party has denied making a submission to the country’s constitution commission calling for Fiji to be declared an officially Christian state.
It’s been reported in Fiji that the largely indigenous Fijian party has called for Fijian to be the official language of the country, for only indigenous i-Taukei to be known as Fijian, and for references to sexual orientation to be removed from human rights laws. But a senior party official says they have made no such submission, and they are still working on what they will say to the commission, which will probably come in late September. The official said some individual SDL members have have said things on their own, but they do not represent the party as a whole. Dr Brij Lal is an academic and a commentator on Fiji affairs, and he tells Bruce Hill that the SDL almost certainly doesn’t hold the extreme positions that are being attributed to it.
Presenter:Bruce Hill
Speaker:Fiji academic Dr Brij Lal, from the Australian National University in Canberra
LAL: My sense is that the SDL as a responsible party, as a major party in Fiji, I just don’t believe that they will be making those kinds of statements now. I mean they have publicly embraced the idea of one person one vote, for example. So I’d be very, very surprised. My own sense is that it’s probably some individual member of SDL who shares those nationalistic views who has made a submission and maybe his remarks have been misrepresented and attributed to SDL. So my own sense is that a major political party would make official submission later on and not so early in the piece. So I would take this “claim” with a huge grain of salt.
HILL: Why would it be reported in the Fiji media that this is the SDL party submission when we called the SDL, they point blank denied it and said they’re still working on their constitutional commission submission, which won’t be ready until the 10th of September? Why would the Fiji media be reporting that it is their position when they’re saying that it’s not?
LAL: Well this is an important and intriguing point. Maybe it is in the interests of some groups in Fiji, maybe even some individuals of political parties to portray SDL as a racist party without really checking with the leaders of that party. I mean Mr Qarase was just jailed recently so I think the party has other things on its mind rather than preparing a detailed submission to the commission. So maybe there’s an element of mischief making in this, I can’t tell. But it is beyond me that any responsible party would make those kinds of claims now, especially now that the demography has changed in business Fiji inside and outside majority, and I think most sensible people in Fiji would say that it is far more important to live a Christian life than to have a Christian state. So I think that these claims have to be taken with a huge grain of salt.
HILL: There has been a stream within some indigenous Fijian iTaukei thought about these ideas for some time. I remember a politician called Sakiasi Butadroka who was toying with a lot of these ideas, the idea that only Fijians were really Fijian and that Fijian should be the language, Christianity should be the official religion of the state. How widespread do you think this still is within the iTaukei community in Fiji?
LAL: Well these ideas have been around for a long time. In 1974 Mr Butadroka asked for the deportation of all Indo-Fijians back to India. I mean these positions were circulated before the Reeves Commission in 1995/96 by the SVT, Mr Rabuka’s party. The idea of being a Christian state was also advocated by a number of other Fijian parties. So there is a history to this. But that was a time when Fijians felt threatened, they were in a minority and they took these extremist views. And there are a number of church leaders and political leaders who actively propagated these ideas. But my sense is that since 2000 and later on the political climate in Fiji has changed and the demographic transformation that has taken place in Fiji has taken some of the heat out of these very, very sensitive and contentious issues.
THE PROOF:
Not so, Professor. To follow is the actual document – the “summary” of the main SDL submission submitted to the Constitutional Commission by Solomoni Naivalu’s team. He evidently didn’t speak but was present as other party representatives addressed the proposals. It ought to lay to rest this journalistic and historical canard once and for all because the document specifically says it is an SDL submission. Whether the main one hasn’t been presented is neither here nor there.
Page Five is the “smoking gun” that has now gone off in the trusting Brij Lal’s face. How on earth will he to explain to Hindus ( 32 per cent of Fiji’s population) and Muslims ( six per cent) why they should bow before a Christian system of government in Fiji, as the party he keeps defending wants them to do? Where is the defence of their religion, language and customs? Yes, from the hated dictator, Frank Bainimarama, who woke up to the SDL’s secret agenda long ago. Brij Lal’s position – along with that of other non-indigenous SDL apologists like his brother-in-law Wadan Narsey – is untenable. And now that the truth has been exposed, he’ll doubtless be realising the implications with mounting horror.
Why the ABC has to keep referring to out of touch and SDL apologist Brij Lal, is beyond me.
Brij has lost all credibility now that he has been shown up to be an SDL apologist – the photo of him, Fraenkel and coupmaker Simi Kaitani (now a dole bludger in Melbourne) says it all.
By its submission to the Ghai committee the SDL has now shown up what many people were saying all along; that the party, even under Qarase, could not provide a unifying vision for Fiji !!!
It is a party with an exclusivist ethno-nationalist agenda, backed by disgruntled chiefs who want their position of privilege at the trough restored, and backed of course by the “Pharisee’s” and “Saducee’s” of Methodist Church.
It therefore has lost its right to present to the people as a credible political party and government alternative in 2014 elections.
Their narrow-mindedness is staggering.
Maybe Graham can shed a light on this to the Australian and New Zealand government who have been supporting the SDL led party and Qarase since the 2006 coup.
Graham, ask them, “Do they really want to support this racist, homophobic, bigoted, anti muslim, anti Hinduism, anti multi-racialism and anti-dual citizenship party?
Maybe it is time Brij Lal’s employer ANU (which receives a chunk of tax payer grant) evaluates the so called Professors employability. His track record is a failure, i.e. what he has stood for so far. God knows what he must be teaching or there direction he is providing to his post graduate students.
Brig is a first class dope and Kaitani is a typical one foot in the shit and the other foot in da! Keep it coming Graham these SDL supporters are just getting back what they were dishing out when they suprimo No 1 Qarase was at th wheel. Ro Teimumu is the only one who had courage to speak but behind the veil of innocence is a person who thinks of Fiji as for the Fijians, which was the limate SDL unspoken manifesto! The iTaukei has woken up from getting fooled for too long, the ones caling for democracy in Australia are the SDL supporters who are running away from their ‘crimes’ and there is a whole bang lot of them now calling foul over Voreqe ideals! Sa bera God ain’t blind, no amount of crying and praying goona do any good because you mob were making a mockery of the relegion you of Christianity! What you got now is what you gave others!
Congratulations Graham- U R 2 GOOD!
Now I see where the pro-democracy mob led by the Mara-Baleidrokadroka-Lal-Fraenkel cabal got their “Ten Point Plan” from. It came from the inner and putrid bowels of the racist SDL brains trust in Suva.
Now its all open for people to see – the pro-democracy movement led in Australia by Suli Dauniveidulu, in the USA by Loru Tawawili and Sai Lealea in Wellington, are a front for the SDL! No wonder Mere Samisoni and Teimumu Kepa have been attending the pro-democracy meetings in Oz.
Sa qai tobo tu o Van Damne!!!
OMG even the names of those pro damocracy in Fijian is speaks for itself one is “Dauniveidulu” which means in Fijian the master of sexual intercources and Tawawili which means not counted and Lealea is sound like “Eleasi” which is a swear word in Bua dialect.
Dr Lal says there is a history to this ( the idea that only Fijians were really Fijian and that Fijian should be the language, Christianity should be the official religion of the stateand and or Fiji should be for the Fijians).
The history is still there-contrary to what Dr Lal believes.
This applies mainly to the elite Fijians.
Does Dr Lal agree with these extremist views? of the SDL and he says they are extremiist.
@ Peni
Laki tarogi Lal
(go ask Lal)
The 2 big C’s are the biggest problems here in Fiji.
The Chiefs and the Church.
Should not the Church make an opposite submission to the SDL one?
Reduce thier influence and Fiji would be a better place.Why should chiefs be running the the government anyway.
Graham ,
Thank you for bringing this to the fore. The politics of exclusion are alive and well in those submissions.
It is indeed a sad day that the echoes of discrimination and non-separation of State and church reverberate in the submissions of the SDL to the Constitutional Commission and the “us” and “them” mentality still finds voice in this age of “enlightenment”. Also it is puzzling to note the support of supposedly intelligent and “enlightened” persons for the positions adopted by those submissions but then there are a lot of puzzles in the world in which we find ourselves.
In time I am sure (as an optimist) those echoes will fade away and that we are left with a realisation that “us” is the same as “them”, that the hopes of all Fijians and the future and destiny of Fiji as a united nation depends on the voices of reason, acceptance and inclusion being stronger and more persuasive in their submissions to the Commission.
These are the same extremists beating the same drum that they did in 1987 and 2000. They do not realise that the deceitful beat of the ethnoationalist drum is now well known.
They have not served to improve the wellbeing of the itaukei and they have not improved the wellbeing of all other fijians. They are the evil words of those elites that have only sought to enrich themselves at the expense of the public purse in times past.
They are the thoughts of those with fork tongues.
No more !
Whenever we get those who advocate for Fiji to be country made up of different races we will always get those who believe that it was Gods will that Fiji is just for one particle group of people or race. My answer is simple give the Indigenous Fijians to run Fiji and you bet your bottom dollar they will be doing exactly what Voreqe said ‘back to cannibalism’ Fijians need a ’cause’ and the scapegoat were the Indo-fijians, if you care to look back at the history of Fiji there was never any big time Tikina, Yasana crap we now have etc that only came about during the period when Ratu Sukuna came ont the scene. Fiji was just simply a country not as united as we have come to believe and it was a case of changing your alligance as quickly as you changed your wives. The Fijians couldn’t be united by Chiefs who have led them thru the period from cession till now and does any Fijian believe they can do the job-my foot! Its the resaon we had a Rabuka, George Speight and now Voreqe as leaders! The reason for the coups wasn’t an Indo-Fijian issue it was to rebel against the Chiefs and behind the agenda of rebbellion was the Methodist Church who was the slow burning candle praying for Gods intercession on one hand (in Public) whilst stroking the fires of hatred with the other! I should know i was in church those sundays before Rabukas coup in 1987. How many non Indigenous Fijians have led Fiji as PM since Cession? Not to many? Chaudary was just clever for his own good. And of Fijian Leadership-well only Ratu Mara is the only one that gave us some hope , Bavadra was never given a chance! Rabuka he did the impossible bankrupted a Bank! Qarase well the records speak for themselves!
Graham the ABC has zero credibility re any poiltical reporting whether national or international.
Nationally they are the ALP’s and the Union’s propaganda machine, (I call them the ALPBC), and internationally they only report with a leftist slant and around 90% of the people they interview are of the same mindset.
It is futile to expect any rational discussion, debate or comment to emanate from there. In a world where journalists in general are now viewed below the status of used car salesmen, they are the worst in Australia followed closely by the pretentious group working for Fairfax (and they wonder why the business is going backwards!)
I had occasion to comment on the press in Fiji back in 2007 because the Fiji Times in particular, was also indulging in ABC type reporting re Fank back then, and it was so obvious I asked Frank to address a group of 100 odd of ex Fiji people from an online group known as Kai Viti Friends I took there (which included MIke Gosling whose post you reproduced recently) and to outline his vision for Fiji so I and we could could judge first hand for ourselves what the reality was.
Incidentally after my welcoming speech and Frank’s address I spent a hour and a half in one on one conversation with him, which then would have been far in excess of any time any Australian or NZ journalist would have done.
I cannot repeat what was discussed, except for one topic which became public and is pertinent as Mike Gosling mentioned he lived in Singapore, and is also important because it is very clear to me that Frank is trying to do for Fiji what the very effective Lee did years ago for Singapore, and you may remember he was also attacked by the Western Press.
I was talking to Frank (he asked me to call him by his first name) and said “When I go to Singapore and deal with Andrew Lim, if I ask him what his nationality is he does not say Chinese, he says Singaporean. If I ask a Malay who works for him what his nationality is he does not say Malay, he says Singaporean, if I ask an Indian who works for him what is nationality is he doesent say Indian he says Singaporean – and at that point Mary who had been engaging the KVF convenor Jill Wooley in conversation as Frank and I talked, interrupted and said “And that is the way it should be in Fiji! – which everyone at the table heard so that topic became public.
Frank then told of one his most trusted advisors who when he travelled was classed as a Fijian wherever he went until he got home when he was classed as an Indian.
I was left in no doubt about his sincerity on the racial issue, and that was reinforced when I had one Indian taxi driver compare him to Ghandi, and another who told me his whole family had moved to NZ and when I asked him why he was not with them he said “I have all the papers, but I would rather live in Fiji, and besides I think this man is going to do great things for Fiji’
Two years later I was on a committee organising the first ever Scientific joint Medical Conference between the Fiji Medical Association and the Gold Coast Medical Association which is the only non Government aligned Medical association in Australia, and it was touch and go whether the bad press would stop that happening, but my explanation of what was really happening and what had really happened in Fiji was supported by Dr Shunil Sharma and Dr Vijay Kapadia, both of whom started their careers at CWM, and I remember one meeting where Vijay said Gerry is correct, I dont necessarily agree with everything Frank does but on the subject of racial relations Franks bona fides are exemplary.
Vijay of course has since set up the Cardiac unit in Suva at absolutely no cost to Fiji, and now that Jill Wooley has passed on and I am in the daily hot seat re KVF group as well as the organisational seat, I have made a decision that all our fund raising will be for the continued operational costs of that unit.
Incidentally after that Medical Conference in 2009 which produced many stories, all of them good, two stand out.
1. Philip Morris who was the President of the GCMA, on his return at the time wrote to Kevin Rudd and later to Bob Carr outlining his thoughts and asking for a more rational approach from the Government, and the second time (unlike most of us who have been doing the same for years) he actually recieved a reply. (You are welcome to see that)
2. One of the Australian Doctors who was completely anti holding a conference with a ‘non democratic ‘ country and said when I asked him if he wanted to stay a few days after the conference “I do not want to stay 1 minute longer than I have to” I invited to a lunch I organised for KVF members back in Australia after the Conference.
He sat next to me and said so everyone at the table could hear “Gerry I owe you an apology, I took my son with me who I have taken to 13 other countries, and he said Dad this is far and away the best country you have ever taken me to, so we did stay an extra 3 days, plus I found that everyone I spoke to had the highest regard for Frank and that my own press and my own Government had been lying to me.”
Lastly just back to 2007 the 100 members of the group all individually conducted their own surveys re opinions of Frank which amounted to around a 1,000 people from all races, all walks of life, being asked their opinion – a much larger sample than any press had done at that time, and bear in mind that these people all had differing political viewpoints, went to different schools, attended different churches, and some like me had not been back to Fiji for decades.
When we compared notes only one person had found someone critical of Frank and that was a Fijian taxi driver who had said with a straight face but huge tounge in cheek , since Frank has taken over he has ruined my business, I dont get the chiefs using Government chits to pay me for taking them to grog joints or to pick up girls!
Sort of sums it up in a nutshell doesent it?
keep up the good work.
Thanks for this insight, Gerald. It has really only dawned on me in recent times that far from being in the minority, we are part of a vast army of supporters of the new Fiji abroad. The “democracy” campaigners and Bainimarama haters might get all the headlines but it is they who are in the minority. They make the most noise but a much bigger number quietly approve of the revolution taking place in Fiji .
Why? Because anyone who visits can see for themselves the dramatic improvement in race relations and the overall tone of the country, plus the improvements in service delivery and a more responsive civil service. You don’t have to idolise Bainimarama to realise that he, Aiyaz Sayed Khaiyun and the rest of his ministry are trying to create a modern, dynamic Pacific state. And central to that is throttling the racial bogey once and for all. I believe they will be rewarded for that when democracy returns.
I find it strange that the regime’s opponents talk about Singapore in such a disparaging fashion, as if its more authoritarian aspects are a negative. If only Fiji could be a shadow of Singapore in terms of providing an affluent, secure and stable future for its citizens. Lee Kuan Yew – who I’ve had the pleasure of meeting and interviewing – had to deal with precisely the same racial challenges as Fiji. And he long ago decided that the only way to ensure racial harmony is to outlaw discrimination and crush any expression of racial supremacy. Racism is a cancer that eats into the fabric of nationhood and must be ruthlessly excised.
Mr Davis, I think it is too early to say whether the regime has active support or taciturn acceptance.
I have a background in law, although still a student, and believe that there are positive and negative aspects inherent in any government system.
In relation to the current regime in particular, I honestly think that it is impossible to know for sure the level of support out there. This is mainly because the outspoken supporters and detractors of the regime are the same few. The overwhelming majority are silent. If you read through the names of people who regularly comment on your blog or anti-govt ones…it seems it is always the same people commenting.
My younger siblings attend schools here in Suva and in Ovalau. One is a local Indian School and the other a Catholic Boarding School. According to them anyway the majority of their friends don’t particularly like the regime.
On the other hand, I have friends who tell me that there is strong support for the regime in particular areas or schools as well.
Specifically, I have seen major support for the government in rural areas where there has been recent development.
For the majority of law students from Fiji at the University of the South Pacific – most are either not particularly keen to comment or strongly on either end. Many of our opinions are coloured to some extent by our lecturers in Vanuatu and here in Laucala which are the 2 biggest campuses – but I can honestly say that support for the regime is near to non-existent. There is however, an acceptance that they are in effective control of the country and general agreement that they set the rules.
But considering that more than half of the new electorate are going to be voting for the first time in 2014 – I think the field is wide open.
When I speak to people, and ask what they think of the government – they try to suss out my position before commenting. If I hint that I am anti-govt, they continue in that vein – if I intimate that I am pro-govt, they follow along that direction also. I really confused a taxi driver recently by starting off one and then switching mid-convo…..I am actually really interested to see what the outcome of the 2014 elections will be because I truly think its impossible to say for sure before that……people tell you what they think you want to hear…
Vinaka, Joeli, for your thoughtful posting. Yes, you’re right in saying that the only poll that really matters is the election itself and we can have no real way of knowing how it will all pan out two years in advance.
All we have to go on thus far is the Lowy poll from last year. And whatever you think about its finding of 67 per cent support for Bainimarama, we need more up-to-date polling to be anywhere near certain that he has majority support.
I know from my limited contact with the PM in a professional capacity that he is taking nothing for granted and knows he has to earn the trust of the people. It will be a hard fight, as you’ve signalled, but that’s democracy. It’s the people who will ultimately decided whether or not he deserves to continue in office.
Wow this is revealing as well as sad for it clearly paints a high definition picture of the mindset of the so called i taukei leaders. They clearly belong in the past, Fiji needs modern up to date leaders now. Leaders who are visionaries, the ones that seeks to improve the standards of living, education and social interraction of all Fijian regardless of ethnicity.
We need a new breed of Fijian leaders who can manouver the country forward through all its economic and international policies which hopefully will draw in investors and also lift the countries reputation. Perhaps its time Fiji calls out to its sons and daughters worldwide to come and help build the new Fiji.
With their experience living and working amongst other nations they can bring in a new sets of strategies working in unison with the local modern leaders. Learning from each other.
Thank you Graham for your consistant positive articles, Fiji needs positivity in any fields right now. Slowly but surely we’ll get there.
Bula Graham
I am still mystified by the document which you claim is SDL policy document and was submitted to the Yash Ghai Commission? Was Vijay Narayan present at the hearing and who made those submissions on behalf of the SDL? Frank is buying off you chaps with passports – he had never set out to do what he is claiming to do now – where is expenses reports etc, and why is Khaiyum’s aunty’s accountancy paying the Minister’s salaries – she doesnt work fro the Ministry of Finance?
“Radio Listener”, I don’t understand why there is mystery and confusion about this. Surely the sole pertinent point is whether the SDL is calling for a Christian state and the other provisions that have already been cited. And yet the focus so far has been on whether what was presented on Monday was THE formal SDL submission or A formal SDL submission. Who cares?
The President of the SDL, Solomoni Naivalu, was present when officials of the SDL presented the document in question. It is labelled as expressing the views of the SDL. Was it just one of a number of submissions? Is the main one still to come? What on earth does it matter? The procedural aspect is meaningless.
Fiji Village was present and says there was no ambiguity whatsoever about what was happening. It was formal SDL submission. The presence of the party president surely lends weight to that. It’s what’s in the document that I’m concerned about – the beliefs of the SDL – not how and when they might be presented to the Constitutional Commission.
More than 48 hours later, no-one from the SDL has said “No we don’t support a Christian state”. An unnamed person from the SDL has told one foreign reporter – Bruce Hill – “oh that wasn’t our formal submission, that’s coming later”. Hill doesn’t seem to have then said “But do you support the introduction of a Christian state?”. That is the newsworthy part of all of this and it’s astonishing that Fiji Village can see it but he can’t.
The question remains: DOES THE SDL SUPPORT THE INTRODUCTION OF A CHRISTIAN STATE and the other provisions cited in a document? That’s the answer I want. That document has NOT been repudiated. So isn’t that clear enough?
Re the passports. Buying me off? I was born in Fiji and used to have a Fiji passport. I surrendered that citizenship because Fiji law at the time required me to after I became the citizen of another country. Now the law has been changed and I can have both. Just like Australia, NZ, the US, the UK and most other countries in the world. I’m not being bought off my anyone. I’m taking what’s mine by birthright.
Thirty of the world’s 194 countries grant automatic birthright citizenship – a legal principle known by the Latin term Jus Soli. Fiji is one of them. So the entire premise of your comment is wrong. End of story.
Radio Listener men you really need to get a life. I am so sick of hearing the same old crap about Nur Bano and the alleged salary that she is paying Frank and Aiyaz. This is a common line used by all racist bigots who hate Frank because he is finally changing Fiji for the better. When they have no more arguments left this is where they go. Can someone please show us some evidence that he is indeed being paid by Ali’s Pacific. If you don’t have hard evidence then please have a Coke sit down and chill as Fiji is moving ahead with or without you.
I am not suprised at all by the sdl submission.Thats what party patron teimumu kepa has been saying all along.By the way another sdl crony and teimumu advisor save kamikamica will be soon joining qarase.
Graham and others
Ev en if it is an SDL document, they have every right to present their views. And the people have the right to choose – so stop jumping up and down – and dont tell me that Frank and his goons must use the guns to keep these people off the streets and from power. It is time you chaps understood that Frank has no right to use the guns to make changes – and you Indo-Fijians have to wake up – if you dont like it taking a running jump from Fiji
RADIO LISTENER
Sa oti na gauna o nanuma tiko kua ni levu tiko na tadra na qai qo sa na qai ga.
Radio Listener why should i leave Fiji. I am a 3rd generation Fijian of Indian heritage. My family and i contribute over $400000 in taxes and duty to the Government which helps pay for the services you enjoy as a citizen of this country. I employ over 30 people half of whom are i-taukei why should you and your kind be better then me. Why should i be relegated to a 2nd class citizen of this country which the SDL seems to want for all folks of my heritage. Let me tell you this you looser. The majority of the people in this country including the i-taukei could not care about the old ways no more. Your chiefly bullshit and all your stupid customs which have been mixed with Christianity. In this day of Facebook, I-phones and flat screen HD TV’S people want a good job and a dignified life. No body cares about the old ways of “masipolo” to the chiefs while your kids starve anymore. Go to the Suva bus stand after 3pm and witness our young people’s behavior and you will know what i am talking about. You are a dying breed fella. Join the new age or you will be left behind holding Qarase’s skirt (sorry Sulu) while Fiji goes past you.
SDL should be told that if they want their submissions to be accepted and for Fiji to be a Christian State they might behave like Christians and follow the Bible which says that all land belongs to God.
Now Brij Lal will say everything has been made up by the local media. He has run out of defensive strategies for the SDL.
Brij Lal was preoccupied trying to win brownie points with Australia and NZ governments by acting as an anti-coup hero. In his eagerness to please he was duped by Fraenkal and dole-bludger Kaitani.
Brij Lal is strong as record keeper but weak as an analyst. He doesn’t have a feel or instinct for what’s happening on the ground and the undercurrents because half his life is spent in libraries and national archives in Canberra, not Fiji.
Even then, his naivety regarding the SDL is mind-boggling. I am no expert on Fiji but even I coud see through the SDL and Qarase democracy bullshit based on past comments and behaviour.
But the professor was fooled and swallowed!
Vetaia e rawa ni dina na nomu nanuma ‘ ki na qai ena qai ga’ era sa qai tiko na qai ia sa vaka e lailai na Indo-Fijians kai sa levu na Fijian e cava sa tadolo na vanua e dodonu me tasogo-o Voreqe wale ga qoka! Ia se bera ni laurai o ira na dau levu ga na vosa ka lailai na ‘yavavala”! Na ganu era biubiu kina na tani era sana qai lesu na kai Viti ki na ‘liu muri’ me vaka sa laurai tiko mai ena gauna e daidai. E sa cadra nikua na liu muri kei na soli maka! Sa vo la me tini tale o Viti ki na kana “tamata”!
Varanitabua
sa gauna ni toso i liu qo, o koya e vakadrudruwai tiko eratou na qai veitauriliga tiko mai kei qarase, teimumu kei na na nodra i lala ka ra na tiko ga ena gauna makawa.
Vetaia and Varantabua, I agree with you that these attitudes belong in the past but yalo vinaka, e dua na kerekere lailai. Please make your future postings ” e na vosa vaka Peretania” ( English). It’s not fair to people who don’t understand what you are saying. While the SDL is trying to make Fijian the official language, it hasn’t happened yet. Vinaka vakalevu na nomuni veivuke.
So it appears that in its attempt to convince the Ghai Commsiion, the SDL have photocopied their submission (the one published above) and have distributed it to its members with instructions they simply delete the ‘SDL’ as the originator of the document and replace it with their own name or name of their organisation. Otherwise the document remains the same, word for word.
This is their attempt to convince the Commission that they have the numbers.
This is the same old SDL and SVT ‘vesu mona’ tactics (brain controlling) whereby the taukei peasatnry are manipulated and encouraged by the taukei (SDL) elite to engage in ‘group think’ activities such as this. Individual thought and individual intiative are discouraged because it may deviate from ‘the cause’.
We saw this in the aftermath of the 2000 Speight coup 2000 when hundreds of brainwashed taukei villagers filed into parliament house like a string of sausages from a sausage machine.
The ethnonationslist are at iot again this time under the cover of the SDL.
Graham
You have neatly captured the contradiction of non-Fijians on this site with your plea to Vetaia and Varantabua to write in English for it is not fair on others. There were you, having lived in Fiji for a while, and still speak, write and understand the Fijian language, and yet Indo-Fijians have lived in Fiji for generations but seem not to have bothered to learn the language of their neighbours.
As an Indo-Fijian I admit this is a failing on our part. On other hand, our indigenous brothers and sisters have not bothered to learn Fiji Hindi either. But if anyone should take the initiative, it should be us indos. I also see it as a national failing on the part of past governments which did not do much to promote unity. One of the good things the regime has done is make learning both languages compulsory.
I am not a regime supporter but I recognise some of their good work, if grudgingly, more so in the context of SDL’s recent supremacist, regressive submission to the constitutional review, which shows no interest in anything multi, be it lingualism or culturism.
Submission by the Fiji Melanesian Community Development Association – representing the descendants of Black Birding Laborers from PNG, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu that were brought, through deception, to Fiji from 1863 – 1904.
Commission members, this submission is from the Fiji Melanesian Community Development Association (FMCDA); the descendants of Black Birding Labors from PNG, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu.
From the outset, the Commission needs to be enlightened on the membership of FMCDA. The associations constitution, appended as Annex 1, stipulates that membership is for ALL descendants of labourers deceptively brought into Fiji from PNG, Vanuatu and the Solomon Islands. Whilst all can speak in an associations meeting only financial members can move or vote in a motion.
Before proceeding with our submission towards the formulation of Fiji’s new Constitution, allow us to highlight some background information and some issues that our community continues to face over the years and which we believe our new constitution will address.
The opportunity that this consultation offers is, timely and will never occur again in our lifetime; hence the appreciation of the FMCDA members.
1. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
Fiji is an island nation within the Melanesian group, and to put things in perspective, this submission is for the descendants of Black Birding Laborers from the 3 Melanesian Islands including Solomon Islands, Vanuatu and Papua New Guinea (Annex 1). Do note that we are an uprooted community and we experience being discriminated upon and marginalized by Fiji’s government systems and programmes. Importantly, we always support whichever government is in power which may be due to our insecurity in a land which we call home.
Politically we are categorized as others, a minority group, non iTaukei or “vulagi”, “vasu” and members of the Multi Ethnic Communities.
Melanesians were brought to provide the much needed cheap labour to lay the foundation of Fiji’s economic development by Europeans before and even during the Colonial period from 1863 to the early 1900’s. Melanesians contributions to Fiji were often forgotten. They were taken for granted because of the nature of recruitment and the type of work they were involved in as laborers in cotton fields, construction of roads, sugar cane fields, and gold mine. Some were also used by planters as “small fierce armies” in the absence of a strong government that could assure early Europeans protection in 1870(Nicole R, 2006)
Records indicate that some of our forefathers were used as laborers on the reclamation of land at the forefront of old capital Levuka and also the new capital Suva before they were distributed to other parts of Fiji to work for planters. As a result settlements were established around Viti Levu, Vanua Levu, Lomaiviti and in the Lau group. Kuva (1976) Tapu, (1987) and Halapua (2005). The contributing factor to our scatteredness.
Their tireless works paved the way for the recruitment of the Indentured laborers from India in 1887 to work in the sugar plantations. Kuva, 1976, Tapu, (1987) and (Halapua, 2005.)
On the expiring of their terms, which is questionable given that they were illiterate, a large number of Melanesians made Fiji their new home. Intermarriages with the iTaukei women became a norm. While few chose to return back to the Solomons and Vanuatu, some went to Queensland. Those who remained in Fiji continued to work as casual laborers and as manual workers in colonial offices and for commercial companies. Some remained subsistence farmers in the land beside their settlements. Kuva, (1976), Tapu, (1987) and Halapua, (2005)
Due to intermarriages with indigenous Fijians, Melanesians way of life, culture, values and languages are predominantly Fijian (Halapua, 2005). Unlike the descendants of indentured laborers from India, still maintainimg their languages, cultures, traditions and even their religions, we have assimilated into the iTaukei traditional and customary system likewise all becoming Christians.
1.1 The Socio Economic Status of Melanesians in Fiji
According to the 1997 UNDP report; Melanesians are the most marginalized ethnic group in Fiji. The marginalization of Melanesians is historical and the result of the uneven economy and political relationship to the important means of production. The social and economic status of the Minority Melanesians in Fiji is shaped by the nature of recruitment for the plantation system as it developed in Fiji. Since the recruitment of the Melanesians as cheap wage labour in the early development of Fiji’s colonial economy, majority still remain ‘a temporary cheap labour force’ (Halapua, 2005)
The question on why Melanesians are still marginalized after more than 40 years of independence in a Melanesian country; which they claimed to have maternal links for the last 100 years is simply by the lack of recognition of our existence in previous Constitutions, government systems and structures likewise its programmes and policies.
The negligence of various governments in the past has prompted our elders in 1987 to form an Association known as the Fiji Melanesian Community Development Association. The formation of the Association was also caused by fear of the threat by nationalist politicians proclaiming that “Fiji is for the indigenous Fijians or the iTaukei and not for the non iTaukei” similar to some sentiments raised in relation to our national identity that we are facing today. The Melanesian Association was formed for the management and administration of the descendants of black birding laborers and also as a vehicle to voice our aspiration to the government, other organization and to the rest of the world.
1.2 Resettlements
The 1987 coup was a crossroad to many of us who used to think that we are also a iTaukei because of our Melanesian look and cultural assimilation. However, little did we know that cultural and traditional values changes, as it is influenced by the environment we live in. Therefore, the general view that for non iTaukei or Fijian to assimilate to the iTaukei’s cultures and traditions in order to become iTaukei or to bridge the gap between the ethnic groups in Fiji is no longer true or a reality as we members of the FMCDA have experienced over the last 100 years.
Some examples we would like to highlight are the relocation of our relatives from land which they were given some 80 to 100 years ago by some landowning unit based on the matrilineal or “vasu” relationship, or some through traditional protocols as a token of a service provided by some of our ancestors.
This includes settlements such as Buinikadamu in Bua where they were resettled at Maniava in Ra, Navutu settlement resettled to Drasa at Lololo ni Lautoka, those at Ganivatu Village Naitasiri faced with continued threats from their cousins in the village because they are not in the VKB. Those in Namara settlement at Khalsa Road where some members of the community were resettled at Sasawira Davuilevu; Matata settlement in Lami were informed that developments will take place in the near future and they have to forego their rights on living on the parcel of land they have lived on for around 100years. Some settlements like Caubati, Laqere, Manikoso, New Town, and Filafou to name just a few are, also expecting developments to force their resettlements.
1.3 Identity Crises
Over those years descendants of Melanesians were pushed around from one identity to another. After independence during the Alliance government we were under the Fijian roll during election only to add numbers to the Alliance party, but could not access programmes that benefited those listed in the iTaukei roll.
The same also applied after the coup in 1987 when Melanesian were
categorized as others, the general voters or the minority communities in Fiji and today we are called the Fijians.
The Melanesian Association and its members supports the current government initiative on the national identity for all citizens to be called Fijians, however, will the change of name benefit us economically? Will the name gives us equal treatment on access to government development programmes, access to education and scholarships?
A case in point; in 2011 when the Department of MEA was dissolved only 1 percent of the Self Help projects benefited the Multi Ethnic Communities while the 99 percent benefitted the ITaukei, or those who own more than 80 percent of the resources in Fiji.
2. OUR STAND ON THE NEW PROCESS
Despite the dissolution of the Department that looks after the Multi Ethnic Communities in Fiji, the Melanesian Community strongly supports the current government in the formulation of a new constitution through the participatory processes, which we are experiencing today.
At this juncture, I would like to thank the government and the Constitution Commission for coming down to the grass roots people like us, to seek our views and hear our voices. These are the voices from the “unsung heroes” (Halapua 2005)
Solutions to the issues that were raised earlier we believe can be addressed through this new constitution.
3. OUR VISION FOR FIJI AS MELANESIANS
The Melanesian Community’s vision for Fiji is for Fiji to be a home to all people irrespective of their origins, culture and religion. A home that is secure and safe.
A home is different from a place; a home is where you find love, peace and harmony. A home is where you find dialogue, arguments controlled by a bond and a relationship based on Biblical principles which is love and justice. Love is willing to forgive, love is willing to compromise, love understands, love accepts one another’s views, status and beliefs. A home that recognizes all human beings as equal and at the same time accepting the status of those that needs to be respected. A home where we find those in leadership have the capability to care for everyone who wants to be part of this home called Fiji.
The Melanesian Community would like Fiji to be a Liberal State, but based on values that promotes love, peace, justice and harmony.
4. RECOMMENDED POLITICAL SYSTEM
To make Fiji a home, our political system needs to be changed. This includes the adoption of the Presidential System where the President becomes the Head of Government and State, rather than the parliamentary system.
The main difference between a parliamentary and presidential system of government is that in a presidential system, the president is separate from the legislative body, but in a parliamentary system, the chief executive, such as a prime minister, is part of the legislative body, or parliament. A presidential system separates the executive and legislative functions of the government and provides what are commonly called checks and balances to limit the power of both the chief executive and the legislature. In a parliamentary system, the legislature holds the power, and the chief executive must answer to the legislature. Another main difference is that in a presidential system, the president and members of the legislature are elected separately by the people, but in a parliamentary system, the legislature is elected by the people and then must appoint or recommend for appointment one of its members to be the chief executive.
Many forms of government are used by countries around the world, and very few governments are completely alike, even if they use the same type of system. Presidential and parliamentary systems of government can vary in specific details from one country to another, but certain general aspects typically are the same in countries that have the same type of system. For example, in some parliamentary systems, the national legislative body is called a parliament, and in others, it might be called by a term such as “national assembly,” but they generally serve the same purposes regardless of their names. Likewise, the specific powers or duties of presidents might vary from country to country, but they generally are all elected by the people and are separate from the legislative body.
In a presidential system, the president is the head of government and the head of state. As the head of government, the president oversees the operations of the government and fulfills certain duties, such as appointing officials and advisers to help run the government, signing or vetoing laws passed by the legislature and establishing an annual budget. A president’s duties as head of state include tasks such as making speeches, representing the country at public events, hosting or visiting diplomats from other countries and presenting prestigious national awards.
The roles of head of state and head of government often are held by different people in a parliamentary system. For example, a country might have a prime minister who acts as its head of government and a monarch who acts as its head of state. Some countries that have a parliamentary system also have a president instead of a monarch, and the president acts as the head of state. A country that has both a prime minister and a president is sometimes said to have a semi-presidential system of government, although it is more closely related to a parliamentary system because of the power held by the legislature and prime minister in such a system.
Another difference between these systems of government is the effects that each system has on things such as efficiency and political acrimony. In a presidential system, because the president and members of the legislature are elected separately, it is possible for the president to be from one political party and the legislature to be controlled by a different political party. This can cause discord at the highest levels of the government and make it difficult for the president and the legislators to achieve their respective goals. In a parliamentary system, the prime minister is almost always from the political party that controls the legislature, so there is less discord, and it is easier for that party to accomplish its goals.
Parliamentary and presidential systems also differ in their abilities to remove the chief executive from power. In a parliamentary system, it is much easier for the legislature to remove the prime minister from power. Even a disagreement in policy or a lack of effective leadership could be enough reason for this to happen. A president is more difficult to remove from power and usually is possible only in extreme cases, such as when the president is accused of a serious crime.
• It also includes the review and reduction of members of Parliament or Legislative Council.
The members of Parliament or Legislative Council is to be reduced from 72 to 45 and from those 45 seats, 1 seat is to be allocated to the Melanesian Community.
By having a representative in Parliament or Legislative Council ensures equal representation and for FMCDA to have a voice in the legislature; similar to what was previously offered to the Rotuman Community where they have their own Roll.
This recommendation is based on the fact that we are scattered all over Fiji and we will always be disadvantaged with respect to numbers in a constituency (akin to the Rotumans). This was evident during the 1977 (x2), 1982 and 1987 General Elections where we were in the Fijian Roll. The situation was also obvious in the 1992, 1994, 1999, 2001 and 2006 General Elections when we were grouped as General Voters.
It will also need the review of the constituency boundaries for election. Constituency Boundaries for election should be based on a proportionate representation of the voters in a constituency.
Candidates for Political Parties to be thoroughly screened based on certain criterion to be developed by the Solicitors Generals Office. To maintain the integrity of the Legislature, FMCDA recommends that aspiring candidates:-
• Who have been incarcerated should not stand for the General Election; and
• Should have a good financial standing.
One voting system is strongly recommended.
5. OUR SENTIMENT ON THE SOCIAL JUSTICE ACT AND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION
The Melanesian Community is of the view that the 2001 Social Justice Act and Affirmative Action Programmes based on the 1997 Constitution are biased and not targeting those that are really disadvantaged in Fiji. From the 21 Affirmative Action Programs under the Social Just Act 2001 only two programs directly benefited the Multi Ethnic Communities, this includes the establishment of MEA Scholarship and Cultural Programs.
The Social Justice Act of 2001 re-affirms the establishment and function of the Department of Multi Ethnic Affairs. However, it is unfortunate for the Multi Ethnic Communities and especially a Minority Community like us that the only Ministry or Department that represent our existence and was set up to facilitate our development especially scholarship was dissolved because of its duplication of roles on the delivery of development projects with the Ministry of Provincial Development.
5.1 Thus we request the re-establishment of the Department of Multi Ethnic Affairs
The re-establishment of the Department of Multi Ethnic Affairs would not affect our National Identity as our ethnic identity will continually maintain.
However, the roles of the Department of MEA to be reviewed and focus on the followings;
• Administration of all Multi Ethnic Communities in Fiji
• Management of MEA Scholarship and,
• Secretariat to the National and District Advisory Council similar to the Ministry of iTaukei Affairs
5.2 The review of the MEA Scholarship policy
5.2.1 For Scholarship the maximum qualifications one can attain if he/she is awareded a Multi Ethnic Affairs Scholarship(MEA) is at Bachelors Level.
• The Melanesian Community requests if the qualification level in the Multi Ethnic Scholarship to be similar to the iTaukei Affairs and Public Service Scholarships where one can reach up to a Post Graduate and even PhD qualification.
• That a quota or percentage from the total MEA Scholarship allocation to be directed to the Melanesian Community.
• It needs to be noted, that initially we Melanesians were allocated a quota of 8. Unfortunately, the introduction of awarding scholarship through merit had a negative impact on us and we are left to struggle once more. The vicious cycle of helplessness and hopelessness rears its ugly head once more.
• We Melanesians would appreciate that Certificate Level qualification, together with Short Term Programmes from FNU or any accredited vocational institution to be also considered by the MEA.
• We believe, that education is the omly way out from if we are to walk away from the vicious cycle of helplessness and hopelessness.
• We are a community rich with untapped potentials BUT the opportunities to explore those potentials are poor. The continued deprivation of scholarships through MEA worsens our attempts to uplift our living standard.
5.3 Review of the Administration of the District Advisory Council and its Allowance
The Melanesian Association feels that government should review the management and administration of the District Advisory Council with its roles functions and its allowances.
The District Advisory Councils was in existence since 1969 and became part of the rural development machinery in 1972 under the ambit of the then Ministry of Fijian Affairs and Rural Development to serve the non- iTaukei communities. Similar to the Provincial Councils, they were known as the Rural Advisory Councils and later as Rural Indian Advisory Councils under the Ministry of Indian Affairs in 1987. Their advisory functions were to cater for the welfare of the non indigenous communities.
In 1994 the DAC was administered by the Ministry of Regional Development and Multi Ethnic Affairs. In 1999, the Department of Multi-Ethnic Affairs was elevated to become a fully fledged Ministry, leaving the Ministry of Regional Development to focus only on rural development.
In 2007 to 2010, the Ministry of Multi-Ethnic Affairs and National Disaster Management were again merged with the Ministry of Provincial Development where the function of DAC continued to be administered by the Department of MEA. The Department of MEA was disbanded on 1st January 2011, with its functions incorporated to other Ministries including the DAC with its current structures transferred to the Ministry of Provincial Development.
The main purpose of the District Advisory Council was to provide a forum for the Indians and Minority communities to participate in the discussion and decision on development issues in their respective settlements and areas.
There are 18 District Advisory Councils around Fiji with 252 members.
The District Advisory Council similar to the Mata ni Tikina appointed by the government through the Minister responsible under the recommendation of the Provincial Administrator or District Officer. DAC members are appointed to serve for 2 years.
Important Role played by District Advisory Council
The role played by the members of the District Advisory Council in general is similar to that of the Mata ni Tikina which includes: attending and conducting meetings of various settlements, coordination of development projects with government and non government organizations and assist the District Officers/Provincial Administrator during Natural Disasters on the coordination of evacuation centres, food rations and relief supplies on settlements outside the iTaukei village boundaries.
However, members of District Advisory Council’s role are more challenging compared to that of the Mata ni Tikina’s. This is because the Mata ni Tikina has the current iTaukei traditional structure already in place where the iTaukei villages and Tikina’s are headed by traditional chiefs and land boundaries are clearly demarcated and development projects are headed by village mayors or Turaga ni Koros with 80 percent of the resources owned by the iTaukei.
The District Advisory Council on the other hand, deals with the Multi Ethnic Communities. These communities are consisting of people from different ethnic and religious backgrounds which include the Indian, Part European, Asians, Melanesians, Polynesians and Micronesians communities
Some of these communities live in farming areas where their houses are scattered, while some lived in formal and non formal settlements. In addition to that, some members of these communities are landless; resettle farmers who are either squarttering on government or iTaukei lands.
Dealing with these communities requires a high level of understanding of the different cultures and religious backgrounds of these communities and the skills to communicate.
Unfortunately, during the years DAC members have been blamed for non performance with high expectation from government and communities for them to work hard, while their counterparts in the iTaukei communities were benefitting from government assistance.
To compare the allowance given to the T/Koro, M/Tikina and DAC members, the T/Koro receives an allowance of $50.00 per month which is equal to $600.00 per annum while the M/Tikina receives an allowance of $40.00 per month which is equal to $480.00 per annum, while DAC member has an allowance of $103.00 if DAC meeting is held once in a year and if it is done twice a year then they would receive an allowance of $206 per annum. To divide the $206.00 into 12 months similar to the Turaga ni Koro and Mata ni Tikina, DAC members would be receiving $17.16 per month and $50.00 in three (3) months which is a month’s allowance of the Turaga ni Koro who only looks after one village, and if DAC meeting is held once in a year, then the DAC allowance for one year is $103 per annum with $8.58 a month looking after 3 to 4 settlements.
The high expectation for DAC members to perform with less allowance provided compared to the allowance given to the Turaga ni Koro and Mata ni Tikina is unreasonable, considering the fact that although they have been receiving less allowance, DAC members continue to work tirelessly throughout the year.
Based on the above the Melanesian Association recommends that the DAC to be reviewed and the DAC allowance to increase to $40.00 month similar to the Mata Ni Tikina.
6. MELANESIAN SETTELMENT AND TRUST ACT
We would appreciate that the new constitution to authorize the enacting of a Melanesian Act similar to the Banaban Settlement Act. The Act should include amongst others the legalization of land parcels that we currently occupy and the setting up of a Trust Fund.
7. PERPETUAL LAND PROVISION
Given that our major concern now and would definitely persist in the future is the insecure land tenure that a majority of us encounter, we are requesting this august body to endorse our recommendation to legalize all parcels of land that we currently occupy.
This could be achieved by way of enshrining our plight in the new constitution. By reflecting our land issue in the Constitution ensures it is legal and not ad-hoc where government or landowners have the powers to evict us. This is what we have experienced in Namara, Nabuinikadamu, and Navutu. Moreover, economic development together with the change in outlook of educated young landowners, who appreciates the economic value of their land, is another threat that could be alleviated if our land issue is in the Constitution.
We therefore would recommend that the Commission to endorse that all insecure parcels of land we currently occupy be legalized by way of a Perpetual Land Provision. Furthermore, for those settlements within a town or city boundaries be exempted from paying municipal rates.
8. DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMMES
The Development Programs under the Ministry of Provincial Development should be shared equally, between the iTaukei and the Multi Ethnic Communities.
9. OTHER ISSUES
i. The Peoples Charter to be included in the new Constitution and any government voted to work in line with the People Charter.
ii. Landownership to be remain with iTaukei under the TLTB as trustees
iii. We would also appreciate that the Fiji Government advocates our concerns to the Melanesian Spearhead Group.
Translator, you give me far too much credit. I read and understand more than I can speak, though I’ll doubtless rattle off a string of biblical texts in Fijian when I’m incoherent on my death bed. I heard enough of them as a talatala’s son – that’s for sure – and I guess they’ll all be in there somewhere in the fetid recesses of a crumbing mind.
I don’t think we can blame Indo-Fijians for not learning Fijian, just as we can’t expect the other races to have learned Hindi. We were all reared in separate schools in the old days. There were literally no i’Taukei or Kai Idia at all when I was in primary school at the Lautoka European School ( later Drasa Avenue) in the 1960s. Only Kai Valagi and Kailoma. I learned whatever Fijian I know from home or church but the only Hindi words in my vocabulary are “Qaise” “Tik” “Pani” and Jaldi!” Thank God times have changed.
Indo-Fijian, yes it is good that Government has made learning both languages compulsory, and just as well because employers are asking for it today. You and I know that Fiji has never been better as far as racial harmony goes. We are all enjoying and embracing the new things we are learning from each other everyday and what I’m enjoying the most is seeing Indo-Fijian women come out & be themselves & the humor all races are beginning to share. The SDL days are over. Just as we are able to joke about our ancestors who were once cannibals, it won’t be long when we’ll be able to look back & fondly laugh at the minority who wanted Fiji for themselves only.
So don’t worry about the lack of effort you’ve made, you’re doing just fine!
Lets not play the blame game when it comes to why some care to learn how to speak in the Fijian dialects or not. In various places i grew up in the mixture of children there basicly spoke almost all the lnaguages that was spoken, Fijian, Hindhi,English and a bit of Chinese(which was the most difficult for almost all of us) as not too many spoke it around us. The system we all grew up with then wanted us to be kept in compartments eg Indian, Fijian, Chinese etc. It was a legacy of the Colonial rule that has made us become ‘bonded’ to a system which has led to where we are today! Segregated and almost ‘racist’ in our development! Yet the very foundations of our faith ask that we be accepting of us-no strings attached as the Great Teachers have asked! Has it made any difference -No! Because our world became a world of total confusion-we hear a message on Sunday or Saturday or whatevere day you want to call it and interpret that message as only befiting a Race or Group and specially interpreted to mean just us YES “the chosen people”! Thats where we stand today in out utter confusion! Its not of our doing but sure as hell has worked its magical formulae by keeping us in bondage and we have never been the more wise. Its great to see someone like Voreqe come out and say what not too many leaders in modern Fiji have had the courage to say to unify as different peoples with different looks , colour, languages, customs, traditions etc , etc and in that we glorify the Lord. It never ceases to amaze me at how people who can preach from the pulpit of our differences without realising that neither they, their religion nor their beliefs can creat a Human Being.By that i mean when you step up to the plate and say you are right and everyone else is wrong when it comes to God creations all you doing is point a finger at Gods creations! Just who gave you the authority of perfection? Are you saying Gods creation of other races is or was imperfect? Se ceva Graham de dua e nanauma tou sa rui too smart se maybe too dopy bro? If people speak Fijian or Hindhi big deal chaps -how many Aussies can speak a word of the Aboriginal people in Aussie? Its for these generations to unify us as a people thats not too hard to do if we love Fiji. God Bless you all and God Bless Fiji and all its people.
Well put. Very intelligent assessment of what has kept the races divided. I’m sure you belong to the new generation of Fijians who will make Fiji a morally rich and progressive society. God bless you and everyone who thinks like you.
Vetaia donu taucoko ( Vetaia exactly correct) Now don’t complain Graham i’m going to be doing my own translation!
Here in california spanish is taught in schools and yet a majority of non spanish speakers just learn it to pass and geta GED and thats it. After that they forget about it or no hablo espanol.whats the big deal about not understanding hindi or fijian.u
.
Graham: Please respond to this. In 1987, two people who founded the racist movement called “Taukie Movement” are in the cabinet of Bainimarama. This is a well documented fact Graham not a propaganda. Ratu Inoke Kubuabola and Felipe Bole were behind the Taukie movement calling for the expulsion fo Indians. Ratu Inoke also served as Information minister from July 2000 to Sep 2001 under your number one enemy Qarase. How do you reconcile the ethno nationalist activities of these two racist now pretending to be saviour for indians? We dont need racist like these two amongs us. Do you agree Graham for once????
@ CFDF media team,
Or maybe we don’t need you in our team.
I’m not sure what team you belong to but definately not in the team which sees the goodness and changes in people…the team which says “lets move forward”….we have all lived in glass houses at least once in our lifetime.
I takes more courage to forgive and to bring people into our fold than to stand on the sidelines and be judgemental.
I for one wouldn’t hasitate and encourage all folks on this side to open your hearts to one and all and welcome everybody..yes even coup 4.5 gangs to join us and move the country forward or be left behind….isn’t what change is all about.
And don’t forget that there are those esp. i-taukei brothers and sisters on the “other”side, waiting for the opportunity to be part of the change but are still somewhat bound by the traditional allegiance to the chiefly system (I’m talking about Ro Teimamu and the likes)..we need to encourage and I understand it could be hard for these folks for they may be looked as outcasts in their villages…
And of course there would be the disruptive ones who have lost out on free loading on their own peoples…..we know who they are..we have to aware of them
And of course we have to be aware of the communities of people with finances who could hijack the process through influences….these are the dangers we have to be aware of…
@ CFDF Media Team
To that list you have to add Rabuka’s co-conspirators in the 1987 coup viz. COMPOL Ioane Naivalurua & Fiji Hicom to Japan Isikeli Mataitoga.
Although the people of Fiji are willing to forgive, they will never forget what these men did.
Its not for Graham to explain or rationalise their behaviour. Its for these men themselves to explain.
Rabuka has publicly apologised but his apology is a qualified one. Because of this many people think his apology is self-serving and not sincere.
I am beginning to think that we need a Truth & Reconciliation Commission where all who had an involvement in 1987 and 2000 etc can come forward and explain their behaviour to the people of Fiji.
Go, wallow in the past, CFDF, even though the past cannot be changed. A vast majority of Fijians felt threatened, and supported the coup. Some felt they should apologise, and they have. Others feel they have nothing to apologise about. Many Indians were championing and crying for democracy in 1987/199 but in 2006, they rejected democracy and supported a coup. Tomorrow, if there is a coup against Bainimarama, Indos will become champion of democracy once more. You talk as if we Indos are so perfect, and the only victims in all.
Enough of your self-righteous bullshit CFDF. Enough of your piteous victimhood mentality. Man up and ball up and move on please.
“CFDF team”, I’m not responsible for choosing the Fiji cabinet and I’m at a loss to understand why you appear to think I am. Why have you ask me this????? ( just adopting your own style of questioning ).
I haven’t spoken to them but I can only assume that Ratu Inoke and Mr Bole no longer hold the views they did to be included in the Bainimarama ministry. Anyone else got any suggestions that might help the “team”?
@ CFDF
In one word “POLITICIANS”, basically they stand for nothing, all they want is power & influence, by hook or by crook, say one thing today say something else the next, this happens the world over, on the day these people say anything to get your vote…. then…adios, saionara, good bye until the next elections. And this is simply (in my opinion) Ratu Kubu & Fil Bole did.
Mr Chand:
With due respect to your views, the fact remains Ratu Inoke and Bole are founders of the Taukei Movement. The battle cry of Kudru na vanua belongs squarely on people like these two who are political prostitutes of some standing indeed.
The 87 coup and attrocities on the indian people have been forgiven by the lot but not forgotten. The dark scar of racism perpertrated by Ratu Inoke and Bole with the likes of Rabuka and Dan Veitata is a glaring history in our face.
Chand do dare to flip the pages of past newspapers or parliamentary hansards and see how your latest hero Ratu Inoke castigated indians just ten years ago. Today he is a reincarnation of Ram Bhagwan so to speak. Shame on you.
@ CFDF Media Team,
Yes, I am Chand and Ram is my Bhagwan and I can see you have a problem with that…so be it….800 years of Mughal raj and 200 years of British rule could not convert me nor my folks and I’m proud of that and if in your eyes, Ratu Inoke is the re-incarnation of Ram, so be it.
I’m begining to understand where you are coming from…and I can assure you that you will make a quick exit as you have made the entry into this blog site….oh yes we know the breeding of your kind….yes we do.
Shameful are those cowards who come without a name and believe me they remain a coward throughout their lives…..religiously cowardly bigots who think they can thrive behind the cloak of Annonymity….
Yes Indo-Fijians and othe non-itaukeis were the targets of racists…we all know that…and we have moved on…yes we remember and we have moved forward and like I said it takes courage to forgive and bring into the fold those people amongst us so we can live as one…and there is nothing to be shamed about.
I don’t live in history…may be you do. I intend to part of the change.
You want to collect newspapers and hansard reports so be it….I am interested in the future hansard reports.
It appears that CFDF media team wants Graham to do soem explanation as if Graham was responsible for their behavoiurs-what are we dumb, dumb? My beliefs teachers me to forgive and that we give people a 2nd go at the cherry-are there any limitations to these- not according to my faith! Yes i am human so i have emotions which also means they also play a large part of my decision making but i am guided by what the Mater taught-LOVE! When Qarase came to the front as a Leader to lead Fiji those of us who knew him, knew what his beliefs were and he had also expressed them & how others had used and influenced him.But here was the ‘catch’ was he going to openly advocate a “taukei’ for all attitude or was he going to take the middle ground ie be inclusive rather than be exclusive when drawing up his policies when he became PM? I knew what he would do well before he took the reigns of PMship and boy wasn’t i correct. I am all fr advancement of the Indigenous races anywhere in the world but not at the expence of making others pay or humbled to prove you can do anything you like. Its funny how old Tua use to warn us don’t bad or evil or wish other evil or bad things it might just turn around and bite you where you most likely expect it! Qarase was all for Fijian rights that was the guise the real game was to get the support of the Fijians by making sure you made out the Indo-Fijians were stealing something it is an old time game, and what were they stealing land, na qele! Yes and while at it he made sure to mention also about advancing the Fijian CAUSE! Really? As if the Indo-Fijinas was responsible for the failure of Fijia Business etc.No one asked him so what were you doing when you were the big boss of the Fiji Development Bank? How many Fijians went kaput or as someone once said ‘we all eat the money” Qarase doesn’t realise how close he is to Indo-Fijians or maybe he does! emember what Tua use to say? Ummmmmmm
Graham and cronies:
No amount of rantings about Qarase can remove the fact that Ratu Inoke and Bole are opportunist of racist garb. No amount of belittling can ever change the fact the these two culprits sow the root of racism in Fiji. dare deny that Graham. Qarase was not even in the scene then when these two nationalist used to cry….: Kudru na vanua” nogo kalou nogo vanua” How convinient for you guys to evade these facts but its stick out like and ugly old sore which will be repeated again and again……
cfdf
People change you moron just like a sinner repenting and turning to god. Its you who is sticking out like an ugly sore, still thinking of the past.
Hi Graham,
Thanks for the great work and service your doing to our beloved Fiji.
Here is my submissions to the Constitution Commissioners that I emailed a few days ago:-
CONSTITUTIONAL AND ELECTORAL REFORMS
My recommendations for the constitutional reforms are as follows:-
1. A small country like FIJI should ONLY have 1 Legislature: the elected house of representatives (House of Representatives) with only 61 elected Memebers.
2. Fiji should abolish the Senate as it is not needed at all.
3. New electoral system to be designed which is not race based( ALL Open Seats) or simply 1 person, 1 vote, 1 and equal value ONLY and prefer still to use Preferential Voting system similar to 1997 Constitution.
4. A minimum qualification, moral and ethical standards enshrined for all contestants of House of Representatives, Head of state and all other Govt CEOS and political and Constitutional Appointees.
5. Eliminate the race based ministries and Boards like Fijian Affairs (FAB), transfer FAB and provincial Fijian boards and management to NLTB and let them get their own funding from NLTB since NLTB owns 90 % of all land in Fiji. The taxpayers should not be burdened with any of the expenses related to FAB or GCC.
6. President to elected by the majority in the House of Representative as be the executive and symolic Leader of Fiji and the commander in chief of the armed forces. The president must be nominated by any elected MPS and a votes held in House of Representatives and one who gets the majority votes to be appointed the president. The president then should have the right to pick his Vice President.
7. Criteria for nominating the president should include:be any person who is a qualified Fiji Citizen with exemplary public service and one who passes the character, morality, ethical and criminalty test.
8. The powers of the president to be expressly noted in the constitution that include: when and how can the president dismiss the PM and or dissolve the Legislature, when can the president assume the full poers of runnin g the country in case of the PM and or legislature being incapiciated such as 1987 and 2000 coups and other unforseen events.
9. The Prime Minister must command majority in House of Reps and shall be appointed by President.
10. Cabinet size to be enshrined into the constitution and not to exceed 15 in any circumstances unless approved by the 66% majority in the legislature.
11. PM and all cabinet Minster must also passe the character, morality, ethical and criminalty test.
12. Other Checks and balance related clauses to be included so that all future based governments are based on Consensus rather then race or partisan politics.
13. Clause to prohibit and punish any one who uses any race based slogans, intimidation, etc or Scare tactics or stirring of indigenous nationalism in Political Campaigns,etc.
14. Change the current legal Voting Age from 21 years to 18 years.
15. Remove all political powers of GCC from politics and downgrade and recognize GCC to that of traditional and cultural significance ONLY. This will enable all political powers including the appointment of President to the elected people.
16. Remove the Multi Party Concept clauses as it creates more political and legal problems then it was actually designed to solve.
17. Redesign the electoral boundaries that is fair and representative of constituents including the current census for accurate voter counts and designing of a systematic and methodical voter registration system that is fair and free of political bias with some audit trail to ensure that no voter is missed out or left behind due to corruption and political bias.
18. Ensure that Elections office and staff are free from political bias to avoid any errors or mishandling including vote rigging.
19. Minimum qualification and character to stand for Public Office to include following:-
(1) At least High School Completion (Form 6)
(2) Must be of good conduct with no criminal records as required of any Govt Jobs
(3) Must have at least 5 years experience in Community service, Social service or at a supervisory level.
20. The term of the legislature to be 4 years ONLY and election dates enshrined in constitution, for example first tuesday on November every four years like the USA elections. The will prevent the party in power to manipulate the elections date for their benefit.
21. The constution to also set procedures for by elections and all constitutional appointments like Judiciary, PSC, Police Commissioner, ombudsman auditor general,etc.
LAND REFORMS
22. All current NLTB board to be sacked and replaced with competent professionals. Also review all middle and upper managers and regional managers and sack all incompetent, inefficient and or political/national activists and replace with competent professionals.
23. NLTB needs to be completely restructured, reorganized and streamlined like the rest of Govt. appointed Boards.
24. NLTB must be corporatised and such all owners made shareholders and should operate a business.
25. NLTB to open its Employment doors to all qualified Fiji people and not restricted to indigenous ONLY as it is currently. I don’t mind if they include in per-requisite as “Must be fluent in Fijian language” or Must be able to speak Fijian and Hindi, etc. As there are many non-Fijians including rotumans and Indians that speak, read and write Fijian and are better qualified BUT can not work in NLTB because of their birth race being non-Fijian. Not sure BUT this must also be in breach of Constitution that advocates no discrimination on the basis of race, colour or creed, etc.
26. To avoid inefficiencies bred by monopolies, NLTB should be decentralized in 4 corporations
(Eastern-Fiji, Western-Fiji, Central-Fiji and Northern-Fiji) or alternatively based on Fijian Provinces so they can compete for the business and remain efficient.
27. NLTB CEOS, Managers and Board must be restricted from Politics or influence of Politicians, Chiefs or nationalists.
28. Good Business governance Policies must be put in place to make NLTB transparent, accountable and responsible with 6 monthly audits.
29. Govt’s only responsibility should be to be a watch dog that the principles fair trade practices are not breached and that tenants are treated fairly.
30. Long term leases (preferably greater then 99 years) with fair market rents and proportional profit sharing of profits in cases where leaseholds are sold/ transferred at huge profits.
31. Equitable and fair mechanism put in place so that the NLTB profits are fairly shared by grassroots indigenous and not just some elites and or chiefs.
32. An independent Body of competent professional (consisting of stakeholders, Land owners, and govt. appointed members) created as a watchdog to over see activities of NLTB and its board.
FISCAL AND MONETARY POLICY
33. Enact into legislation that all fiscal and monetary budgets must be balanced. In other words no expenditure to be allocated if there is no source of funds. This has been done in province of BC in Canada and just recently the Democrats have joined forces in USA to enact a similar Legislation. This will force the elected governments to be more responsible and accountable.
GOOD GOVERNANCE
34. Enact Anti-corruption Legislation that includes the creation of Anti Corruption Tribunal headed by a Qualified Judge with team of qualified investigators including forensic team of accounts, IT professionals, Auditors, etc.
35. Enact a Code of standard practice (including ethical, moral and professional standards for all Government CEOs and political and constitutional appointees. Breaches to be severely dealt with including heavy fines, prison terms and or suspension or sacking where appropriate. These two combined with other good policies and procedures should become checks and balances for accountability, transparency and responsibility and serve as the foundation of the good governance.
CITIZENSHIP REFORMS
36. Change Citizenship Act to Allow Dual Citizenship – Citizenship by birth in Fiji and children of Fiji born in another country to be guaranteed and retained, regardless if some one has acquired a citizenship of another country by immigration( Allow Dual Citizenship similar to NZ, Australia and Canada. This MUST be a persons birth right and humane thing to do. This will encourage many former Fiji Residents like me who have made a lot of wealth overseas to go back
to Fiji and semi-retire while investing in business ventures, land developments or Eco-tourism related projects or simply take the role of Financiers for local businesses. This will speed up the foreign investment and economic recovery process in Fiji. Currently if you acquire Citizenship of another Country then you automatically lose the Fiji citizenship and unfairly substituted ONLY by residency rights for former Fiji Citizens that only gives free entry, residency and exit rights but restricts from working, doing business and or voting etc. Unless you pay $5000 FJD to apply for Fiji citizenship by registration that seems unwarranted when a person is already a citizen of Fiji by birth. Many countries including Canada, USA, Australia, NZ and UK allow dual citizenship, simply because it is good for their economy, familial and social reasons and it is guaranteed to be very good for Fiji as well.
FREEDOM OF PRESS AND RELIGION
37. Constitution should separate religion and state and every citizen must be free to express their freedom and religion as well as political views but within the country’s laws.
AMENDMENT TO CONSTITUTION
38. The constituion can only be amened by 75% majority in the Legislature.
39. Constitution can never be abrogated and or suspended and shall remain the supreme laws of the land.
Satendra Singh; B.Com, M.Com (Aust)
Vancouver, Canada
Formerly of Nadi, Fiji
(Also served in Fiji Police between 1976 and 1987, along side current ACP Ravi Narayan)
@ Satendra
A fairly comprehensive list into which you obviously put a lot of thought. Congrats.
Para 6 – I am not convinced we need a Vice President. It just means more cost re personal and household staff and duplication of President’s roles. Drawing up a separate official agenda for each and deconflicting each will be a challenge. . Am inclinned to keep to the CJ acting as President whenever President is not available. Saves costs which can go towards a medical centre or additional classroom somewhere etc
Para 7 – the character, morality, ethics, criminality test seems straightforward but this needs to be spelt out. But I agree such a test should comprise the ‘minimum standarcs’ for apointment to any public office.
Para 13 – the Malaysians have what they refer to as ‘sensitive issues’ that they are careful not to exploit for political purposes. Fiji should have the same i.e. public officials should be careful in their public utterances to avoid fomentling racial divisions and unrest etc. The words and deeds of the ‘Taukei Movement’ in 1987, and the same sort of open and reckless exploitation of racial issues by Speight and his mob in 2000 are examples of what should be avoided.
All the best
I agree with Graham, as per my submission of citizenship by birth must be retained, much like Canada, Australia, UK ans NZ, unless voluntarily surrendered. Fiji must allow dual citizenry for those born in Fiji and there should be no fee like $3380, etc; just the cost of passport renewal like Canada.
cfdf no one is denying the facts you have stated, so what do you want us to do? Apologise for the 2 of them? These two you may think were on the scene before Qarase appeared but if you knew those that worked with Qarase they will tell you a totaly different story-his racisn was way,way back and exposes the typical Lauan hatred for Indo-Fijians yet i don’t know of 1 Lauan who leases land to Indo-Fijians back in Lau-i amybe wrong?. Lets come back to your point of appointing racist by Voreqe and what would you call Qarase apppointing those hard line Taukei movement mob to his cabinet or the famous racist Talatala Senator and later his daughter? What about the Vice -President from Bau who was made President in Speights cabinet oh and the famous Kaitani who now hides his face in Canberra and jumps fence whenever its convinient! Do you now get the picture? Can i kindly suggets you go back to taking Fijian lessons-there is no such word in Fijian as ‘NOGO”! Unless you wanted to say ‘NEQE”! Its noqu Kalou, noqu vanua! But as someone once said ‘words are cheap” but you can add this to that ” of no value at all when you use Gods name to justify your stupidity! The likes of you must have prayed so hard for a good Govt during the last elections which Chaudary won? Unless you one of those that thinks the Lord didn’t answer your prayers hence you need to muster support for the Taukei movement- to take away a legaly elected Govt-sega na lusi kei na yalo ca qori! God ain’t fooled by your pronouncement of the Lords name from the roof tops nor in you writings but you sure must win a prize if Graham gave them out, for letter of the month -and we not even into the midle of the month yet- “ulu kau award”, in tukai’s lingo ‘wooden head”
One major issue I had missed out that I just submitted to the commissioners of Fiji constitution, the Presidency term, and vice presidency’s accession and end of presidency in absence of president in case of death, abuse of office, and or impeachment(that the elected House will have the power to); that I submitted now as follows:-
7. The term of President to be 4 years at a time with a limit of 2 terms and not to coincide with the elections of the House of Representatives.
8. If and when the President dies and or becomes incapiciated by means of illness and or criminalty, breach and or abuse of office or y way of impeachment(to be outlined in detail in constitution) then ONLY Vice president assumes the presikdency ONLY to complete the term of the elected president and until the next election and appointment of the new elected president.
9. The house of representatives with a majority vote shall have the full powers to impeach the president for breach and or absue of office and or criminalty, etc. If thathappens then the Vice President will be appointed president who shall ONLY complte the elected president’s term in office and until the next president is elected by the HOUSE.
Reading all the blog and websites I am shocked to see how quick people are to judge others on the basis of can alleged motive when the motive of others is usually not known at all. Such a subjective assessment surely? Is Patricia Imrana Jalal/ Graham Leung/ Wadan Narsey the honest Conned, or the dishonest Conner? Is Brij Lal a genuinely confused academic, or a slave to Australian interests and hopelessly compromised by the SDL? Is Ratu Inoke Kubuabola a born again multi-racialist or a racist opportunist? Actually we do not know. The truth is with them and with God. Everything else is speculation.
@ Ally Singh ,
Lets cut out all the fancy languages and bring in two equally good looking apples and a knife.
Cut both the apples and you will find one to be perfact and the other one rotten to the core.
I have thus made a judgement that the first apple is good and the second, despite having the same outer good looks, is rotten.
And therefore I don’t give a damn if the rotten apple may have been mishandled during transportation or may be from a different farm in Australia than the first one or someone did the dranikau to it.
It is just plain rotten mate.
What says Petelo??
Ally Singh we can go one step futher and say its all Maya! But then if its all illusion is truth an illusion also? Or is it just from my perspective that i am seeing things? But then i can also just make judgements based on my senses maybe 5 then also my 6 or 7!
Or here’s a new idea! We could wait to hear and see the facts?