The official Opposition leader and leader of People First, Inia Seruiratu, is clearly sensitive about Grubsheet’s criticism of him in our article in which we questioned why he hadn’t joined Savenaca Narube, Premila Kumar and Mahendra Chaudhry in their strong statements criticising the government’s handling of the review of the 2013 Constitution.
We asked four days ago whether his description of himself on Facebook as a “distinguished Christian minister” meant that he supported the abolition of the secular state – one of the provisions that has reportedly been recommended by the Constitutional Review Commission.
Seruiratu has since altered his Facebook profile to remove the reference to him being a Christian minister but has dodged the issue of the secular state altogether.
This is how he was describing himself last week:
And this is how he is describing himself now:
Why the change? Readers can draw their own conclusions. But the following is as far as the Opposition leader goes in referring to the present constitutional right of all religions to be treated equally by the state in the secular state provision of the supreme law that has reportedly been removed in the draft replacement recommended by the CRC.
Yes but what about the secular state – the provision that stipulates that the state does not favour any one religion? The Opposition Leader sidesteps that issue altogether amid a furor over any change to the existing supreme law, which has prompted the Prime Minister to call for calm.
It isn’t good enough.
Seruiratu launched People First specifically saying that it was the ideological successor to FijiFirst – the party to which he and his colleagues in the parliament belonged before it imploded and on whose policies they were all elected in 2022. This includes the secular state.
So it is only natural that non-Christians – Hindus, Muslims and others – would be aghast at the failure of Seruiratu and People First to re-iterate their commitment to upholding their rights by insisting that the secular state is non-negotiable.
We expect the Prime Minister, Sitiveni Rabuka, to refuse to rule out its removal because that is what he and his supporters are intent on doing – to lift any constitutional restriction on the state favouring Christians. But we don’t expect the Opposition leader to remain silent when it is such a critical issue for the minorities and he was once part of the government that introduced the secular state and was the basis of his own election to parliament.
Inia Seruiratu’s statement falls woefully short of what he must be doing – telling the nation that the secular state is non-negotiable and People First will fight to the last to keep it. Certainly his failure to do so is being noted by Hindus and Muslims – the biggest non-Christian religions – and has the potential to cost the Party a great many votes.
Can anyone in the minorities imagine this kind of prevarication from Frank Bainimarama and Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum? And yet Inia Seruiratu was not only part of their government, presumably supported the 2013 Constitution and has not repudiated their legacy. He specifically sold People First as the custodian of the values of FijiFirst and is presumably seeking the votes of former FijiFirst supporters.
He isn’t going to get them without a full-throated defence of the main constitutional provisions on which FijiFirst went to the nation and secured the most votes at the 2022 election – the common and equal citizenry, the common identity and the secular state.
_____________
A “commitment to honesty and collaboration with the public”? What about a commitment to uphold the secular state? It is disturbingly absent from Inia Seruiratu’s comments. Unless collaboration with the public now includes going along with the Christian majority to remove any impediment to the state siding with them.
The Opposition leader is certainly anxious to dispel any public perception that he has got too close to the Coalition government when he is getting $200,000 and a house to oppose them. But why won’t he take a stand now and publicly say that the secular state must stay?
____________________
What the Constitutional Review Commission reportedly recommends removing. It isn’t acceptable to Fiji’s minorities and if it wants their votes, People First ought to be saying so.
INIA SERUIRATU: TOTAL VOTES 1200
Inia wears the title of Leader of Opposition like a costume — the mandate of the people draped over the naked ambition of a man who sold his voice the moment the price was right.
He doesn’t oppose power; he auditions for it, trading the trust of every citizen who believed in him for a pile of quiet inducements he thinks no one notices.
History has a long memory for men who mistake self-enrichment for statesmanship, and Inia’s legacy is already written in the currency of his own betrayal.
Inia’s media statement ” The cost of his trip is not covered by Fiji or Fijian Taxpayers but by Australia”.
Hey Inia, I am an Australian Taxpayer and I am annoyed you and the Fiji Government are misusing my tax money.
That would be the Australian gvt misusing it as they spent it. As for Fiji first and Frank. They had no legacy just a bunch of dumb guys！They were the ones that ruined Fiji.
“Lowry” and “Mac”, you are banned. I am not convinced you are authentic, let alone two independent individuals and in any event, it is unrelenting pro-Coalition, anti FijiFirst propaganda bereft of reason, let alone balance, and is tediously repetitive. You chronically raise topics that are completely irrelevant to the postings here.
Worse, much of what you write isn’t grounded in fact. You cannot possibly be spending so much time as a casual authentic reader/readers making up this stuff.
Beyond my suspicions about the source of the content of your comments, you have suddenly appeared out of nowhere in the past few days and the possibility of two separate individuals doing so stretches credulity to the max. So in the interest of free and fair debate, bugger off.
It’s about time you pulled the plug, GD. And GS gave them a fair go.
They can go start their own blog and wallow in their own poison.
How did Fiji First ruin Fiji? For starts they were in power for 16 years, faced natural disasters like cyclones and pandemic yet focussed on developing Fiji with major infrastructures etc rebuilding Fiji and saving the national airline, putting Fiji back on the map after billions of dollars loss from Rabuka and Speights coups.
What has your Rabuka Government done, apart from having 3 DPMS, suspending people, taking everyone to court and losing cases, nepotism jobs for mates, highest level of corruption mismanagement of Funds, yet you keep mentioning FIJI FIRST and allowing this corrupt Coalition government to continue raiding the treasury?
It’s OK. “Lowry” and “Mack” have demonstrated themselves to be be Coalition trolls and on the evidence, the same person using separate email accounts.
“Mack”‘s furious response to me banning him/ them after a “Lowry” posting has been to accuse me within minutes of “suppressing fee speech” and telling me to “grow a penis, you silly little man”. You shan’t be troubled by them again.
Now they have morphed within a matter of hours into “Theguywhoknows”, spewing the same rubbish. “Theguywhoknows” has now joined “Lowry” and “Mack” in the outer reaches of cyberspace.
Another identity emerging out of absolutely nowhere peddling crude Coalition propaganda from the same song sheet. My readers know I never normally censor if the person is authentic. But this stuff is not only unconvincing and repetitive but obviously so.
As propagandists go, they are the crudest of amateurs. Or shall we say “amateur”. Because again, I suspect it is the same person using multiple email addresses to circumvent the recently announced Grubsheet protocols. Arriving all of a sudden with the same writing style and same BS narrative.
All addresses with no comment history at all in these columns to date but suddenly submitting lengthy pro-Coalition postings on the same subjects using the same language.
A bit too “smart” by half. Out!
And they keep coming. “Grow some balls” says truthhurts@outlook.com. Now there’s a genuine ID. Same person, of course.
Byee Mr Hurts.
Totally agree Grubsheet and well called out.
Seruiratu cannot continue to hide behind flowery language and motherhood statements like ‘our common national identity and equality of all citizens must be approached carefully and responsibly’.
As Leader of Opposition, does he have the responsibility to say where he stands in respect of this important aspect of the constitution, which frankly turned the card for many minorities to vote for Bainimarama’s Party in 2013. Yes, and Seruiratu was part of it. Has he had a change of view? If so, tell us so we can better decide how to vote at the next election.
We all know how Mr Seruiratu has been propped up by the current regime. He has been a favourite member trotting the world with Presidential, Speaker’s and other delegations. The ‘Climate Champion’ gives him extra justification although he has yet to prove himself and, with his recent (non) performance in Palau, the region is already talking about a replacement.
And just to reiterate, this issue will be paramount come the next election.
He is the opposition leader in name only and has by his actions, or the lack of them, shown himself to be a pseudo member of the Government.
He rarely contradicts or criticises the PM or the Government and readily accepts overseas trips provided by them.
I will predict now he will have little to say on the report or the recommendations of the Commission and not oppose any attempt to remove the secular state provision of the current constitution and will instead support it as he, as I said earlier, is a closet member of the Government.
In Fiji’s context, with leaders who are racist, corrupt and untrustworthy, I am in no way for the secular state part of the constitution being removed.
But it is interesting to reflect that many of the iTaukei who feel slighted by the 2013 constitution harp back to old Colonial times where the UK’s influence had proportional voting along racial lines, and supported the GCC.
The UK is a non-secular country, though a very multicultural society. I wonder if this is why removing the secular provision is being irrationally latched onto – because of deep unresolved emotions about what was lost, rather than well debated and reasoned decision making.
Could you please start calling out the blatant use of AI that politicians and others are using to generate their statements? Compare Inia’s statement with anything he wrote more than 4 years ago and the difference is obvious.
The same can be said of Victor Lal’s articles on FijiLeaks, the tone and structure of which changed practically overnight when generative AI became mainstream.
And I see the same things in many comments on Grubsheet (though not, to your credit GD, in your articles). It needs calling out where it’s seen as it obscures still further the equivocal positions of the majority of the opposition behind glib phrasing.
Yes, this is an AI-free zone. I am obliged to use it on Google searches because that’s what happens when you enter anything these days. But I do NOT use AI to write my articles and never will. For a start, even the Google searches turn up factual errors and AI simply cannot be relied on to get things right.
Authenticity is everything as far as I am concerned and anyone who resorts to AI has abandoned their authenticity and any respect for their intellectual position and that of others. Because quite simply, those postings are fake, generated not by a particular individual but artificial entities way beyond the imaginings of George Orwell when he wrote his dystopian vision of the future in the 1930s.
We can all spot these postings because they are generally overly turgid, lengthy and repetitive. And if you are in any doubt, you can purchase services online that claim to be able to identify AI-generated material.
As the election approaches, I may well resort to this myself and start calling out these individuals. Because they are a genuine threat to free speech and proper democratic discourse. Why? Because they are not real people but intellectual robots paying a fee to sprout the writings of an anonymous Big Brother. That’s 2026, not 1984. And quite simply terrifying.
Interesting comment about AI and Victor Lal’s indulgence.
I had a lot of respect for Victor Lal’s analysis on constitutional and legal issues. As a lawyer and former journalist, I assumed he has the uncanny ability to articulate issues convincingly.
Unfortunately, unlike this column where anyone can comment and provide feedback, FijiLeaks views remains uncontested and is often advanced as authoritative and gospel.
Victor sometimes relies on opinions of specific individuals, in who he places undiminished faith and does not bother to check facts and motivation.
Recent posts on UniFiji are classic examples where it is obvious that the VC Shameem, is using her friendship with Victor to address issues which are not only petty but are a reflection of her inability to provide effective leadership.
His column talking about cracks in walls and floors and unsuitability of rooms, many which have been infested by termite, is a cheap and unfair attempt to discredit the Arya Samaj which has been instrumental in establishing the first University by any religious organisation and runs a number of schools in Fiji. Whilst the Arya Samaj is not above criticism, it is hypocritical that the VC who has benefited from their generosity, is now using Victor Lal to air her grievances.
Having recently completed a law degree myself, I am acutely aware of the dictatorial and unprofessional activities of the VC. She was not only VC, she was the Dean of Law School and Head of Department depriving us students of a clear path to airing our issues.
Recently she has cultivated a warm relationship with the President of the Student Union and is using him as her tool to embarrass the owners of UniFiji. I know concern has been expressed about her practice of hiring of people for top positions like Deans, DVC, Heads of School, Corporate Manager etc without transparency. Her personal relationship with a senior colleague and setting centres in places like Tuvalu, Levuka etc have obviously generated questions from the Council.
Victor could have cared to check the facts and the context before using his blog to assist his close friend who herself has made the work and culture at UniFiji toxic and void of the environment expected of a tertiary institution.
So yes, we should not just accept such blogs, no matter how profound it appears, without the usual scrutiny. I wish Victor has the courage to open up his blog for comments like Grubsheet does and not carry out personal vendetta against individuals based on the agenda of his close friends.
Inia S.R.
U ain’t a leader
People First
What a Lie
Inia First
Your only Cry
U ain’t got courage
What a Loser
Don’t Preach
Your Lies
Minorities now see
Your Crocodile Tears
Raise your Voice
for Heaven’s sake
Oppose the Fear !
Traitor! Traitor! Traitor!
U just ain’t anyone’s leader.