Former Fiji Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama has been sentenced to one year in prison, Fiji media are reporting.

Bainimarama, alongside suspended Fiji Police Commissioner Sitiveni Qiliho appeared in the High Court in Suva today for their sentencing hearing for a case involving their roles in blocking a police investigation at the University of the South Pacific in 2021.

Qiliho has been sentenced to two years jail.

Bainimarama and Qiliho jailed.      Video: Fiji Village

Bainimarama, the 69-year-old former military commander and 2006 coup leader, had been found guilty of perverting the course of justice.

Qiliho had been found guilty of abuse of office by the High Court Acting Chief Justice Salesi Temo, who upheld the state’s appeal.

Bainimarama and Qiliho walked out of the High Court in Suva in handcuffs, and were escorted straight into a police vehicle.

“The former PM and the suspended COMPOL were found not guilty and acquitted accordingly by Resident Magistrate Seini Puamau at the Suva Magistrates Court on 12 October 2023,” the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions said.

“The State had filed an appeal against their acquittal where the Acting Chief Justice, Salesi Temo then overturned the Magistrate’s decision and found the two guilty as charged. The matter was then sent back to the Magistrates’ Court for sentencing.

“In sentencing the duo, Magistrate Puamau announced that both their convictions would not be registered. The former PM was granted an absolute discharge while the suspended COMPOL received a conditional discharge with a fine of $1500 on 28 March 2024 by the Suva Magistrates Court following which the State had filed an appeal and challenged the discharge for a custodial sentence.

“The Acting Chief Justice quashed the Magistrate Court’s sentence and pronounced the custodial sentences respectively.”

Earlier today, local media reported an increased police presence outside the Suva court complex.

“There is more pronounced police presence than usual with vehicles being checked upon entry. A section has been cordoned off in front of the High Court facing Holiday Inn,” broadcaster fijivillage.com reported.

State broadcaster FBC reported that police only allowed close relatives and Bainimarama and Qiliho’s associates, along with the media, to sit in the courtroom.

MPs from the main opposition FijiFirst party in Parliament, including opposition leader Inia Seruiratu, Faiyaz Koya were present in court.

Brief timeline:

• The duo were sentenced by the Magistrates Court on 28 March.
• Magistrate Seini Puamau gave Bainimarama an absolute discharge — the lowest level sentence an offender can get and no conviction was registered.
• Qiliho was fined FJ$1500 and without a conviction as well.
• The 69-year-old former military commander and 2006 coup leader was found guilty of perverting the course of justice in a case related to the University of the South Pacific; and suspended police chief Qiliho was found guilty of abuse of office by the High Court Acting Chief Justice Salesi Temo.
• Magistrate Puamau’s judgement had left many in the legal circles and commentators in the country perplexed.
• The State – through the Office of the Director of Public Prosecution – had appealed the sentencing straightaway to the High Court.
• They were back in court 7 days later — during the court appearance at the High Court, the Acting Chief Justice Salesi Temo, gave time until the 24 April for the respondents to file their submissions and for the State to reply by the 29th.
• The sentencing hearing was last Thursday, 2 May.
• Acting Chief Justice Salesi Temo sentences Bainimarama to one year in jail and Qiliho for two years.

Bainimarama’s attempt to pervert the course of justice charge had a maximum tariff of five years while Qiliho’s charge of abuse of office carried a maximum tariff of 10 years.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Fijian Broadcasting Corporation (FBC) board chairman Ajay Bhai Amrit says he has receipts to prove former FBC chief executive officer Riyaz Sayed-Khaiyum received an annual package of $387,790 including benefits and entitlements.

He said this worked out to $32,315 a month and that the board had evidence in the form of payslips and Sayed-Khaiyum’s contract.

Sayed-Khaiyum had denied the amount disclosed was what he received in salary.

In response to media queries about going public with Sayed-Khaiyum’s salary, Amrit said the people owned FBC as the public broadcaster and they had every right to know where and how their money was being spent.

He also said the $93 million that FBC received over the past 14 years would be closely scrutinised to see where the money went — a process which he said could take weeks.

Responding to a question from the media on claims made by Sayed-Khaiyum that the government left FBC “short changed”, Amrit said the corporation could not continue without government funding.

Government funding was about $11.2 million a year — almost $1 million per month.

Amrit said since the ex chief executive had taken the reins at FBC, it had received about $93 million in public service broadcasting funds, but it would not be known for some time whether the funds were used for public service broadcasting or for other things.

“It takes quite a long time to work out where that money is going, how it came in, what it was used for, and 100 percent we need to work on this but it will take weeks,” he said.

“It’s not a simple situation where I can sit down and say hold on, this money went yeah there, everywhere.

“It was used for various means so we’ve got to find out.”

Amrit said some of FBC best customers were government departments.

Ian Chute is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Former Fijian Broadcasting Corporation chief executive Riyaz Sayed-Khaiyum was paid $224,792 in bonuses during his term at FBC which began in 2008, the new board chair has claimed.

He was due for a $30,000 bonus this year.

FBC chair Ajai Bhai Amrit also revealed Sayed-Khaiyum, brother of former attorney-general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, received a salary of F$304,453 (NZ$218,000) and was paid a bonus of $25,671 during the covid-19 pandemic.

Amrit revealed this while speaking to the media.

Amrit said FBC would have incurred a loss of more than $63 million if the company had not received annual grants from government.

He clarified questions regarding the purchase of a vehicle by the sacked CEO.

“The final price of the vehicle was $207,470 and the vehicle is at Customs,” Amrit said.

“The vehicle will be tendered, I haven’t seen it yet.”

He said no staff would lose their jobs and the board was now dealing with the company’s annual reports and continuing investigations into its operations.

Wata Shaw is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

Riyaz Sayed-Khaiyum denies chair’s claims
FijiVillage News reports that Riyaz Sayed-Khaiyum said in a statement today that Amrit’s comments that he was being paid $32,000 a month in salary was “absolutely false”.

Sayed-Khaiyum said that under his most recent 3 year contract, which was approved by the previous board in late December, he was paid “nowhere near” what has been falsely reported.

He said that for all his contracts over the last 15 years of his tenure as CEO, FBC had been strictly sanctioned and approved by several boards with a clearly defined job description.

The former FBC chief executive said the board had always approved his salary, bonus and other entitlements based on performance and job evaluation reports.

He said the board also sanctioned every major development at the FBC over the past 15 years.

Riyaz Sayed-Khaiyum said Amrit’s allegation that Sayed-Khaiyum had received more than $304,000 in salary during the covid19 pandemic was also incorrect.

He said that during this time the FBC staff went through a 10 percent salary reduction for about half a year in order to mitigate the effects of the pandemic on their revenue, and he took a 12 percent salary reduction on his own volition.

Wata Shaw is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Fijian Broadcasting Corporation (FBC) chief executive officer Riyaz Sayed-Khaiyum’s employment status has been terminated, new board chair Ajay Bhal Amrit confirmed today.

Amrit said in a statement that chief financial officer Vimlesh Sagar would act in the position until the board could “confidently appoint” a person with appropriate commercial competency and attributes needed to lead the company.

This decision was made following a board meeting with Amrit, Sayed-Khaiyum, executive directors and senior management team on Friday.

Amrit later said Sayed-Khaiyum was earning considerably more than government ministers and even the prime minister. Riyaz is the brother of former FijiFirst attorney-general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum.

Amrit said this came as a shock to the new FBC board members and to most of the citizens of Fiji.

FBC grant to be reviewed
iHe said there were discussions with Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka and Minister for Finance Professor Biman Prasad and it was agreed that the government grant to FBC would be reviewed.

“The board will work with staff and management to ensure that FBC is a financially viable and a self-sustaining commercial business, while honouring its PSB [public service broadcasting] responsibilities,” he said.

He added that the public broadcaster FBC was willing to work with other media organisations to ensure that there was positive change to the current media laws as this would allow the newsroom to function in a fresh, balanced and new environment going forward.

“Our collective objective and commitment to our staff, shareholders, our valued listeners and viewers remains.”

Wata Shaw is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

One of Fiji’s leading media analysts says wholesale changes to the Fiji Broadcasting Corporation’s board were inevitable, given the change of government in the country, reports ABC Pacific Beat.

The board’s previous members and chairman resigned last week as Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka’s government continues to clear the decks in the public service.

The government has begun an investigation into excessive spending patterns in the Department of Information, involving US-based PR company Qorvis, along with local communications company VATIS and FBC itself.

Featured: Dr Shailendra Singh, associate professor in journalism at the University of the South Pacific

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

After the termination of Qorvis Communications and Vatis, Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka has indicated that attention has now shifted to the state-run Fiji Broadcasting Corporation (FBC) and Fiji Sun newspaper.

He revealed this while addressing the nation on Friday afternoon.

“We made it clear in our manifestos that implementation of certain promises would be dependent on the true state of Fiji’s economy,” Rabuka said.

“We will be conducting mandatory audits and associated checks and balances. Until these are completed, we will be curtailing what we consider to be wasteful spending in areas that are not a priority.

“We’ve started an investigation into what appears to be excessive spending in the Department of Information, through payments to the [US-based] public affairs company Qorvis, the local communications company Vatis, the Fijian Broadcasting Corporation (FBC) and the Fiji Sun newspaper.

“In fact, there are many looming issues to address.”

He said that in the past 14 days they had made progress with ministers establishing themselves in their respective ministries.

Questions sent to FBC chief executive officer, Riyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, and Fiji Sun acting chief executive officer Rosi Doviverata remained unanswered when this edition of the Fiji Times went to press.

Wata Shaw is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Addressing the training development deficit in the Fiji media industry can stem journalist attrition and improve coverage of election reporting in the country, says University of the South Pacific journalism coordinator Dr Shailendra Singh.

Speaking during last week’s launch of the National Media Reporting of the 2018 Fijian General Elections study in Suva, Dr Singh said media watch groups regarded Fiji’s controversial media law as having a “chilling effect on journalism” and “fostered a culture of media self-censorship”.

Dr Singh, who co-authored the report with Dialogue Fiji executive director Nilesh Lal, said scrapping or reforming the 2010 Media Industry Development Authority Act was crucial to “professionalising journalism”.

“The Act does nothing for training and development or journalist attrition. In fact, the Act may have exacerbated attrition,” he said.

This situation, Dr Singh said, highlighted the importance of training and development and staff retention, which were longstanding structural problems in Fiji and Pacific media.

“This underlines the role of financial viability and newsroom professional capacity in news coverage.”

He said two core media responsibilities in elections were creating a level playing field and acting as a public watchdog.

“It seems doubtful that these functions were adequately fulfilled by all media during reporting of the 2018 Fijian general elections.”

Advertising spread
Dr Singh said the research also recommended the even distribution of state advertising among media organisations as well as the allocation of public service broadcasting grants fairly among broadcasters to minimise financial incentives to report overly positively on any government.

According to the report, the FijiFirst Party received the most media coverage during the 2018 Fiji general elections and this was expected given its ruling party status.

However, variance in coverage tone and quantity appeared too high.

“The largely positive coverage of the ruling FijiFirst party could be deemed irregular. It questions certain media’s ability to hold power to account,” Dr Singh said.

“Under a stronger watchdog mandate, ruling parties face greater scrutiny, especially in election time. Instead, media coverage put challenger parties more on the defensive which is curious.”

He said challenger parties were forced to respond to allegations in news stories and were grilled more than the incumbent during debates.

“It should be other way around. In such situations the natural conclusion is journalist bias but only to a certain extent,” he said.

Direct political alignment
While the report found that certain media outlets in Fiji seemed to privilege some political parties and issues over others, distinguished political sociologist and Pacific scholar Professor Steven Ratuva said this could be due to several reasons such as direct political and ideological alignment of the media company to a political party or conscious and subconscious bias of journalists and editors.

“Bias is part of human consciousness and sometimes it is explicit and sometimes it is implicit and unconscious. This deeper sociological exploration is beyond the mandate of this report,” Professor Ratuva said in the foreword to the report.

“Election stories sell, especially when spiced with intrigue, scandals, mysteries, conspiracies and warring narratives.

“The more sensational the story the more sellable it is. The media can feed into election frenzies, inflame passion and at times encourage boisterous political behaviour and prejudice which can be socially destructive.

“The media can also be used as a means of sensible, intellectual and calm engagement to enlighten the ignorant and unite people across cultures, religions and political ideologies.”

He said keeping an eye on what the media did required an open, analytical and independent approach and this was what the report attempted to do.

Research findings
The research found that after FijiFirst, the larger and more established opposition parties SODELPA and NFP, were next in terms of the quantity of coverage, but were more likely to receive a lesser amount of positive coverage and at times found themselves on the defensive in responding to FijiFirst allegations, rather than being principles in the stories.

The smaller, newer parties had to content themselves with marginal news attention and this was generally consistent across four of the five national media that were surveyed — the Fiji Sun, FBC (TV and radio), Fiji Television Limited and Fiji Village.

“The only exception was The Fiji Times, whose coverage could be deemed to be comparatively less approving of the ruling party and also less critical of the challenger parties,” the report found.

“Besides comparatively extensive and favourable coverage in the Fiji Sun, FijiFirst made more appearances on the major national television stations, FBC and Fiji One, as well as on the CFL radio stations and news website.”

The report noted that even in special information programmes where news media allowed candidates extended time/space to have their say, the FijiFirst representatives enjoyed a distinct advantage over their opposition counterparts in the two national debates, with regards to the number of questions asked, the nature of the questions, and the opportunity to respond.

“When the two major opposition parties were in the media, it was often in order to respond to allegations by the ruling party, or to defend themselves against negative questions,” the report noted.

“The results could explain why the government accuses The Fiji Times of anti-government bias, and the opposition blame the Fiji Sun and FBC TV of favouring the government.”

However, there were other factors other than media/journalist bias that could be attributed to the lack of critical reporting.

“These could range from the news organisation’s and/or newsroom’s partiality towards the ruling party politicians and its policies. The reporting could also be affected by the inexperience in the national journalists corps to report the elections in a critical manner.”

This observation, the report highlighted, was supported by “issues balance” results indicating that key national issues, such as the economy, were understated.

The focus was instead on election processes, procedures and conduct. Another factor in the reporting could be news media’s financial links to the government.

Election reporting
As Fiji prepares for its next general election, Dialogue Fiji’s Nilesh Lal said it was important to put the spotlight on factors that impinged on an even electoral playing field.

“Given the importance of news media in disseminating electoral information and shaping public opinion, it can profoundly influence electoral outcomes, and therefore needs to come under scrutiny,” he said.

“There may also be imperatives to consider safeguards against the negative impacts of unequal coverage of electoral contestants through legislating as other countries, like the US, for instance, have done.

“Alternatively, media organisations can self-regulate by instituting internal guidelines for election reporting. A good example is the BBC’s Guidelines on election coverage. Another alternate could be the formation of an independent commission/committee made up of media organisation representatives and political parties representatives that can set rules and quotas for election coverage.

“For example, in the UK, a committee of broadcasters and political parties reviews the formula for allocation of broadcasting time, at every election.”

Lal said the purpose of the report was not to accuse any media organisation of having biases but rather to show that inequitable coverage of electoral contestants was a problem in Fiji that required redress at some level if “we are sincere about improving the quality of democracy in Fiji”.

He said the co-authors hoped the report would initiate some much-needed public discourse on the issue of equitable coverage of elections by media organisations.

Wansolwara is the student journalist newspaper of the University of the South Pacific. It collaborates with Asia Pacific Report, which prioritises student journalism.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

What do you do when the other small island nations don’t recognise your brilliance and won’t go along with your suggestions?

Well, when you are Fiji Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, you call up your brother, Riyaz’s, broadcasting network (their FBC, not yours), and instruct it to express your displeasure.

FBC News reports that the Chair of the Alliance of Small Island States, Antigua and Barbuda, rejected a proposal on oceans put forward by Fiji at COP26 and “this has not gone down well with Fiji, which says it does not believe this position is in the long-standing collaborative interest of AOSIS”.

Which actually means the big slap in the face has not gone down well with Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, an oceans champion at COP.

The FBC News story doesn’t carry the name of the author of the story, which is a requirement for every story under the AG’s media laws. But those rules don’t apply either when the AG orders a version of a story to go to air to try to counter a humiliating setback.

Grubsheet Feejee understands that with the Chair of AOSIS “shunning Fiji’s presentation” – which is how even FBC News put it – other island nations have taken Antigua and Barbuda’s lead.

Indeed, there are reports that not a single other AOSIS member has sided with the AG, which just compounds his humiliation.

It wasn’t meant to be this way. COP26 was meant to showcase Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum’s brilliant negotiating skills by putting oceans at the centre of the climate agenda.

But Glasgow is not Suva. And the AG is finding out the hard way that just because he wants something doesn’t mean that he will get it.

Maybe he can use his celebrated skills of persuasion to turns things around before it all ends in failure.

But let’s hope Captain Mendacious has learned a valuable lesson in one of his first forays onto the global stage. That the leaders of other nations don’t necessarily share his high opinion of himself.

Australian-Fijian journalist Graham Davis publishes the blog Grubsheet Feejee on Fiji affairs. He was a member of the Fiji government’s climate delegation at COP23.

AOSIS Chair shuns Fiji’s presentation

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Stung by successive Grubsheet articles revealing how the military wants changes to the Fiji government and also revealing the name of his designated successor, Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama has made an astonishing personal attack on me on the front page of the government-controlled Fiji Sun newspaper today and in the government-controlled Fiji Broadcasting Corporation news.

While conspicuously failing to deny the substance of anything I have reported, the PM accuses me of “trading in gossip” and makes a number of snide personal references that are gratuitous and totally beside the point.

Once again, the PM has evidently been used by his Attorney-General, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, to engage in an ill-considered public relations blunder that elevates me personally and the substance of what I have written and drives even more Fijian readers to my website.

Whether it was on the advice of my former colleagues at Qorvis Communications is an open question.

One of them has already commented that: ”Someone should tell him [the PM] to keep a cool head. He’s doing his own negative PR by being so aggressively defensive”.

If Fiji is going to pay Qorvis $800,000 this year in highly straightened circumstances on top of the many millions it has expended over the years, the Prime Minister and his de facto number two could at least heed their advice.

Bainimarama’s statement
Here’s the text of what the Prime Minister said to the Fiji Sun:

“It’s funny, people outside of Fiji often have the most to say and the least to offer the country. Graham is no different. I know him, and he did some work with Qorvis, but that ended sometime back.

“I think I remember the stress was sometimes too much for him. I don’t know why he’s dealing in gossip these days, but I also remember even in the best of times he always seemed to find drama. And if he couldn’t find it, he’d make it up.

“I have no idea what he wants now. Maybe attention, maybe a job. I really don’t know. I don’t care and we don’t want to give him either. But he needs to understand that an attack on Fijian democracy, our Constitution, any of our independent institutions, or any of my ministers is an attack on me.

“If you’ve read our Constitution, you know Fiji is a democracy. We are not a dynasty and I do not handpick my successor. The only ones who choose the Prime Minister of Fiji are Fijian voters.

“I know, because they have picked my government twice. As the leader of FijiFirst, I am appointed under our party’s constitution, like all our office bearers. And I will once again work hard to earn the votes of the Fijian people when I lead FijiFirst into the next election.

“Until then, we have to recover our economy and get industries running again, get jobs back and get help to those who need it most. I am working on these issues every day. We don’t have time to waste on gossip blogs. But for old time’s sake, I wish Graham all the best in his retirement in Australia.”

The Davis response
And here is the text of the statement that I have released to the Fiji media in response and that it is obliged to publish under Fiji’s media laws guaranteeing the right of reply to criticism of this nature.

“I thank the Prime Minister for drawing public attention to my blogsite – grubsheet.com.au – in that many more Fijians will know that far from me criticising him or eroding his position, I am in fact trying to strengthen it by calling for the government to re-invent itself so that it can win the next election.

“I take it as confirmation that what I have said is fact that in his statement, the Prime Minister does not deny anything at all that I have reported over the past month or for that matter, dispute any opinion that I have expressed.

“In relation to his comments about the Constitution, the Prime Minister knows that a political party such as FijiFirst decides its candidate as leader before the people get to vote on that selection. So his preference as party leader is critical and as I reported, he has told the Military Council that his designated successor is Inia Seruiratu.

“While I thank him for his best wishes, I am far from being retired – being of the same age as the Prime Minister – and am working for his re-election to prevent him from going into enforced retirement himself. He remains a person for whom I have a great deal of respect and affection.”

The Davis column drew some lively online debate today, including from Rajend Naidu who writes:

“People from outside Fiji comment on Fiji’s situation on behalf of people inside Fiji who have been silenced by a repressive state and are fearful of reprisal should they have the audacity to speak out against the corruption, nepotism, favouritism, debasement of institutions of state through politisation and patronage, and a sword of Damocles hanging over the free press in the country.”

• Grubsheet Feejee is the blogsite of Graham Davis, an award-winning journalist turned communications consultant who was the Fiji government’s principal communications adviser for six years from 2012 to 2018 and continued to work on Fiji’s global climate and oceans campaign up until the end of the decade.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz