Winston Peters has been accused of “pure racism” in Parliament by Labour leader Chris Hipkins, who has called out National ministers for failing to combat or challenge it.

The Greens say Peters is scapegoating migrants, while ACT’s David Seymour — his own Cabinet colleague — says Peters is simply seeking attention.

The condemnation came following Parliament’s Question Time yesterday when the NZ First leader singled out a Green MP for his Rarotongan heritage.

Green MP Teanau Tuiono had used the word “Aotearoa” to refer to New Zealand while asking questions about climate aid in the Pacific.

It prompted Peters to interrupt: “Why is [the minister] answering a question from someone who comes from Rarotonga to a country called New Zealand . . . ”

Speaker Gerry Brownlee cut him off to object to noise from other MPs in the debating chamber.

Hipkins then leapt to his feet: “Members in this House are equal. For a member of the House to stand up and question whether someone is entitled to ask a question because of their country of origin is pure racism, and you should’ve stopped him in the beginning.”

Brownlee said he did not hear Peters’ remark, but would review the transcription later.

Peters then completed his question, asking why somebody from Rarotonga had decided “without any consultation with the New Zealand people” to change the country’s name.

In response, Brownlee said that was “not an acceptable question at all”.

“I want that to be the last time that those sort of questions are directed so personally at members of this House,” Brownlee said.

Tuiono has both Māori and Cook Islands Māori heritage but was born in New Zealand.

Hipkins calls out ‘ugly side’ to politics
In a speech to Parliament shortly later, Hipkins decried an “ugly side to New Zealand politics”, calling out “outright race-baiting” and “direct racism” being expressed in the debating chamber.

“Attacks on our Chinese and Asian communities in New Zealand, attacks on our Indian communities in New Zealand, and just today, attacks on whether those who have Pasifika heritage are entitled to ask questions in this house.

“And what have we heard from the government side on those attacks? Absolutely nothing.”

Hipkins said National ministers needed to “combat and challenge that racism” during this year’s election campaign, saying it was “totally unacceptable” for them to “say nothing and do nothing”.

“They are quite happy to stand by while members of their own government attack our Chinese community, our Indian community, our Pasifika community, migrants to New Zealand who work damn hard and contribute to New Zealand, and it’s an absolute disgrace.”

Hipkins said government ministers should celebrate diversity and not cast aspersions on it.

Speaking to reporters later, Hipkins said Peters’ behaviour “had no place in government and Parliament” — but he still would not say whether Labour would be prepared to work with NZ First after the election.

“I’m going make judgements about those things closer to the election, but I’ll call out bad behaviour when I see it.”

Greens call Peters ‘Temu Trump’
Addressing reporters outside Parliament, Tuiono said Peters was using “culture wars” to distract from the real harm he was causing New Zealanders.

“Just like Trump, he’s not very good with geography,” he said. “He just needs to get an atlas. A bilingual one preferably.”

His Green colleague Ricardo Menéndez March said Prime Minister Christopher Luxon had failed to show leadership by allowing Peters — “a Temu Trump” — to spread anti-migrant sentiment.

“It’s migrant scapegoating . . .  it’s emboldens people outside of these four walls who wish to cause harm on our migrant communities,” Menéndez March said.

Speaking afterwards, ACT leader and Deputy Prime Minister David Seymour said he would never make such comments but would leave others to judge them for themselves.

“Do I like those comments? No. Would I make those comments? No. But I think if we all go on a 2019-style witch-hunt, we’re actually just fuelling it,” he said.

“If we all get ourselves in a lather, giving them the attention that they want, then that’s just as bad.”

‘Utter nonsense’ claim
In response, Peters told reporters Hipkins was talking “utter nonsense” and he did not care about Seymour’s views.

“How can somebody from another country who’s come to New Zealand decide to change my country’s name?” Peters said.

When told that Tuiono was actually born in New Zealand, Peters said, regardless, the Green MP claimed to be a “Cook Islander”.

“I would never go to the Cook Islands and start changing their name, would I?”

Peters said he was regularly being “literally mobbed” by New Zealanders on matters like the use of the word Aotearoa.

“I’m not indulging fools here. Let me tell you something: stand back and watch the polls go.”

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

In a highly anticipated session of the Tongan Parliament to debate and vote on the second vote of no confidence (VONC) scheduled for last Monday, December 9, in Prime Minister Siaosi Sovaleni Hu’akavameiliku and the Cabinet, Hu’akavameiliku surprised everyone by announcing his resignation — even before the actual debate had begun.

The session began with the Speaker, Lord Fakafanua, announcing the procedure for the day which was to have each of the seven grounds of the VONC read out, followed by the Cabinet’s responses, after which each member of Parliament would be allowed 10 minutes to make a statement for or against.

Before parliamentary staff started reading out the documents, Deputy Prime Minister (DPM) Samiu Vaipulu moved that the VONC be declared null and void as it did not have the 10 valid signatures that the house rules stipulated.

He claimed that two of the 10 signatures were added on October 10, whereas an event included in VONC did not begin until October 21, thus making those signatures invalid. That event was the 2024 Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting which was held in Samoa, October 21-26, and the VONC cited it in relation to alleged Cabinet overspending on overseas travel.

After an hour and half of debate on the DPM’s motion, the Speaker ruled that despite the technical shortcoming, he would proceed with the VONC at 2pm after the lunch break. Hu’akavameiliku immediately asked for a break, as only 10 minutes remained before the lunch break, but the Speaker sided with VONC supporters and ruled that the debate begin straight away.

That is when Hu’akavameiliku asked for the floor and proceeded to thank everyone from the King to the nobles and his Cabinet members and the movers of the VONC before announcing his resignation.

The second VONC had been tabled on November 25. The Speaker instructed the parliamentary committee responsible to scrutinise it for compliance with parliamentary rules and determine whether additional information was needed before making it available to the Prime Minister and Cabinet by November 29.

More time request granted
Hu’akavameiliku was initially required to submit his response by December 3 for debate and ballot. But on November 28 the Speaker granted his request for more time, rescheduling the debate to December 9. The movers of the VONC were not happy, particularly given that the first one submitted in August 2023 had contained 46 grounds (compared with seven in the second), to which the Prime Minister and Cabinet had responded to in detail within five days.

There is reason to suspect that there was more to the request for extension than meets the eye. The inaugural graduation ceremony for the Tonga National University, which opened in January 2023, was held over three days beginning December 4, with the University’s Chancellor, King Tupou VI, officiating. Hu’akavameiliku, as Pro-Chancellor and chair of the University Council and Minister for Education and Training, facilitated the first day’s ceremony.

That date, December 4, marked the 1845 coronation of King Siaosi Tupou I, the founder of modern Tonga. Notably, King Tupou VI was absent on the second and third days, with Lord Fakafanua and Hu’akavameiliku stepping in to play the Chancellor’s role.

In a media conference on November 25 after the VONC was tabled, Hu’akavameiliku defended the VONC movers’ constitutional right to introduce it, but also said that since he only had a year left of his four-year term, he would have preferred a dialogue about their concerns.

He gave the impression to the media that he had the numbers to defeat this second VONC. However, his numbers were tight.

As of November 10, his Cabinet had nine members, reduced from 10 after his Minister for Lands and Survey, Lord Tu’i’afitu, resigned after receiving a letter from the Palace Office saying King Tupou VI had withdrawn his confidence and trust in him as minister.

Of the nine remaining members, four were People’s Representatives (PRs), including the Prime Minister, two were Nobles’ Representatives (NRs) and three were Non-Elected Representatives who could not vote on the VONC.

Question mark over allegiance
o, with six votes in hand, Hu’akavameiliku needed eight more to beat the VONC. He could usually count on five PRs — Tevita Puloka, Dulcie Tei, Sione Taione, Veivosa Taka and Mo’ale ‘Otunuku — and possibly three NRs that could have sided with him, Lord Tuiha’angana, Lord Fakafanua and Prince Kalaniuvalu.

But there was a question mark over Prince Kalaniavalu’s allegiance as he had voted in favour of the first VONC in September 2023.

The movers of the second VONC were confident they had the numbers this time round. Lord Tu’ilakepa, who had voted against the VONC in 2023, was one of the signatories this time around. Previously, Lord Tu’ileakepa had almost always voted with the Prime Minister and was loathe to be associated with members of Parliament who had any pro-democracy inclinations.

The seven PR signatories were Dr Langi Fasi, Mateni Tapueleuelu, Dr ‘Aisake Eke, Piveni Piukala, Kapeli Lanumata, Mo’ale Finau and Vatau Hui. They were also guaranteed the vote of Dr Tanieta Fusmalohi, still making his way back from COP29.

So, they had 11 guaranteed votes, and 13 if the recently resigned Minister, Lord Tu’I’afitu, and Prince Kalaniuvalu sided with them. As with the first VONC, the NRs would play a crucial role, controlling nine of the 26 seats (more than 33 percent of the Parliament) despite representing less than 1 percent of the country’s population.

Since King Tupou VI withdrew his confidence and trust in Hu’akavameiliku as Minister for Defence and Fekita ‘Utoikamanu as Minister for Foreign Affairs early in 2024, the Prime Minister continued as Acting Minister in those two portfolios.

There was hope that substantive Ministers would have been appointed (from the Royal Family) by the time of the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) Leaders Meeting in Nuku’alofa in August 24, but it was not to be.

Relations remained strained
In spite of the hulouifi (traditional reconciliation ceremony) performed in February, relations between the King and Hu’akavameiliku remained strained. One cannot help but think that the Palace Office was at least supportive of the VONC, if not among the instigators.

As PIF chair until next year’s leaders’ summit in Solomon Islands, Hu’akavameiliku reportedly felt let down by King Tupou VI’s absence from the country during the Leaders’ Meeting — not least because his father, King Taufa’ahau Tupou IV, and his brother, Prince Tuipelehake, were instrumental in setting up the PIF (South Pacific Forum, at that time) in 1972.

Together with Fiji’s Ratu Kamisese Mara, Cook Islands’ Sir Albert Henry, Nauru’s Hammer De Roburt, Samoa’s Malietoa and Niue’s Robert Rex, they walked out of the then South Pacific Commission (SPC) when they could no longer stand being treated like children by the colonial powers (US, France, UK, the Netherlands, Australia, and NZ) at the annual SPC meetings and their refusal to include decolonisation and nuclear testing on SPC’s agenda.

The Speaker immediately recessed parliament after Hu’akavameiliku’s announcement. By the time it reconvened at 2pm he had a letter from the Palace Office saying they had received the PM’s resignation in writing.

In spite of vociferous opposition from some of the VONC movers, he announced that, under section 18 of the Government Act, DPM Samiu Vaipulu would be Acting Prime Minister (in an interim Cabinet of existing members) until December 24, when Parliament is scheduled to elect a new Prime Minister from its existing membership of the house.

Lopeti Senituli is a law practitioner in Tonga and is the immediate past president of the Tonga Law Society. He was Political and Media Adviser to Prime Ministers Dr Feleti Vaka’uta Sevele (2006-2010) and Samuela ‘Akilisi Pohiva (2018-2019). This article was first published by Devpolicy Blog and is republished with the author’s permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A vote of no confidence in Papua New Guinea’s Prime Minister James Marape is set to be moved on May 29.

Sinasina-Yongamugl Open MP Kerenga Kua told the media yesterday that the Marape government had “subverted the opposition’s attempts to hold them accountable for their actions”.

“I want to give confidence to the people of Papua New Guinea that this opposition is committed to ensuring that this government is brought to account,” Kua, an opposition MP, said at a media conference in Port Moresby.

“People are screaming for accountability. On behalf of the people. We are serious. The people are sick and tired of this government.

“They want to see the back of this government. They want to see them out.”

The opposition bloc stands by the motion filed on February 20 despite discrepancies raised by the overseeing Private Business Committee in a letter.

“The Acting Speaker was clear and advised that there was a discrepancy or discrepancies and so on legal advice, we have opted to not challenge that stance.

“But then by the position that the integrity of the notice of motion that we have filed is intact,” said opposition MP Keith Iduhu.

Accused the opposition
He said in their view there were no issues with the paper despite the Prime Minister having “rubbished it” and accused the opposition of forging names.

“If the committee or this chair decides to tamper with the motion . . . in any manner other than contemplated by the Supreme Court, section 23 of the constitution will be invoked and punitive measures will be sought from the courts,” Iduhu said.

“What that means is that penalties to the tune of even imprisonment up to 10 years,” he said.

“We will not hesitate to exercise our rights and the cause under the constitution.”

RNZ Pacific understands that Acting Speaker Koni Iguan and the Private Business Committee would be impacted on if that is the case.

Meanwhile, Marape said last week he would refer the second motion of no confidence paper — the one the opposition bloc said it stands by — to the Parliamentary Privileges Committee following allegations of forgery.

“It looks as if somebody is cutting and pasting these signatures and filling in names,” Marape said.

Acting Speaker Iguan told Parliament on Thursday last week that the first motion of no confidence did not qualify to be listed on the notice paper.

All MPs accountable – watchdog
Transparency International PNG (TIPNG) said the abuse of Parliament’s processes undermined public confidence and “fed corruption”.

TIPNG said all MPs were ultimately accountable to the people of PNG.

The anti-corruption watchdog said undermining democratic processes not only erodes public trust but hinders the country’s progress and development.

It said the refusal of the acting speaker to allow the motion for a vote against the prime minister, followed by an adjournment until May raises serious questions.

TIPNG chair Peter Aitsi said the motion is a fundamental tool within the parliamentary system, allowing MPs to hold the executive accountable.

He said denying a no confidence motion without due process was an affront to the democratic rights of both the opposition and the people they represented.

It “perpetuates a culture of impunity and weakens the already fragile checks and balances within the government and fuels an environment rife to corrupt behaviour,” he said.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The Vanuatu Supreme Court has ruled in favour of the opposition, which contested a ruling by the parliamentary Speaker regarding what constitutes an absolute majority in Parliament.

The court case followed a motion of no-confidence in the prime minister being defeated under a technicality of the rules as interpreted by the Speaker.

Former prime minister Sato Kilman, who is now in the opposition, said the judge had ruled an absolute majority in Parliament was 26, so the opposition won the case.

But he said the judge had stayed the case until 3pm on Monday to allow any appeal.

“We are glad, because we believed that we were right from the start, and that is why we lodged the application to the court,” Kilman said.

Earlier this month the opposition, in seeking to remove Prime Minister Ishmael Kalsakau, won 26 votes in the 52-member House, while the government got 23 votes.

There was one abstention — from the Speaker — one seat is vacant and one is empty due to that MP getting medical treatment overseas.

Vanuatu’s constitution states that an absolute majority is needed to oust a prime minister and this has been interpreted to mean 27 MPs in the 52-member Parliament.

Legal precedent
Kalsakau said there was legal precedent to support this position.

In the judgment released today, the judge said the court “concludes that the actual number of members of Parliament when this vote was taken is the relevant number on which an absolute majority should be based”.

“It is the view of this court that the applicants have shown that their Constitutional rights, as set out in the application filed on 17th August 2023, have been infringed by the 1st respondent,” the judgment said.

“They are entitled to relief sought.”

It also said an order would be issued about that relief, but the order would include a stay to allow an appeal before any further steps are taken to enforce the order.

Supreme Court has just ruled that the vote of 26 MP’s to oust the PM last week was valid and that the PM was voted out by an absolute majority of 26 in a Parliament with 51 members. So we are still only in Government due to a stay order granted to allow us time to appeal.

— Ralph Regenvanu (@RRegenvanu) August 25, 2023

Cathy Solomon, 64, who lives in Port Vila, said the majority of people in Vanuatu were suffering because of “unfair and sad” politicians who were only thinking of self preservation.

She said the country’s politicians had failed in their purpose as elected representatives of the people.

She said it was time for more women to get into Parliament so they could challenge and change Vanuatu’s precarious political situation.

Hendon Kalsakau, 65, a chief of the Coconut Tribe on Ifira island, said the situation was “affecting deeply” the ni-Vanuatu people.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Mister Speaker, our collective question without notice is to you mister Speaker. We want the Prime Minister and his deputy to take note Sir.

Our question from the Media Gallery is specifically directed to you, Mr Speaker, because of events that have transpired in the last 48 hours in which the freedom of the media in the people’s house has been once again curtailed.

Mr Speaker, we are aware of proposed changes to laws that are yet to reach the House that have been circulated by the Minister for Communications for consultation with all stakeholders in the media industry on the media development policy document, we are still concerned about what these will further impinge on the operations of mainstream media in PNG in covering, questioning and investigating Parliament, politicians and government departments and their activities.

Last week, our members’ movements in and around the National Parliament at Waigani was further restricted by members of the Parliamentary Security Services.

We are now restricted to the press gallery and cannot further venture around the House in search of news. Mr Speaker, is the media really a serious threat to you and the members of the House that you have to apply such stringent measures to curtail our movements?

Parliament is an icon of our democracy. It is rightfully the people’s House, might we remind you mister Speaker, that we are guaranteed freedom of movement, freedom of speech, freedom to engage with all leaders mandated by the people to represent them here.

What then is the reason for you to set up barriers around the hallways, offices of MPs and public walkways, Mr Speaker?

Your Parliamentary Clerk is lost, Mr Speaker. In our queries not aware of any order to gag the media in the people’s House. His deputy is muted and cannot find a reason for this preposterous decision to restrict our movements in the House.

Mr Speaker, we consider this a serious impingement on the freedom of journalists to access Parliament House, report on the proceedings, seek out and question MPs on the spot.

Sir, Mr Speaker, we are well aware of the processes, procedures and decorum of the house, and where we as political reporters and photographers can traverse and that we always stay on our side of the fence.

Mr Speaker, let us remind you once again that Parliament belongs to the people. Their voice must be heard. Their MPs must be on record to deliver their needs and wants and their views.

The people cannot be denied. This will be a grave travesty Mr Speaker, if you deny the people their freedom to know what is transpiring in Parliament by silencing the media.

In the past, the media had a very good relationship with your office and we are pleased to say that the Speaker has on more than one occasion, assisted the members of the media with accreditation, and even transportation.

But Mr Speaker, don’t entertain any point of order from other Members on our question. They have had their day on the floor.

Mister Speaker, we members of the media are not primitives. Far from it, we are just the messengers of the people.

One last friendly reminder Mr Speaker. The very people that you are trying to restrict are the ones that you will need to get the message out to the people and to the world.

We are not your enemies. We are here to ensure your all 118 MPs do a proper job transparently without fear or favour.

Thank you Mr Speaker.

This PNG Post-Courier editorial was published under the headline “A Question without Notice” on 12 June 2023. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Mā’ohi Nui and the Pacific region has witnessed a historical moment at the Territorial Assembly when Oscar Temaru, leader of the pro-independence party Tavini Huira’atira, sat briefly in the most important chair of the chamber.

He presided over the election of the new Speaker (president) of the House.

This honour was his as the eldest member of the Territorial Assembly at the age of 78.

In his return to the Assembly, he was put in the highest seat of the House from which he had been axed as a member of Parliament in 2018 by a French court which convicted him of a “conflict of interest” in the Radio Tefana affair.

A sweet revenge for the once persona non grata politician in front of the High Commissioner representative of the French administration, along with the two pro-French senators —  and the entire autonomist political platform.

Another no less significant moment that took place when the ballots for the electing the Speaker were counted, 41 were for the only pro-independence candidate, Antony Geros, against 16 that abstained.

This might have come as a surprise to the autonomist alliance of édouard Fritch-Gaston Flosse to see the three non-aligned autonomist members of the assembly give their votes instead of abstaining.

Working with new administration
However, those non-aligned autonomist members have publicly announced that they would work with the new administration.

The other point about the three non-aligned members is the hope of being offered a ministerial position for one of their group, an answer will come when the newly elected President of the territory presents his cabinet in five days.

In his opening speech, Speaker Geros reminded the House about historical facts over the many political battles and strife that Tavini had had to go endure — mostly instigated by the French state.

He also said that the past 10 years had been a “journey in the desert” for the new local government.

When asked whether he was worried that his speech against the French administration could send the “wrong signal” to Paris, he said the young new Tavini members of the Assembly needed to know how they got to where they were and the sacrifices that were made by the forefathers of the independence party.

They needed to know the past of their party to understand the future of the country.

It has also been a happy reunion for Roch Wamytan, president of New Caledonia’s Congress and pro-independence leader, who came in person to congratulate and support his old friend Temaru for what he has achieved.

Brotherson’s new administration
Moetai Brotherson was elected president of Mā’ohi Nui with 38 votes ahead of the outgoing president Édouard Fritch (16 votes), and Nicole Sanquer from the non-aligned party — and the first woman to seek the presidency — (three votes) and Benoit Kautai from Flosse’s party, who quickly withdrew his name.

The majority premium won by the Tavini settled the outcome as already predicted.

Any member of the Assembly can stand as a presidential candidate and present their programme. Undoubtedly the autonomist candidates will reiterate their allegiance to the French Republic.

Moetai Brotherson will make his speech and continue to form his cabinet. He has already given the names of some of the members of his cabinet and to those already known, the following names could be added to his new cabinet.

He promised gender parity in his government with a hint of more women which he can still achieve. He is adding another woman called Manarii Galenon, who is likely to be Minister for Solidarity, Housing and Urban Development.

The Budget and Finance minister would be Tevaiti Pomare which is an interesting choice as he is known to be an A here ia Porinetia supporter.

Some negotiations must have gone on between Tavini and the A here ia Porinetia.
The last name that we are hearing of is Cedric Mercadal as Health Minister.

Most of the new ministers are of high calibre in terms of academic achievement but might be rather light on their political engagement and experience.

President Brotherson will need to find two more women to reach gender parity and stay under the number of 10 ministers that he announced previously.

Although he has five days to form his government, we should know all the ministers by Monday.

Priorities for new government
The biggest challenge for this government and Tavini Huira’atira party as a whole will be to work with the French administration whose financial help to the country is around 200 billion Pacific francs (NZ$3 billion) a year.

Despite the long and historically skewed relationship between the independence party and the French state, open discussions with other potential investors, especially China, should not put any strain between the new local and the French administrations.

It has becoming increasingly necessary for this new government to be close to all the mayors of Mā’ohi Nui which is what the French administration had already put in place around 30 years ago.

This relationship between municipalities and the French state has allowed the latter to have a direct communication with the representatives of the populations, be their only intermediary and to set up agreements of inter-dependence between the parties involved.

The new government will try to seek this close relationship, particularly with the mayors of the Marquesas archipelago since it is planning to use those islands as an essential lever to boost tourism.

The Marquesas archipelago is only a three-hour flight to Hawai’i which welcomes 8 million tourists a year and the new government believes that by offering the Marquesas as a new tourist destination, it will boost both the local and the whole of Mā’ohi Nui’s economies.

Managing to bring in 3 percent of this new market in search of authenticity would be a substantial financial addition and would more than double the number of tourists visiting the territory year to around 300,000.

Infrastructure objective
In anticipation of this, building the necessary infrastructure — such as airport, wharves, parks, hotels — to welcome this potential tourist mass could only be achieved by working with the mayors.

On the other hand, the more pressing matter for this government will be to visit and help the town of Te’ahupo’o located on the west coast of the main island of Tahiti that was hit by torrential rain and flooding 10 days ago.

It left about 60 households desperate to find somewhere to live.

Te’ahupo’o is also the town where the 2024 Paris Olympic Games surfing competition will take place.

Tackling urban delinquency and homelessness around the capital Pape’ete is also part of the new administration’s programme which ties up with the warm welcome that Ma’ohi Nui wants to offer visiting tourists.

The last word is for Oscar Temaru about concerns that the independence party might face a repeat of 2004 and the “politics of intimidation”.

He says the French administration is witnessing an increase in popularity of Tavini Huira’atira and will think twice about trying to “shut the taps”.

Paris is also aware that all the political institutions in Ma’ohi Nui — the Assembly and the government — and in France (the three deputies seated in France’s National Assembly) have independence members to represent the people.

It is Temaru’s wish to also win the senatorial elections in order to strengthen his claim to self-determination.

His only worry is whether Paris might change the constitution during their governance. But at the moment, Ma’ohi Nui is allowing “the young people to govern this country”.

Ena Manuireva is an Aotearoa New Zealand-based Tahitian doctoral candidate at Auckland University of Technology and a commentator on French politics in Ma’ohi Nui and the Pacific. He contributes to Asia Pacific Report.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Fiji’s opposition leader Voreqe Bainimarama has been suspended for three years as an MP for breaching parliamentary privilege.

It comes after the ex-prime minister said the President, Ratu Wiliame Katonivere, had failed to protect the constitution and the rule of law in his opening statement for the 2023 parliamentary session on Monday.

The FijiFirst leader will be out of Parliament until 17 February 2026, after a midnight vote as both sides of the House clashed over Bainimarama’s suspension.

Leader of government business Lynda Tabuya said Bainimarama’s words “denigrated” the head of state when he uttered “seditious words”.

“Matters of offensive conduct towards Parliament must be taken seriously. It is even more important that members of Parliament uphold the required standard of behaviour in Parliament,” she said.

“In particular, the prohibition against speaking words that are disrespectful to our head of state as well as seditious words that breach the standing orders.”

The Parliamentary Privileges Committee had recommended that Bainimarama be immediately suspended for three years; that he provide a written apology to the President within 14 days; and issue apology to public within 48 hours.

It also recommended that he not be allowed to enter Parliament during the period of suspension; and if he fails to comply then necessary enforcement measures will be implemented.

Co-deputy Prime Ministers Viliame Gavoka and Professor Biman Prasad supported the former PM’s exclusion.

Gavoka said Bainimarama’s comments were an “insult” to President Katonivere and his “ignorant comments can destroy confidence” in the office of the head of state.

He urged all MPs to “defend the values” of Parliament and “denounce the ignorance” of the leader of opposition.

Professor Prasad said Bainimarama was a “repeat offender of parliamentary assault” and his words were “utterly pathetic”.

But Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka appealed to the Speaker Ratu Naiqama Lalabalavu and the parliamentarians as the “lone voice” from the government side for Bainimarama to be forgiven and he receive a lenient suspension.

Rabuka’s plea resulted in the government side amending their motion to reduce Bainimarama’s suspension to 18 months.

However, the opposition side still not did not support the amendment late into Friday night.

“You cannot apologise if you have done nothing wrong,” FijiFirst MP Jone Usamate said as he defended Bainimarama’s political fate.

While another opposition member, Faiyaz Koya, said they “did not find any guilt” in what their party leader said.

Bainimarama becomes the fifth MP to be suspended from the House after breaching privilege.

Previously:

• The current Speaker Ratu Lalabalavu was suspended for two years in 2015 as a Sodelpa MP;
• Former National Federation Party MP Tupou Draunidalo was suspended in June 2016 for the remainder of her term;
• Another Sodelpa MP, Ratu Isoa Tikoca, was suspended for two years in September 2016; and
• Current Home Minister Pio Tikoduadua was suspended for 6 months in 2019.

RNZ Pacific has contacted Bainimarama for comment.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Vanuatu Supreme Court judge Justice Oliver Saksak has upheld a decision by the former Speaker of Parliament to expel 19 government MPs from Parliament.

The court ruling could trigger the collapse of Vanuatu’s government but a subsequent appeal is likely to grant a stay of execution for the administration of Bob Loughman.

Gracia Shadrack, who resigned the speakership earlier this week, ruled last week that the 19, who include Prime Minister Loughman, had vacated their seats by failing to attend Parliament on three consecuative days.

The 19 MPs had sought a court ruling claiming their constitutional rights had been breached.

The group of MPs is planning to appeal and will seek a stay on the court’s decision.

If that appeal is rejected there is likely to be 19 byelections in Vanuatu.

It has also been reported locally that the remaining 13 government MPs are being encouraged to consider resigning and so forcing a full election.

The case came after the opposition had lodged a motion for a vote of no confidence which prompted the government to seek to remove the Speaker.

Both those motions were to be heard this past week but the appeal over the vacation of seats took precedence.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Vanuatu Supreme Court judge Justice Oliver Saksak has granted a stay on the vacation of 19 seats in the country’s Parliament.

On Tuesday, the Speaker of Parliament, Gracia Shadrack, declared the seats of Prime Minister Bob Loughman and 18 of his MPs vacant because they had been absent from Parliament on three consecutive occasions in breach of standing rules.

The MPs were absent on the third occasion to avoid a vote of no confidence motion, but they had also been striving through the past week to remove Shadrack, after he appeared to side with the opposition.

Shadrack encouraged the MPs to seek a court ruling on his actions and now Justice Saksak has issued a stay on the actions of the Speaker, with a court hearing to be heard from 10am tomorrow.

Meanwhile, the Speaker has adjourned Parliament until Friday when debate on his actions, and the motions that are in play, can begin.

RNZ Pacific’s correspondent in Vanuatu said the shutout of the government MPs was all people were talking about in the kava bars.

He said everyone in Vanuatu knew that under normal practice, it was the opposition that would boycott parliamentary sessions.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The speaker of the Vanuatu Parliament has declared the seats of the prime minister, the deputy prime minister and 16 other government MPs vacant.

The government had filed a motion to have the speaker, Gracia Shadrack, removed – a feud which saw the MPs and Prime Minister Bob Loughman boycott Parliament for three days last week.

This morning, Shadrack said their three days’ absence meant their seats were now vacant, announcing the suspended MPs one-by-one during a dramatic session of Parliament.

But MPs, including Prime Minister Loughman, refused to leave their seats, with security guards called onto the floor of Parliament as a shouting match developed.

“This is not proper. It does not honour the rights of a person who has allegations against them, the right to respond,” said Loughman, referring to a motion of no confidence in the government that was also due to be heard.

“And I hope Mr Speaker what the chair has done here this morning represents the democratic way not just here in Vanuatu but around the world.”

RNZ Pacific understands a Supreme Court challenge is already being prepared.

Parliament adjourned
Parliament has now been adjourned until Friday, with neither of the motions having been debated.

Speaking to RNZ Pacific after he adjourned Parliament, Shadrack said he expected a challenge.

“They have their constitutional right to go to the Supreme Court to determine over my announcement this morning,” he said, adding that his actions amounted to restoring “the integrity of the Parliament.”

“If they win they will come back, otherwise there will be byelections in 18 seats throughout Vanuatu.”

The same provision cited by Shadrack this morning was used last June to suspend 22 members of the opposition, which was challenged in the Supreme Court.

The government withdrew the suspension before it could be heard, but the Supreme Court ruled in the opposition’s favour.

An opposition motion of no confidence in the government was also due to be heard this morning.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz