The arrest and charging of British-Fijian publisher Charlie Charters has pushed Fiji’s anti-corruption watchdog into fresh controversy.

Charters’ arrest by police last weekend has raised sharp questions about whistleblowers, due process, and political pressure in the Pacific island nation.

The 57-year-old appeared in the Suva Magistrates’ Court on Monday charged with two counts of aiding and abetting.

The Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) alleges he helped an officer of the commission unlawfully release official information, which was then posted on his Facebook account, “Charlie Charters”.

In a statement, FICAC saID the first charge related to posts made between 2 November and 14 December 2025. The second related to a post on 2 February 2026.

Under section 13G of the FICAC Act, it is an offence for an officer or former officer to divulge official information without written authorisation.

Charlie Charters speaking outside the court.             Video: FijiVillage News

Section 45 of the Crimes Act states that a person who aids and abets an offence is taken to have committed that offence and is punishable accordingly.

Stopped at airport
Charters was stopped at Nadi International Airport on Saturday while travelling to Sydney.

He reportedly declined requests from FICAC officers to reveal his sources and spent two nights in custody before being granted bail.

The court imposed strict bail conditions, including surrendering his travel documents and a stop departure order.

A non-cash bail bond of $2000 was set with a surety. The matter has been adjourned to March 2.

FICAC said it had not issued a public comment earlier because the matter was under active investigation.

“It would have been inappropriate and contrary to established investigative practice to discuss a live investigation while inquiries were continuing, irrespective of commentary circulating on social media,” the statement read.

“The matter is now properly before the court and will proceed in accordance with due process.”

Agency challenged
But Charters’ lawyer, Seforan Fatiaki, has strongly challenged the agency’s actions.

He has publicly alleged that the arrest and detention were aimed at forcing his client to reveal his source instead of pursuing a genuine criminal investigation.

“It was made clear that Mr Charters’ arrest and detention were carried out for the sole purpose of extracting that information from him,” Fatiaki said.

“If Mr Charters will not volunteer that information, FICAC cannot lawfully use its powers of detention and arrest to pressure him into giving it.”

Fatiaki described the actions as a gross misuse of FICAC’s statutory powers, particularly the prohibition on departure from Fiji.

The case comes at a sensitive time for FICAC. Fiji’s Judicial Services Commission is reportedly of the view that the appointment of the agency’s current head, Lavi Rokoika, was not legal.

Appointed after sacking
She was appointed last May after the sacking of former commissioner Barbara Malimali.

The High Court has since ruled that Malimali’s removal was “unlawful”.

Fijian Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka has sought to distance his government from the unfolding saga.

“We will not interfere [with FICAC],” Rabuka told reporters in Suva.

He acknowledged Fiji does not have a whistleblower policy but said it needed one. Rabuka added that questions remained about “how do we know that the whistleblower is genuine and the facts that they raised are factual”.

As the case heads back to court next week, many in Fiji and across the Pacific will be watching closely.

For some, it is about whether anti-corruption laws are being upheld. For others, it is about whether those who publish leaked information can do so without fear of being forced to reveal their sources.

Republished from Pacific Media Network News with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka says his government will not interfere with the work of the country’s anti-corruption body following the latest turn of events involving a British-Fijian national.

On Monday, Charlie Charters, a former Fiji Rugby administrator and a journalist, was released on bail by the Suva Magistrates Court after being charged with aiding and abetting an unknown Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) whistleblower into releasing confidential information from the agency.

Charters, 57, was en route to Sydney on Saturday but was held at Nadi International Airport and reportedly asked by FICAC officers to reveal his sources in order to proceed with his scheduled flight.

He reportedly declined to comply and as a result spent two nights in FICAC custody before appearing in court yesterday. He has been released on strict bail conditions and has been ordered to surrender his travel documents.

Charters’ arrest comes amid a deepening constitutional crisis at FICAC.

According to local media, Fiji’s Judicial Services Commission, the body responsible for making recommendations to Fijian President on constitutional officers, is of the view that the appointment of FICAC’s current head Lavi Rokoika was not legal.

It makes the saga significantly complicated for Rabuka, as Rokoika was appointed in May last year following the sacking of FICAC’s previous chief, Barbara Malimali.

Appointment unlawful
While Rabuka said that the decision to dismiss Malimali was in response to the findings of a 650-page Commission of Inquiry led by Judge David Ashton-Lewis, the Fiji High Court has now ruled Malimali’s appointment was “unlawful”.

Charters has been using his Facebook platform to highlight what he describes as shortcomings of Rabuka’s coalition government which came into power in December 2022.

His posts have focused mainly on governance concerns, including issues at FICAC.

His arrest, detention, and charges have heightened anxiety among politicians, advocates and the public about FICAC and Rokoika using intimidation tactics — tactics for which the previous FijiFirst administration was accused.

“We will not interfere [with FICAC],” Rabuka told reporters in Suva when asked about the situation.

He said Fiji did not have a whistleblower policy but it needed one.

However, he added that questions needed to be asked about “how do we know that the whistleblower is genuine and the facts that they raised are factual”.

“Those are the things that will have to be considered before we formulate the policy on whistleblowing.”

Meanwhile, the case against Charters has been adjourned until March 2.

FICAC said the matter was now before the court and would proceed according to due process.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A court ruling in favour of Fiji’s dismissed anti-corruption chief has “embarrassed” Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka, a New Zealand-based Fiji politics academic says.

University of Canterbury distinguished professor Steven Ratuva told RNZ Pacific Waves that while the Fiji High Court decision on Barbara Malimali offered “clarity” on the separation of powers, it added “to the weight of responsibilities” piling up under Rabuka’s leadership.

On Monday, the court ruled that Malimali’s dismissal was unlawful — a decision she said “vindicated” her. Rabuka immediately announced that he would be appealing the decision, but later told local reporters that he would “consider” resigning if the appeal failed.

“[Resignation] is an option,” he said.

Despite this, Rabuka’s Information Minister Lynda Tabuya told reporters on Tuesday that the prime minister had the full support of the cabinet.

“It was a resounding sentiment in cabinet that we would not accept his resignation,” she said in a post-cabinet press briefing on Tuesday, adding that Rabuka had “unanimous support . . .  to continue to lead this country and continue to lead us.”

Rabuka had not admitted to any wrongdoing and reports in the media “need to be corrected,” Tabuya said.

Fiji military commander Major-General Jone Kalouniwai also weighed in on the turn of events, telling local media that the army is maintaining “a [situational] awareness of what is happening” given that the country was heading into an election period.

“It’s important for us to understand what’s happening. Looking at it from a security perspective, things can cascade into a different situation,” he told The Fiji Times.

Dr Ratuva said all the issues Rabuka was having to deal with were “leading him to breaking point”.

“The fact that he has signalled his willingness to resign if the appeal doesn’t come through, is something which only [Rabuka] himself will have to decide,” he said.

“A lot of people have been asking for his resignation in the last few months for different reasons, particularly in relation to the way some of these complex challenges have been handled by the government.

“So it depends very much on what’s going to happen after the appeal, and the process might go on for some time . . .  even the election might come in between.”

Fiji is expected to head to the polls anytime between August 7 (earliest) this year and 6 February 2027 (latest).

Dr Ratuva said Fijian opposition parties will try to use some of these issues faced by Rabuka as part of campaigning.

“Anything can be leveraged as a means of manoeuvring your opposition, so certainly it is something which will arise during the election campaigns,” he said.

He said other issues such as the cost of living, health, infrastructure, rising crime, drugs, would become campaign issues during the election.

The government under Rabuka, he said, would be on the defensive in terms of making sure that they would be re-elected.

“But then that depends very much on how they are able to handle these issues, and of course, the choice of the voters ultimately,” Dr Ratuva said.

“The number of scandals and the number of crisis, which have defined the rule of this particular coalition has diverted attention away from the real issues on the ground, so they have to live with it and the consequences are going to be felt in the next election.”

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka has confirmed that his Finance Minister — and one of three deputies — has resigned after being charged by the country’s anti-corruption watchdog.

Local media first reported that Professor Biman Prasad, the man in charge of government finances, had been charged with corruption-related offences under Fiji’s political party laws and was expected to resign.

According to local media reports, Dr Prasad was charged with allegedly failing to declare his directorship in hotel ventures as required under the Political Parties Act.

The development came less than a week after the resignation of co-Deputy Prime Minister Manoa Kamikamica, who is also facing corruption charges.

“Today, I received Biman Prasad’s formal notification of his resignation from Cabinet and as Deputy Prime Minister. He will remain a member of Parliament and caucus. His resignation follows the formal charges being laid against him by the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC),” Rabuka said in a video statement released by the Fiji government yesterday afternoon.

Dr Prasad, who is the leader of the National Federation Party, has served as a cabinet member since 24 December 2022. He was responsible for finance, strategic planning, national development and statistics portfolios.

Rabuka told fijivillage.com that he believed the cases against his two deputies would not be resolved quickly, and that “it may take some portfolio management and reshuffling”.

‘Shortest possible time’
However, in a statement last evening, Dr Prasad said he intended to “deal with this charge in the shortest possible time and in accordance with proper legal process”.

“My lawyers are dealing with this expeditiously,” he said.

He said Rabuka had “assured me of his personal support while I do so”.

“One thing I have learned in 11 years of political leadership is that it involves many challenges, often from unexpected places,” he said.

“This is just one more of those challenges to be dealt with calmly, patiently, and as swiftly as possible.”

Rabuka has appointed an MP from his ruling People’s Alliance Party to take over the ministerial portfolios that Dr Prasad and Kamikamica had been overseeing.

Kamikamica is being charged with perjury and giving false information to a public servant, while the details of the charges against Dr Prasad have yet to be made public by FICAC.

‘Political and institutional chaos’ – Labour Party
The Fiji Labour Party says the latest developments is a sign of “a total breakdown of leadership” under Rabuka.

“Fiji Labour Party notes with deep concern the ongoing political and institutional chaos gripping the coalition government,” it said in a statement.

“Instead of confronting the crisis head-on, the Prime Minister has chosen to downplay the gravity of the situation, pretending that everything remains ‘under control’.

“The truth is quite the opposite — the coalition is collapsing under the weight of its own hypocrisy, infighting, and betrayal,” it said.

The party added the government is “in free fall” and the country needs “renewal, not recycled politics”.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

You can wake up one morning in Fiji and feel like you’re living in a totally different country.

Overnight we have lost two of our three Deputy Prime Ministers — by many accounts these were the two who were perhaps among the most influential and pivotal in the running of this government.|

Just like that. No longer in cabinet.

For days news of Biman’s impending arrest was being posted about in advance — clearly leaked by people inside Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC). So it did not come as a total surprise.

But reading the reactions on social media — what has surprised, unnerved and confused many — especially government supporters, is how and why does a government charge their own when many in the previous government they wanted to be held accountable continue to walk free?

Why did charges against the two DPM’s take priority?

Is that a sign of how divided they are — or how upright and full of integrity they are?

Charges seem small
The charges brought against the two DPM’s seem small when compared to the significant impact of their removal from cabinet. PM Sitiveni Rabuka, when he was SODELPA leader in 2018, was charged with more or less the similar offence DPM Biman is being charged with — inaccurate declaration of assets and liabilities under the Political Parties Act.

Rabuka was acquitted on the eve of the 2018 election.

Many thought then the whole charge was nothing more than the former Bainimarama government trying to take out its main competitor ahead of the 2018 elections. There was a strong anti-FICAC sentiment then by those now in power.

The main gripe of the coalition parties coming in was that FICAC was being used by those in power for their political agenda — and needed to be disbanded and come under the Police Force.

Rabuka said as much to me in a 2022 interview.

Inevitably, many are now openly wondering if the same thing FijiFirst was accused of doing is happening here, and if this is a machiavellian political strategy for power. To take out a potential internal challenger and clear out a coalition partner so PAP can fight the next elections on its own and focus on winning it outright.

With the support of some former FijiFirst MP’s — PAP has more than enough numbers — and not as reliant on NFP and SODELPA any more.

Coalition has been great
The coalition has been great — but it has been a headache keeping everyone together and managing everyone’s competing interests.

However, the PM has grounds to argue that he is just following the process and maintaining the integrity of FICAC’s fight against corruption — that was severely compromised with the appointment of Barbara Malimali as per the Commission of Inquiry report.

That all he is practising are the principles of transparency, accountability and good governance. Nothing more, nothing less.

That matter is being heard in court with the ruling to be delivered by 23 January 2026 — three months away.

Rabuka has stated that “no one is above the law” and seems confident of weathering any political storm.

But the dark political clouds are forming. Expect more thunder and lightning strikes as more influential people in key positions are expected to be arrested, putting the political and judicial landscape in turmoil.

Forecast is uncertain.

Many storms before
Rabuka has been through many storms like this before. He says he continues to have the support of everyone on his side, including the two DPM’s recently charged.

For now he remains firmly in charge.

But what was once just whispers of internal dissent and division that many of us once dismissed as rumours is starting to grow, as politicians weigh their options.

Whether it turns into a split or full on rebellion, or everyone realise they have no choice but to fall in line, we shall wait and see.

Could we see a repeat of 1994 when Rabuka’s government was brought down from within but he managed to win enough in the elections and form a coalition with the GVP to remain in power?

As of now many in politics are trying to work out which way the wind will blow.

Stanley Simpson is director of Mai TV, general secretary of the Fiji Media Association (FMA) and a media commentator. This is an independent commentary first published on his Facebook page and republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Fiji Deputy Prime Minister Manoa Kamikamica has stepped down from his position on the eve of his court appearance for corruption-related charges.

Kamikamica has been charged by the country’s anti-corruption office with perjury and providing false information in his capacity as a public servant.

Kamikamica, who also serves as the Minister for Trade and Communications, informed Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka yesterday that he would focus on clearing his name in relation to the charges laid against him by the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC).

He is one of three deputy prime ministers in Rabuka’s coalition government.

“I have accepted his decision to step down, and he has assured me of his unwavering commitment to the government and the people of Fiji,” Rabuka said in a statement.

“I will be overseeing his portfolio responsibilities for the foreseeable future.”

The deputy prime minister was overseas on official duties and was returning to the country.

His case is scheduled to appear at the Suva Magistrates Court today.

FICAC has not publicly commented on the specifics of the case.

The charges were filed following investigations related to the Commission of Inquiry report into the appointment of Barbara Malimali as FICAC chief, according to the state broadcaster FBC.

FBC reported that FICAC officers had seized Kamikamica’s mobile phone in July during the execution of a search warrant.

Kamikamica is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

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

FBC reports that Kamikamica’s legal representative, Wylie Clarke, appeared before the court today and raised serious concerns about the validity of the charges.

Clarke told the court that the case was fundamentally flawed, both in its legal foundation and in the evidence supporting it.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A Fiji deputy prime minister has been charged by the country’s anti-corruption office with perjury and providing false information in his capacity as a public servant, according to local news media reports.

Manoa Kamikamica, who also serves as the Minister for Trade and Communications and a key part of Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka’s coalition government, is currently overseas on official duties.

His case is scheduled to be called on Wednesday at the Suva Magistrates Court.

According to Mai TV’s Stanley Simpson, Kamikamica will not attend court hearing and will be represented by his legal counsel Wylie Clark, who is the current head of the Fiji Law Society.

“The case, brought by the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption [FICAC] is listed under case number 06/25 in the Magistrates’ Anti-Corruption Division at Suva Court 4,” Simpson said.

“Kamikamica has referred all questions to his legal counsel.”

FICAC has not publicly commented on the specifics of the case.

According to the state broadcaster FBC, the charges were filed following investigations linked to the Commission of Inquiry report into the appointment of Barbara Malimali as FICAC chief.

“FICAC officers had seized Kamikamica’s mobile phone in July during the execution of a search warrant.”

Kamikamica is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The Fiji government looks set to pay around NZ$1.5 million in damages to the disgraced former head of the country’s anti-corruption agency FICAC.

The state is offering Barbara Malimali an out-of-court settlement after her lawyer lodged a judicial review of her sacking in the High Court in Suva.

Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka suspended Malimali from her role on May 29, following a damning Commission of Inquiry into her appointment.

Malimali was described as “universally corrupt” by Justice David Ashton-Lewis, the commissioner of the nine-week investigation, which involved 35 witnesses.

“She was a pawn in the hands of devious members of government, who wanted any allegations against them or other government members thrown out,” Ashton-Lewis told RNZ Pacific Waves earlier this month.

Tanya Waqanika, who acts for Malimali, told RNZ Pacific that her client was seeking a “substantial” payout for damages and unpaid dues.

Waqanika met lawyers from the Attorney-General’s Office in the capital, Suva, on Tuesday after earlier negotiations failed.

Expected to hear in writing
She declined to say exactly what was discussed, but said she expected to hear back in writing from the other party the same day.

A High Court judge has given the government until 3pm on Friday to reach a settlement, otherwise he will rule on the application on Monday.

“We’ll see what they come up with, that’s the beauty of negotiations, but NZ$1.5 million would be a good amount to play with after your career has been ruined,” Waqanika said.

“[Malimali’s] career spans over 27 years, but it is now down the drain thanks to Ashton-Lewis and the damage the inquiry report has done.”

She said Malimali also wanted a public apology, as she was being defamed every day in social media.

“I don’t expect we’ll get one out of Ashton-Lewis,” she said.

Adjournment sought
During a hearing in the High Court on Monday, lawyers for the state sought an adjournment to discuss a settlement with Waqanika.

However, she opposed this, saying that the government’s legal team had vast resources and they should have been prepared for the hearing.

Malimali filed a case against President Naiqama Lalabalavu, Rabuka and the Attorney-General on June 13 on the grounds that her suspension was unconstitutional.

Waqanika said the President suspended her on the advice of the Prime Minister instead of consulting the Judicial Services Commission.

Government lawyers approached Waqanika offering a compensation deal the same day she lodged a judicial review in the High Court.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The Fiji government is backing the appointment of the country’s new anti-corruption chief who was under investigation by the office she now heads, which has left Fijians asking questions.

Barbara Malimali — who was also the Electoral Commission chairperson — was revealed as the new Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) commissioner last Wednesday.

Malimali’s appointment, confirmed by the nation’s president on the advice of the Judicial Services Commission (JSC) — who report to the Attorney-General — has been slammed as “unbelievable” by one opposition MP, while the opposition leader in Parliament has said it raises “numerous questions . . . that need answers”.

The announcement was causing a stir due to it being unclear if she held the Electoral Commission chairperson role at the time of her appointment — raising concerns about conflict of interest.

But the issue became more critical when Malimali was taken for questioning by FICAC officers on her first day in the job as its boss, sanctioned by the anti-corruption agency’s acting deputy commissioner Francis Puleiwai.

However, the saga became even more bizarre when the government’s chief legal officer and minister responsible for the anti-corruption office, Attorney-General Graham Leung, criticised Puleiwai for not updating him for detaining Malimali.

In a statement, Leung said Puleiwai — who resigned later on the same day Malimali was detained, stating that she would “not be able to work in that institution when we know that a suspect is there” — was “legally obliged” to advise him of the activities of FICAC.

“This matter is particularly sensitive since Ms Puleiwai was herself an applicant for the position of commissioner. She was unsuccessful,” Leung said in a statement.

“As acting deputy commissioner, Ms Puleiwai has no role in the appointment of the commissioner. If Ms Pulewai has a problem with the appointment then, like every other public official or citizen, she has the right of access to the courts,” said.

He said Malimali still “has the responsibilities and powers of Commissioner” despite the investigation and was “entitled to the presumption of innocence”.

“I am concerned with a worrying trend in this country of maligning people based on rumours and innuendo,” he said.

“Trial and conviction by whispers are wrong and must stop. They run against the very grain of decency and fairness, which is the foundation of a society ruled by law. This is not who we are.”

In his statement, Leung defended Malimali’s appointment, saying all five members of the Electoral Commission had written to the Judicial Services Commission “expressing full confidence in the integrity of Malimali and explaining the context of the complaint against her for abuse of office”.

“They say the complaint has no basis. The commissioners are persons of high repute and integrity,” he stated.

He said the issue was “particularly sensitive” because Puleiwai was an unsuccessful applicant for the position of FICAC commissioner, adding her actions were “severely open to question”.

Puleiwai has rejected the suggestion that she had a “vested interested”.

“The only interest that I have is for the rule of law to be upheld.”

On Friday, FICAC put out a statement saying Malimali was back in office and ready to lead FICAC.

“Malimali is back in office this morning, Friday, 6 September 2024 and is ready to lead the commission,” the statement said.

“Malimali stated that she would not let the events of yesterday [Thursday] deter her from performing her duties as prescribed under the law,” it added.

Meanwhile, Judicial Services Commission has condemned the new FICAC chief’s arrest on Thursday, who it says is “a distinguished member of Fiji’s legal community”.

It remains unclear whether the abuse of office investigation against Malimali has been closed.

It is also unclear when Malimali had resigned from her role as the Electoral Commission chairperson.

RNZ Pacific has contact FICAC and the Electoral Commission Secretariat for comment.

Timeline:

Wednesday, September 4:

• Barbara Malimali revealed as the new FICAC commissioner.
• FICAC confirms Malimali is under investigation for an allegation for abuse of office.
• A former Prime Minister and Labour Party leader, Mahndra Chaudhry denounces the appointment and calls Prime Minister Rabuka to intervene.

Thursday, September 5:

• Rabuka tells state broadcaster government has no input in Malimali’s appointment.
• Local media report Malimali is taken in for questioning under orders from FICAC’s acting deputy commissioner Francis Puleiwai.
• Attorney-General Graham Leung weighs in backing Malimali and slams Puleiwai, saying she “must respect that appointment”.
• Leung says Malimali remains in charge despite investigation, which he claims, “has no basis”, according to five Electoral Commissioners who are “persons of high repute and integrity”, and Pulewai’s actions are “severely open to question”.
• Puleiwai resigns, saying she is “not be able to work in that institution when we know that a suspect is there”, adding “I don’t have any vested interest.”
• Opposition leader in parliament Inia Seruiratu calls the turn of events ‘transparency and accountability under fire’, saying the Malimali appointment situation raises “numerous questions…that need answers”.

Friday, September 6:

• Malimali is back in office and tells state broadcaster she would not let the saga “deter her from performing her duties”.
• Judicial Services Commission condemns the new FICAC chief’s arrest on Thursday, who it says is “a distinguished member of Fiji’s legal community”.
• It remains unclear whether the abuse of office investigation against Malimali has been closed as well as when Malimali stepped down from her role as the Electoral Commission chairperson.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Fiji’s former Elections Supervisor Mohammed Saneem is under investigation by the country’s anti-corruption agency for alleged abuse of office and has been stopped from fleeing the country.

The Fijian Elections Office (FEO) said Saneem was alleged to have “on numerous occasions . . . unlawfully authorised payments of sitting allowances” to members of the Electoral Commission (EC) and has been referred to the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC).

The FEO said the Constitutional Offices Commission had clarified to Saneem that the allowance for the chairperson and members of the EC remained at the same rate of FJ$500 (NZ$356) per person, per meeting.

Saneem, however, had continued to instruct for allowances to be paid to the commission’s members for attending events other than meetings, including social functions.

According to Section 5 of the Electoral Act 2014, meetings held by the Electoral Commission are to be determined by the chairperson or a majority of the members of the Commission.

The Electoral Commission could also hold meetings virtually.

The FEO said the former elections boss — who was suspended last month and resigned this week — “continued to deviate from this and constantly gave instructions for payment of FJ$500 allowance to the Electoral Commission members”.

Attorney-General Siromi Turaga confirmed to Fijivillage News that Saneem had been trying to board a flight to Australia on Friday morning but was stopped by border officials as he was now under investigation by FICAC.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Files submitted to the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) two years ago over alleged abuse of funds by a former Fiji Sugar Corporation (FSC) executive are believed to have “disappeared”, says Sugar Minister Charan Jeath Singh.

Singh said someone in FICAC would be held responsible for causing the disappearance of the files.

Singh said it was unacceptable that in a case of national importance involving taxpayers’ money, files had disappeared while FICAC found it easy to charge other people for abuse of office.

Speaking to FSC staff members in Labasa this week, Singh said evidence existed to prove allegations against the executive.

“We have sufficient evidence as a result of the investigation and every information points out at alleged corrupt dealing in the mill and at management level,” the minister said.

“The files were given to FICAC two years ago but someone may have deliberately dealt with it which is why it has disappeared,” he said.

“FICAC is good at charging other people in society but when it comes to big sharks, why can’t they be taken to task?”

Files to be resubmitted
Singh said someone in FICAC would be held responsible for losing the files.

“I will leave it with the minister responsible but we need to show the people and tell them what transpired.

“So we have resubmitted the files to FICAC and we want the investigations to be done right away so we can take the executive to task.

“This is to also warn people holding senior positions in state-owned companies that there is no room for corruption.”

Fiji Labour Party leader and National Farmers Union general secretary Mahendra Chaudhry, making submissions to the Standing Committee on Economic Affairs in Lautoka in May 2016, claimed two FSC directors had pocketed $2.4 million in directors’ remuneration between 2012 to 2014.

He claimed that the two directors had jointly picked up fees of $781,000 in 2012, $846,000 in 2013 and $791,000 in 2014, saying the figures he was quoting were lifted directly from FSC annual reports for those years.

In May 2017, Sugar Ministry Secretary Yogesh Karan told The Fiji Times that investigations into the executive were continuing.

He said he had done his part and had given the matter over to the relevant authorities — the Reserve Bank of Fiji and the Fiji Revenue and Customs Authority — to deal with.

Questions sent to FICAC on the comments made by Singh remained unanswered when this edition went to press.

Serafina Silaitoga is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Sixteen years later, Fiji is about to go to the polls for the third time since Bainimarama took power. One question voters may well ask is: has the good governance coup delivered on its promise to address corruption?

In this article we argue that, while there have been some gains, political will towards anti-corruption efforts in Fiji appears to be running out of steam.

While the phrase “good governance coup” is an oxymoron, there are signs that the government’s subsequent anti-corruption efforts have borne fruit.

The Worldwide Governance Indicators find that Fiji’s Control of Corruption percentile ranking has improved, from 60 in 2007 to 67.3 in 2021. This is better than Papua New Guinea (25) but lower than Micronesia (70) and Tuvalu (73).

In 2021, the country scored 55 out of 100 (with a score of 100 equating to clean and 0 very corrupt) and ranked 45 out of 180 countries on its first appearance in over a decade on Transparency International’s Corruption Perceptions Index.

On this index Fiji ranks better than neighbours Solomon Islands (score: 43/100), Vanuatu (45/100) and PNG (31/100). Fiji’s score was slightly better than the east African island nation Mauritius (which scored 54/100).

Corruption concerns Fijians
Fiji’s citizens are concerned about corruption. In a recent Global Corruption Barometer survey, 68 percent of respondents across the country said that corruption is a big problem in government; 61 percent said it was a big problem in the private sector.

However, the same survey found that bribery rates are low — 5 percent of respondents said they paid a bribe to get a service in the previous 12 months, compared to 64 percent of respondents from Kiribati.

Still, our analysis suggests these relatively positive results could be undermined by dwindling political will towards key anti-corruption organisations. To understand the level of political will towards anti-corruption efforts, we calculate the relative amount of funding for key state-based anti-corruption organisations (we’ve written more about this approach in relation to PNG and Solomon Islands).

To do so, we draw on over a decade of publicly available budget documents.

In 2007, the Bainimarama regime established the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption, known as FICAC, which became a key symbol of the good governance coup. FICAC has been accused of being politically motivated — in the lead up to the 2022 election the agency questioned the leader of the People’s Alliance (PA) party, Sitiveni Rabuka, and charged PA deputy leaders Lynda Tabuya and Dan Lobendahn with vote buying and breach of campaign rules.

If it wins the election, the PA party has recently pledged to phase out FICAC within 100 days of forming office.

While complaints to FICAC have significantly increased since it was established, it only responds to a small fraction.

FICAC spending declining
Though budgeted to receive an increase of F$2.2 million in real terms in the 2022-23 budget, our analysis shows that the government’s actual spending on FICAC has been declining.

In 2010 the government spent 0.5 percent of its budget on FICAC, which had halved by 2020-21. (It is budgeted to bounce back slightly in 2022-23, rising to 0.28 percent.) In real terms, spending on FICAC dropped by F$2.6 million between 2010 and 2020-21.

Similarly, spending on the Attorney-General’s Chambers reduced from 0.26 percent of the budget in 2010 to 0.12 percent in 2020-21 (in real terms, spending reduced by F$1.7 million). It is budgeted to receive 0.14% by 2022-23, but given a history of underspending it is likely this agency will receive less than what has been promised.

On a somewhat brighter note, the Office of the Auditor-General received a slightly higher proportion of the budget over the past decade: the government spent 0.15 percent of the budget on this agency in 2010 and 0.16 percent in 2020-21 (an increase of F$1.8 million in real terms).

This is set to dip back down to 0.15 percent by 2022-23. Despite not losing financial ground, as one of us (Neelesh) argues, Fiji’s Auditor-General faces questions about the office’s independence and impact.

Diminishing political will towards key state-based anti-corruption organisations is also evidenced by what is not in the budget. Despite the 2013 constitution providing for the establishment of an Accountability and Transparency Commission — which is supported by civil society groups — the government has not provided the funding required to establish this agency. (In the 2022-23 budget it provides a paltry F$20,000 for this agency, which pales in comparison to the F$10.5 million budgeted for FICAC.)

In February 2021, Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum explained that the budgetary allocation for the Accountability and Transparency Commission would not be forthcoming as a bill outlining its responsibilities had not been approved by Parliament. This is still the case.

Financial backing for police
The government has increased financial support to the country’s police force. Spending on the police increased from 4.9 percent in the 2010 budget to 5.7 percent in 2020-21 — an increase of F$78 million in real terms.

In comparison, in its 2020 budget the Papua New Guinean government spent just over 2 percent on its police force, and this is budgeted to fall to 1.6 percent by 2022. Fiji’s police, however, have their own problems with corruption.

The Global Corruption Barometer survey found that, compared to other institutions, more people thought the police, along with members of Parliament, were involved with corruption. Cuts to key anti-corruption organisations may exacerbate this.

Further reforms are clearly needed. Beyond being well funded and staffed, anti-corruption agencies need to be independent and publicly accountable, which suggests the need for multi-stakeholder oversight involving politicians, the business community and civil society.

This could mean reforming — through greater oversight and the involvement of independent stakeholders — rather than abolishing FICAC. Establishing and funding an independent Accountability and Transparency Commission to investigate permanent secretaries and others holding public office could also help.

Whatever the outcome of the 14 December election, the next government will need to quickly establish (or re-establish) its anti-corruption credentials if Fiji is to build on any gains it has already made in the fight against corruption.

Grant Walton is a fellow at the Development Policy Centre and the author of Anti-Corruption and its Discontents: Local, National and International Perspectives on Corruption in Papua New Guinea; Husnia Hushang is school administrator at the ANU Research School of Economics, and a research assistant at the Development Policy Centre; and Neelesh Gounder is senior lecturer in economics and deputy head of school (research) in the School of Accounting Finance and Economics at the University of the South Pacific, Suva. This article is republished from the Devpolicy Blog under a Creative Commons licence.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

People’s Alliance candidate Lynda Tabuya claims her 16-year-old daughter was “harassed” by the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) officers last week.

Tabuya made this allegation in a video posted on social media.

“This is my daughter coming back from school and they asked her where I was,” she said.

“And she said she didn’t know and then they said to her, ‘tell your mother that FICAC is looking for her’.”

She said this step taken by FICAC was unacceptable.

“You come to my home and harass my child, my 16-year-old who was just coming back from school, just did her exam.

“It’s just very shameful.”

Made daughter panic
Tabuya said this made her daughter panic and worry about what would happen to her mother.

“You know, they could have asked her, is there an adult in the home, can we see someone?

“But no, they came and my family was at home and they rang the doorbell like 10 times, 15 times in a row with my children inside.

“What are you doing FICAC. If you wanted to find me, you know where to find me, you have means to find me, but don’t harass my children.”

• Questions sent to FICAC by The Fiji Times on the claims made by Tabuya remained unanswered.

Rakesh Kumar is a Fiji Times journalist. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

By Sri Krishnamurthi in Suva

In a dramatic afternoon, more than 1000 people sang Fijian songs of jubilation as Chief-Justice Anthony Gates dismissed the appeal by the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) against former Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka.

In a jam-packed High Court 2, Chief Justice Gates said the magistrate was correct to dismiss the original charges of not guilty of providing a false declaration of assets under electoral rules.

The FICAC took its appeal to the High Court as was its legal right.

Chief Justice Gates said that had Rabuka been found guilty, he would have had the right to appeal his case in the High Court too.

In his 36-page ruling, Chief Justice Gates said the magistrate had been correct in his findings that the prosecution had not been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt.

He said that the interview conducted by FICAC with Rabuka left many answers unprobed or unclarified.

-Partners-

He went on to say such interviews should always be conducted on the basis that reliance may have to be made solely on that procedure.

Acquitted last month
Rabuka was acquitted of the charges last month but FICAC had appealed that decision, taking its case to the High Court.

The hearing lasted more than an hour, after which Rabuka emerged to the cheers of joy from his supporters wearing a white shirt over which he draped a red scarf, all the time smiling but looking relieved.

Now that he is a free man he can stand as a candidate in the Fiji general election as the leader of SODELPA, the second largest political party after the ruling FijiFirst Party.

Voting is on Wednesday.

Vandhana Bhan from Radio Tarana, who got close to Rabuka’s white SUV, asked him the age-old question “how are you feeling?”

Rabuka replied, “great and getting better.”

She asked Rabuka if he had anything to say to the people? “Thank you to all of them for their prayers,” he said before being whisked away.

Sri Krishnamurthi is a journalist and Postgraduate Diploma in Communication Studies student at Auckland University of Technology. He is attached to the University of the South Pacific’s Journalism Programme, filing for USP’s Wansolwara News and the AUT Pacific Media Centre’s Asia Pacific Report.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz