The founding members of the FijiFirst party, including former prime minister Voreqe Bainimarama and ex-attorney-general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, have resigned.

Sayed-Khaiyum confimed that party president Ratu Joji Satalaka, vice-president Selai Adimaitoga, acting general-secretary Faiyaz Koya and treasurer Hem Chand have also resigned from the party, according to local media reports.

Sayed-Khaiyum said the other vice-president Ravindran Nair and founding member Salesh Kumar have also resigned.

He said the resignation letters were given to the Registrar of Political Parties last Friday, June 7.

One FijiFirst MP, Ketal Lal, posted on Facebook: “Sad day for Fiji” after the news was made public.

Dialogue Fiji executive director Nilesh Lal said the “mass resignation of founding members and senior officials is probably one of the most ill-conceived moves on the part of the founding members of the FijiFirst party”.

Lal said the move will “severely weaken” the position of the two minor parties — Sodelpa and NFP — in the coalition government.

Minor parties losing ‘bargaining chip’
“It was always in the interests of NFP and Sodelpa that FijiFirst remained a strong, united and viable party, and with this latest development, this is clearly not the case any longer. Both Sodelpa and NFP lose their bargaining chip, with the demise of FijiFirst.”

RNZ Pacific has contacted the Registrar of Political Parties, Ana Mataiciwa, for comment.

Last week, FijiFirst confirmed that it had sacked 17 MPs after they voted for a pay rise — going against a party directive.

However, the expelled Fijifirst MPs said they were going to contest the decision and would remain parliamentary opposition, highlighting divisions within the largest single party in the Fijian Parliament.

Mataiciwa, who was also the Supervisor of Elections, said FijiFirst needed to amend its consitution by June 28 or risk deregistration.

She told local media the party’s constitution did not have guidelines on how internal party disputes were resolved, which was in breach of the Political Parties (Registration, Conduct, Funding and Disclosures) Act 2013.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The Fiji government has announced its “rebuilding our future together” Budget with a spend of FJ$4.3 billion (NZ$3.2 billion) to address the high cost of living and pay for the hefty bill racked up by the former FijiFirst administration and the global pandemic, coupled with multiple tropical cyclones and the effects of Russia’s war on Ukraine.

Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Finance Professor Biman Prasad said the focus of the budget was navigate the country from its economic crisis to provide a better standard of living for its people.

Professor Prasad said the deficit was higher than he wanted and nearly 25 percent of the budget would go to servicing debt.

“We have too much government debt for the size of our economy and that remains one of our biggest challenges. We must continue to carefully manage our revenue spending.”

He said the budget “stabilises revenue and debt level and puts the country on a sustainable path”.

Financial summary
Total government expenditure for the 2023/2024 Budget is $4.3 billion with a projected revenue of $3.7 billion — a deficit of $639 million. Fiji starts July with a debt-to-GDP ratio of almost 88.8 pecent.

Here’s a list of the major spending and projects:

Tax policies
Increases

• Value Added Tax increases to 15 percent on most food, with the intension to pump an estimated $446m into the economy.
• 5 percent increase to the excise tax on alcohol and tobacco.
• The excise on carbonated/ sugar-sweetened beverages will be increased from 35 cents per litre to 40 cents per litre.
• A domestic excise of 40c per kilogram or per litre, and import excise of 15 percent, will be introduced on carbonated drinks, ice cream, sweet biscuits, snacks, and sugar confectionery.
• Motor vehicle import excise duty will increase on all new and used passenger vehicles by an additional 5 percent.
• The corporate tax rate will increase from the current 20 percent to 25 percent.
• New companies eligible for reduced corporate tax for listing on the South Pacific Stock Exchange will have their tax rate increased from the current 10 percent to 15 percent. This will be for new companies and only for a period of seven years. These corporate tax rate increases will add about $73.5m in revenue.
• Departure Tax will increase from the current $100 to $125 effective from August 1 and will further increase by an additional $15 to $140 effective from January 1, 2024. This will add a total of $30m towards overall tax revenues.

Reductions

• 21 basic food items continue to attract zero VAT with the inclusion of prescribed medicine to the list.
• Reduction in fiscal duty from 32 percent to 15 percent on canned mackerel (except canned tuna), corned mutton, corned beef and beef products, canned tomatoes, prawns and duck meat.
• Fiscal duty on sheep/lamb meats will be reduced to zero. For beef meat the duty is being reduced from 32 percent to 15 percent.
• Reduction in import excise on chicken portions such as wings, drumsticks, feet, thighs, etc from 15 percent to 0 percent.
• Concession on smartphones will be removed and replaced with a fiscal duty of 5 percent.

Education

• Education gets the highest allocation in this budget – $845m.
• Biman Prasad announced all Tertiary Scholarship and Loans Service debt — $650m owed by more than 50,000 students — is written off. But it comes with the caveat that these students will have to save a bond. The bond savings will be years of study multiplied by 1.5, and those who choose not to save the bond will have to pay the equivalent cost amount.
• The rebranded Fijian scholarship scheme will have a total budget of $148.2m.
• The salaries budget for the Ministry of Education increased to $322.6m, to cover existing teachers and 179 new teaching and non-teaching positions.
• There is $8.9m for salary upgrades for teachers completing qualifications for higher pay.
• $5.7m for the rural and maritime teaching allowance budget.
• Free education and transport assistance to ECE, primary and secondary school students, with a total funding allocation of more than $100m.
• There is also money for back to school support, and maintenance and upgrading of schools.
• Investment in the technical colleges, working together with existing service providers, including the newly established Pacific Polytech.
• A revamp the apprenticeship scheme in the next few months and also review the NTPC Levy and how best to support and fund skill upgrades in the workforce.
• Tertiary institutions get $103.3m, the grant for the University of the South Pacific is restored, and they have allocated extra money towards clearing the USP outstanding grants.
• There is also an extra $500,000 for Sangam Institute of Technology to accommodate additional nursing students, “in light of the current shortage”.

Health and disability

• Health Ministry is allocated a budget of $453.8m, a significant increase of $58.7m from the previous budget.
• Salaries and wages budget for the Health Ministry has increased to $126.4m.
• This will cater for 250 intern nurses to move up to become registered nurses; 237 new intern nurses; 46 nursing assistants; 50 nursing aides; 40 midwives; 94 medical laboratory scientists; and additional support staff in various hospitals and non-medical officers for the Fiji Pharmaceutical & Biomedical Services to strengthen capacity and improve procurement efficiency.
• Nursing assistant and nurse aide positions have been created to support the nurses’ focus on their core role, where these aides and assistants will take over the non-clinical responsibilities like making the bed, getting the consumables etc. The government is also providing $11.6m for the upgrade of nurses’ salaries and overtime.
• $63m has been allocated for public health programmes, Emergency Radiology and Laboratory Services, procurement of drugs, consumables, medicines, and purchase of bio-medical equipment and accessories.
• $2.5m is allocated for the Kidney Dialysis Treatment Subsidy. The allocation has been increased by $1m from this year’s level to cater for the increase in the dialysis subsidy from the current $150 per session to $180.
• $16.4m is allocated for the upgrade and maintenance of urban hospitals and institutional quarters, permanent walkway for the maternity hospital at CWM, purchase, installation and replacement of ICT equipment, and a major interior upgrade of Labasa hospital.
• From August 1, only patients with a combined household income of $30,000 or less per annum can qualify for the free services at private practitioners.

Tourism

• Tourism Fiji is allocated an operating grant of $7m and to support new marketing strategies an increased Marketing Grant of $30m is provided in the new financial year.

Infrastructure, roads and water

• $200m has been allocated for the maintenance of hospitals, health centres, schools, public buildings, government quarters, roads and bridges and water infrastructure.
• The water sector will have an increased budget of $250.8m. This is a major increase of almost $60m compared to the current budget.
• $51.2m has been allocated for the completion of the Viria water project. The total cost of the project is approximately $400m.
• Government is working with the Asian Development Bank for a major institutional revamp of the Water Authority, including governance, investment planning, asset management, infrastructure replacement and upgrade, review of water tariffs, investment in people and improving customer service management. This will cost over $500m to replace the 40-year-old pipe system which is leaking underground.
• An increased allocation of $100.6m is allocated for road maintenance.
• Fiji Roads Authority is allocated a budget of $387.6m which comprises $14.7m for operations and $372.9m for capital expenditure.
• In the last eight years, a total of around $3.1b was spent by the road authority without any strategic plan, without much priority and without proper costing.
• $82.2m for the Transport Infrastructure Investment Sector Project financed through Asian Development Bank and World Bank loans of US$100m and US$50m, respectively.
• Public Works, Meteorological Service and Transport Ministry is allocated a sum of $98.3m.
• Government has also re-established the Public Works Department (PWD) to improve the state of rural roads around the country with an initial setup cost of $5m.

Social welfare and pension

• Ministry of Women, Children and Social Protection funding allocation has increased from $147.7m to $200.2m.
• More than 90,000 thousand people on social welfare will directly benefit from increased monthly allowances of 15 and 25 percent.
• $100,000 is allocated to cater for the establishment of a new Department of Children.
• $19.9m has been allocated for the Child Protection Allowance. This is an increase of $6.2m.
• The Family Assistance Scheme is allocated a budget of $45.6m. This is an increase of $11.5m from the current financial year. A total of 26,000 households are expected to be assisted in this financial year.
• $43million is allocated to cater for disability allowance, bus fare subsidy for elderly and disabled, electricity subsidy to households below $30,000 income and insurance for social welfare recipients. Over 100,000 people are expected to benefit from this.
• Those aged 70 years and above, and on the social pension system, will receive a 25 percent increase in allowances. This means the monthly allowance will increase from $100 a month to $125 a month effective August 2023. Those between the age of 65 to 69 years will have their monthly allowances increased from $100 to $115.
• The social pension scheme is allocated a large budget of $78.2m, an increase of $23.2m to cater for the needs of 54,200 senior citizens.
• Effective from August 2023, the 1,500 FNPF pensioners who had their pension rates reduced by the military regime will be able to access the Government social pension allowance of $125 if they are above the age of 70 or $115 if they are between 60 to 69 years.

Civil service and cutbacks

• Review of the current minimum wage rate to be done in the next financial year.
• The government is working together with the workers’ representatives to review the overall pay and benefits of the civil servants.
• In the next six to nine months, government will review the civil service remuneration and pending the review, the salary structure of the civil service will be readjusted to be commensurate with the work the civil servants are doing for the nation.
• Government ministers have taken a 20 percent pay cut; they are significantly cutting down ministerial travel allowances put in place by the previous government.
• Travel allowance of the Prime Minister, the current 250 percent per diem loading, will be reduced to 100 percent.
• Ministers will have their top-up reduced from 200 percent to 50 percent.
• For assistant ministers the top-up will be reduced from the current 100 percent to 25 percent.
• Apart from these major reductions, Government will remove “all the exorbitant incidental allowances that are currently provided”.

Culture and arts

• Ministry of iTaukei Affairs, Culture, Heritage and Arts has been allocated a budget of $38.6m, a major increase of $23.2m from this year’s allocation
• To strengthen iTaukei administration and provincial councils, a grant of $10.8m is allocated to fund the 14 provincial councils, including $4.3m to fund the salaries and wages of 182 provincial council officers and other operational expenses of around $6.1 million.
• The Turaga-ni-Koro monthly allowance will be increased from $100 to $150 per month for all 1,181 Turaga-ni-Koro for which a total sum of $2.1 million is allocated.
• The Mata-ni-Tikina quarterly allowance will be increased by $150 per quarter, which is equivalent to an increase of $50 per month for the 262 Mata-ni-Tikina.
• $4m is allocated for iTaukei Land Development to help landowners with the development of their land for commercial purposes.
• To recognise and support the Turaga-ni-Yavusa in decision-making and Vanua administration, a monthly allowance of $100 has been allocated for 648 Turaga-ni-Yavusa under the Vanua Leadership Allowance with a sum of around $800,000.

Agriculture and Sugar

• Ministry of Agriculture and Waterways is allocated a budget of $95.2 million in this budget which is an increase of $37.3 million.
• For the first time, the government will be providing weedicide and fertilizer subsidy for non-sugar crops which includes rice, ginger, dalo, and cassava, with a funding of $1m to boost production of these crops.
• The Ministry of Multi-Ethnic Affairs and Sugar Industry is allocated a sum of $51.7m in the new financial year, of which $49.7m is for the sugar unit.
• With the aim to increase cane production from current production of 1.6m tonnes to 1.9m tonnes by 2024 season, a sum of $11m is allocated for the Sugar Development and Farmers Assistance Program, New Farmers and Lease Premium Assistance, Weedicide Subsidy, Farm Incentive Program and Cage Bins.

Fisheries, land and SME

• Ministry of Fisheries and Forestry is allocated a budget of $41.6m. This will support the expansion of aquaculture, shrimp farming, seaweed Development Programme, Multi-Species Hatchery, construction of ice plants and the supply of tilapia fingerlings and prawn frys to farmers in the Western Division.
• Ministry of Lands and Mineral Resources is allocated a budget of $30.1m to enable the Ministry to continue effectively and efficiently administer and regulate the land and mineral resource sector
• Ministry of Trade, Co-operatives and Small Medium Enterprises and Communications is allocated a budget of $116.5m in the next financial year, an increase of $25.3m from this year’s allocation.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

It has been six months now, but I have to make a strange admission. I miss the laughs I used to get over the pseudo-authoritative pronouncements of Fiji’s former attorney-general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum (pictured).

I recall that he got a bit over-excited in January this year. That was when he decided to lecture the new government on “constitutionalism” and “rule of law”.

This was apparently without any reflection on how he and his FijiFirst party government had performed by the rule of law standards on which he was pontificating.

But in the last few days he decided to debate Deputy Prime Minister Manoa Kamikamica on the FijiFirst party’s 2022 financial accounts, apparently insisting that FFP was not insolvent.

This was never going to be an equal contest. Kamikamica is a chartered accountant. Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, well — he isn’t.

You don’t need to be an accountant to read a balance sheet — or to understand the simple definition of insolvency.

It’s not hard. You are insolvent if you “cannot pay your debts as they fall due”. You can find the accounts of all the main political parties on the Fiji Elections Office website.

More cash than others
FFP’s balance sheet (see image) says it has cash and term deposits of more than $270,000 in the bank.

That’s pretty good. It’s actually more cash than all the other political parties combined. But FFP also has debts (called, in accountant-speak, “payables and accruals”).

These come to well over $1.6 million. Once you add and subtract all the smaller stuff, FFP is left with net liabilities of just over $1 million.

In other words, that’s $1 million that FFP, even if it sold everything it owns, still could not pay to its creditors.

That $1.6 million in debts “fell due” months ago. And FFP could not pay them as they fell due. So FFP is insolvent.

Why pretend otherwise? Luckily for FFP, there isn’t a simple legal way for a creditor to wind up a political party for not paying its debts. Presumably FFP’s unpaid suppliers have learned that bitter lesson a bit late.

Learning lessons
But we are all learning lessons about FFP. Six months ago it was all-powerful. Its leaders sat in taxpayer-funded government offices and did (pretty much) whatever they wanted.

They regularly lectured the rest of us on all of our failings and all the things we were doing wrong. They exuded competence. Fast forward to June 2023.

The same FFP — which previously ran a government that spends $4 billion a year — had been suspended because it couldn’t prepare its own accounts on time.

The deadline for submitting political party accounts is March 31 each year. That’s in the Political Parties Act. Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum presumably knew that because, after all, he “wrote the law”.

FFP’s accounts were not submitted by March 31. The Acting Supervisor of Elections (in stark contrast to her predecessor) did not fire off a suspension letter one day later.

She gave FFP (and some other political parties) an extension of time to put in their accounts. Six weeks later, FFP still had not filed its accounts.

And at that point even the most reasonable supervisor is entitled to be annoyed. That was when the suspension letter went out. Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum’s reaction at the time was the usual legalistic bluster unsupported by the facts. FijiFirst, he said, had not been afforded “due process and natural justice”.

Failed to meet deadline
He did not elaborate. And what could he say? His party had been given a six-week extension of time and still not met the deadline under the law he had himself drafted. And then we found out.

FFP was deeply in debt — and presumably too embarrassed to tell the rest of us. If it hadn’t been suspended, we would probably still not know.

What else can we learn from the accounts of the former ruling party? We can see from its balance sheet that it began 2022 with (cash and term deposits) more than $860,000 in the bank.

That’s the sort of money other politicians could only dream of. At that time the People’s Alliance and National Federation Party, between them, had less than $20,000.

However FijiFirst then went on to spend $4.2 million — or more accurately, it ran up debts of that amount, and now it has to find $1.6m to pay off those debts.

That is because FFP raised only $2.2 million in donations. I say “only” — but that $2.2 million was twice as much as the three parties now in government could collect.

More lessons
There are other, bigger, lessons to learn from all of this — lessons about money and politics. What was FFP thinking as it threw around the cash in the 2022 election campaign?

Who would spend $1.6 million they didn’t have? The answer — a party that thought that, as long as it could win, the cash would keep rolling in.

No political party in Fiji’s history has ever had millions of dollars to spend.

And no political party in Fiji has ever cashed in on its political power as cynically as FFP did in the past 10 years. It was FFP that made the laws on electoral funding for political parties.

Companies were not allowed to contribute — only individuals and only up to $10,000 each. All donors had to be publicly disclosed — this included someone who put $2 in a bucket during a soli.

SODELPA leader Viliame Gavoka famously commented on how the laws required his party to issue a receipt for selling a $1 roti parcel. FFP of course, did not have to bother with the small stuff.

Soli? Roti parcels? Why bother when you can just wait for the $10,000 cheques? And the cheques rolled in — with embarrassing enthusiasm.

Early donor lists
Many of us saw the early FFP donor lists when they were published. Prominent business families fell over themselves to write their $10,000 cheques.

Of course, these cheques were from “individuals”. Those individuals were company directors, their spouses and even their under-age children, even if those children (and probably some of the spouses) didn’t have bank accounts to write cheques from.

You would hear from other, less enthusiastic, business people about invitations to FFP fund-raisers. You went — and you took your chequebook with you — because if you didn’t, well…

One business man complained to me: “If I pay, I get to talk to them — but they don’t do anything about my business problems anyway.”

Fiji is not the first country to encounter unhealthy problems about money and politics.

These create challenges in every democracy. In Fiji’s so-called “true democracy”, the rules about who donated money were supposed to be transparent.

The Political Parties Act originally required the Supervisor of Elections to publish the names of people who donated to political parties. But as FFP’s donors squirmed with discomfort under the spotlight of social media, in 2021 FFP quietly changed the law — buried, of course, in one of those Bills that would be rushed to Parliament on two days’ notice and rushed through the infamous Standing Order 51.

The law change meant that those party donor lists still had to be disclosed to the Supervisor of Elections — but the Supervisor no longer had to publish them in the newspapers.

Climate of political fear
Of course, in the climate of political fear that FFP actively promoted, that created a separate problem.

The ruling party always collects the millions. But the opposition parties would have to work much harder to collect their cash because no one with any serious money wanted to be identified on those disclosure lists as giving money to the opposition.

Because, even though the Supervisor of Elections no longer had to publish those lists, any member of the public could still inspect them.

Most Fiji citizens might not know that. But the one person who would know that was the general secretary of FFP — also the minister for elections, attorney-general and minister for economy.

Now, however, for the first time since 2014, we can do something about our money-and-politics laws.

Those laws need to be reviewed, with a strong eye on the lessons of the past.

But the most critical lesson is probably not about those laws. It is about the climate of fear that enabled one political party to raise millions of dollars to keep itself in power while keeping all of its opponents out of cash.

Some good news?
Finally, for diehard FijiFirst supporters — a small spot of good news in those accounts. Apparently FFP still has 6120 “promotional sulu” in stock.

The sulu, according to the accounts (Note 11), have been “fully expensed”. This is because “realisable value cannot be determined with reasonable accuracy.” This is the way accountants say: “We don’t think anybody wants them so we can’t put any value to them.”

Perhaps to show their loyalty, FFP’s fans could buy the sulu to pay off the $1.6 million debt. This would cost only $270 per sulu. Just thought I’d try to help.

Richard Naidu is a Suva lawyer who writes a regular independent column for The Fiji Times. He has enough sulu. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Fiji’s Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka has played down criticism he is leading an administration that practices nepotism and favouritism.

The Rabuka-led three-party coalition government has been accused of rewarding loyalists with top positions in state-backed institutions and organisations.

There are some Fijians who claim Rabuka’s coalition is walking the same path as the previous FijiFirst government, which was also accused of rewarding party supporters with government jobs and contracts when it was in power from 2014 to 2022.

But Rabuka, while not categorically denying the accusations, said the opinions of detractors did not worry him.

“[My reaction is] that I should not worry about that,” Rabuka told RNZ Pacific at Bau Island following the conclusion of the first meeting of the Great Council of Chiefs.

He said criticism received by his government was healthy and a part of democracy.

“It is a good thing that people speak out [about good governance concerns].”

‘Can they do better?’
“What I can say, or all I can say is ‘can they do better?’” he added, pointing out if his critics were good enough to offer a better alternative.

But the country’s former attorney-general and economy minister Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum has alleged Rabuka’s government has been offering people unfair advantage on the basis of “political allegiance”.

Speaking to local media outside a Suva courthouse on Tuesday, Sayed-Khaiyum said former prime minister Voreqe Bainimarama’s FijiFirst-made appointments to government boards and institutions were due to “their capability or the capacity to assist”.

“We have people being appointed on boards not because of what they know, what they can contribute but who they are, who they know, whose political allegiance they have,” he claimed.

“When we [FijiFirst] appointed people to boards it was all about those institutions, those bodies started making revenue, start collecting revenue, start paying dividends to the government.”

He gave the example of Airports Fiji Limited, a government commercial company, paying more than F$40 million in dividends to government which he said was “unprecedented” when it happened before the covid pandemic.

Sayed-Khaiyum claimed Rabuka’s government was rewarding individuals based on the political connections they had rather than on merit.

“So, people are now being appointed to those positions not because of their capability or the capacity to assist but over who they are, which political parties they belong to, what province they come from, what ethnicity they are, who they know, [or] whether they were failed [political] candidates or not.”

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Fiji’s Department of Information spent $889,234.84 in taxpayer funds to the Fiji-owned company Vatis Communications until its contract was terminated earlier this year.

Prime Minister and Minister for Information and Public Enterprises Sitiveni Rabuka revealed this in Parliament last week in response to questions raised surrounding the engagement of Vatis Communications by the Ministry of Information under the Voreqe Bainimarama-led FijiFirst government.

Rabuka said Vatis had been engaged by the Department of Information from September 2019 to January 2023 to provide social media management services for the Fiji government social media platforms.

He said the department did not have the specifics for the engagement of Vatis by other ministries.

“The Department of Information entered into two one-year contracts with Vatis, commencing on September 24, 2019, and October 1, 2022, respectively, which also included provision for extensions,” Mr Rabuka said.

“The first contract between the Department of Information and Vatis commenced on September 24, 2019, and was valued at $280,000 VIP.

“The second contract which commenced on October 1, 2020, was valued at $295,412 VIP.”

The PM said that according to the Registrar of Companies records, Vatus was established on January 22, 2018, while the advertisement for the initial expression of interest for a social media management firm was posted on August 17, 2019.

Responding to questions on its experience and motivation, Rabuka noted Vatis had previous experience working with multiple and diverse range of stakeholders that included government ministries and statutory organisations, independent agencies and private organisations; and their experience included crisis management and strategic communication services on social media platforms, among other things.

Timoci Vula is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The Fiji government is signalling that it will not completely tear down the country’s controversial media law which, according to local newsrooms and journalism commentators, has stunted press freedom and development for more than a decade.

Ahead of the 2022 general elections last December, all major opposition parties campaigned to get rid of the Media Industry Development Act (MIDA) 2010 — brought in by the Bainimarama administration — if they got into power.

The change in government after 16 years following the polls brought a renewed sense of hope for journalists and media outlets.

But now almost 100 days in charge it appears Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka’s coalition is backtracking on its promise to get rid of the punitive law, a move that has been condemned by the industry stakeholders.

“The government is totally committed to allowing people the freedom of the press that will include the review of the Media Act,” Rabuka said during a parliamentary session last month.

“I believe we cannot have a proper democracy without a free press which has been described as the oxygen of democracy,” he said.

Rabuka has denied that his government is backtracking on an election promise.

“Reviewing could mean eventually repealing it,” he told RNZ Pacific in February.

“We have to understand how it [media act] is faring in this modern day of media freedom. How have other administrations advance their own association with the media,” he said.

He said he intended to change it which means “review and make amendments to it”.

“The coalition has given an assurance that we will end that era of media oppression. We are discussing new legislation that reflects more democratic values.”

And last week, that discussion happened for the first time when consultations on a refreshed version of a draft regulation began in Suva as the government introduced the Media Ownership and Registration Bill 2023.

The bill is expected to “address issues that are undemocratic, threatens freedom of expression, and hinders the growth and development of a strong and independent news media in Fiji.”

The proposed law will amend the MIDA Act by removing the punitive clauses on content regulation that threatens journalists with heavy fines and jail terms.

“The bill is not intended as a complete reform of Fiji’s media law landscape,” according to the explanations provided by the government.

No need for government involvement
But the six-page proposed regulation is not what the media industry needs, according to the University of the South Pacific’s head of journalism programme Associate Professor Shailendra Singh.

“We have argued there is no need for legislation,” he said during the public consultation on the bill last Thursday.

“The existing laws are sufficient but if there has to be a legislation there should be minimum or no government involvement at all,” he said.

The Fijian Media Association (FMA) has also expressed strong opposition against the bill and is calling for the MIDA Act to be repealed.

“If there is a need for another legislation, then government can convene fresh consultation with stakeholders if these issues are not adequately addressed in other current legislation,” the FMA, which represents almost 150 working journalists in Fiji, stated.

Speaking on behalf of his colleagues, FMA executive member and Communications Fiji Limited news director Vijay Narayan said “we want a total repeal” of the Media Act.

“We believe that it was brought about without consultation at all…it was shoved down our throats,” Narayan said.

“We have worked with it for 16 years. We have been staring at the pointy end of the spear and we continue to work hard to build our industry despite the challenges we face.”

‘Restrictions stunts growth’
He said the Fiji’s media industry “needs investment” to improve its standards.

Narayan said the FMA acknowledged that the issue of content regulation was addressed in the new law.

But “with the restrictions in investment that also stunts our growth as media workers,” he added.

“The fact that it will be controlled by politicians there is a real fear. What if we have reporting on something and the politician feels that the organisation that is registered should be reregistered.”

The FMA has also raised concerns about the provisions in relation to cross-media ownership and foreign ownership as key issues that impacts on media development and creates an unequal playing field.

Sections 38 and 39 of the Media Act impose restrictions on foreign ownership on local local media organisations and cross-media ownership.

According to a recent analysis of the Act co-authored by Dr Singh, they are a major impediment to media development and need to be re-examined.

“It would be prudent to review the media ownership situation and reforms periodically, every four-five years, to gauge the impact, and address any issues, that may have arisen,” the report recommends.

But Suva lawyer and coalition government adviser Richard Naidu is of the view that all issues in respect to the news media should be opened up.

Naidu, who has helped draft the proposed new legislation, said it “has preserved the status quo” and the rules of cross-ownership and foreign media ownership were left as they were in the Media Act.

“Is that right? That is a question of opinion…because before the [MIDA Act] there were no rules on cross-media ownership, there were no rules on foreign media ownership.”

Naidu said the MIDA Act was initially introduced as a bill and media had two hours to to offer its views on it before its implementation.

“So, which status quo ought to be preserved; the one before the [MIDA Act] was imposed or the one as it stands right now. Those are legitimate questions.”

“There is a whole range of things which need to be reviewed and which will probably take a bit of time.”

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The long-running row between the former Fiji government and the Suva-based regional University of the South Pacific (USP) has come back to haunt former Fiji Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama, who spent a night in a police cell on March 9 before appearing in court, charged with abuse of office.

Not only did the “USP saga”, as it came to be known, cause a major rift between Fiji and the other 12 USP-member countries, but it may have contributed to the narrow loss of Bainimarama’s FijiFirst Party (FFP) in the December 2022 election.

Bainimarama’s abuse of office charges included accusations of interfering with a police investigation into financial malpractices at USP. If convicted, he would face a maximum sentence of 17 years in jail.

But there are also serious questions about the future of the party that he co-founded, and which won successive elections in 2014 and 2018 on the back of his popularity.

A day before his indictment, there were surreal scenes at the Suva Central Police Station, as police officers marched an ashen-faced Bainimarama to his cell to spend the night before his court appearance the next morning.

This, under the full glare of live media coverage, with journalists tripping over themselves to take pictures of the former military strongman, who installed himself as prime minister after the 2006 coup and ruled for 16 years straight.

Arrested, detained and charged alongside Bainimarama was his once-powerful police chief, Sitiveni Qiliho, who managed a wry smile for the cameras. Both were released on a surety of F$10,000 (about NZ$7300) after pleading not guilty to the charges.

Shut down police investigation
It is alleged that in 2019, the duo “arbitrarily and in abuse of the authority of their respective offices” shut down a police investigation into alleged irregularities at USP when former vice-chancellor Rajesh Chandra was in charge.

In November 2018, Chandra’s replacement, Professor Pal Ahluwalia, revealed large remuneration payments to certain USP senior staff, some running to hundreds of thousands of dollars. The Fiji government, unhappy with Ahluwalia’s attack on Chandra, counter-attacked by alleging irregularities in Ahluwalia’s own administration.

As the dispute escalated, the Fiji government suspended its annual grant to the USP in a bid to force an inquiry into its own allegations.

When an external audit by the NZ accountants BDO confirmed the original report’s findings, the USP executive committee, under the control of the then Fiji government appointees, suspended Ahluwalia in June 2020.

This was in defiance of the USP’s supreme decision-making body, the USP Council, which reinstated him within a week.

Samoa’s then Deputy Prime Minister Fiamē Naomi Mataʻafa (who is now prime minister, having won a heavily contested election of her own) said at the time that Ahluwalia’s suspension had been a “nonsense”.

The then Nauruan President Lionel Aingimea attacked a “small group” of Fiji officials for “hijacking” the 12-country regional university.

Students threatened boycott
The USP Students’ Association threatened a boycott of exams, while more than 500 signatures supporting the suspended vice-chancellor were collected and students protested across several of USP’s national campuses. All these events played out prominently in the regional news media as well as on social media platforms.

With Fiji’s national elections scheduled for the following year, the political toll was becoming obvious. However, Bainimarama’s government either did not see it, or did not care to see it.

Instead of backing off from what many saw as an unnecessary fight, it doubled down. In February 2021, around 15 government police and security personnel along with immigration officials staged a late-night raid on Professor Ahluwalia’s Suva home, detained him with his wife, Sandra Price, and put them in a car for the three-hour drive to Nadi International Airport where, deported, they were put on the first flight to Australia.

The move sent shockwaves in Fiji and the region.

To many, it looked like a government that had come to power in the name of a “clean-up campaign” against corruption was now indulging in a cover-up campaign instead. The USP saga became political fodder at opposition rallies, with one of their major campaign promises being to bring back Professor Ahluwalia and restore the unpaid Fiji government grant that stood at F$86 million (about NZ$62 million) at the time.

A month before the 2022 polls, a statement targeting the estimated 30,000 staff and student cohort at USP, their friends and families, urged them to vote against FijiFirst, which would go on to lose government by a single parliamentary vote to the tripartite coalition led by another former coup leader, Sitiveni Rabuka.

Albanese official visit
It was Rabuka who greeted Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese on his first official visit to Fiji last week. During talks at the Australian-funded Blackrock military camp, Albanese reportedly secured Rabuka’s support for the AUKUS deal.

Australia is keen for stability in Fiji, which has not had a smooth transition of power since independence, with democratically elected governments removed by coups in 1987, 2000 and 2006. Any disturbance in Fiji has the potential to upset the delicate balance in the region as a whole.

For Bainimarama and his followers, there is much to rue. His claimed agenda — to build national unity and racial equality and to rid Fiji of corruption — earned widespread support in 2014.

His margin of victory was much narrower in 2018 but Bainimarama managed to secure a majority in Parliament to lead the nation again.

His electoral loss in 2022 was followed by a series of dramatic events, which first saw Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, his deputy in all but name, disqualified from holding his seat in Parliament.

Bainimarama went next, suspended for three years by Parliament’s privileges committee for a speech attacking head of state Ratu Wiliame Katonivere. He chose to resign as opposition leader.

Following his March 10 hearing, Bainimarama addressed the media and a few supporters outside court, adamant that he had served the country with “integrity” and with “the best interests” of all Fijians at heart.  The former leader even managed to smile for the cameras while surrounded by a group of followers.

With nearly double the personal votes of the sitting PM Rabuka under Fiji’s proportional representation voting system, Bainimarama’s supporters still harboured some hope that he could return as the country’s leader one day.

However, his health is not the best. He is now out of Parliament and bogged down by legal troubles. Is the sun now setting on the era of Bainimarama and FijiFirst?

Dr Shailendra Bahadur Singh is a frequent contributor to Asia Pacific Report and is on the editorial board of the associated Pacific Journalism Review. This article was originally published by the Lowy Institute’s The Interpreter and is republished here with the author’s permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Former Fiji Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama has resigned from Parliament just two weeks after copping a three-year suspension for making seditious comments.

Bainimarama, who was the opposition leader, made the announcement via a five-minute video on Facebook today.

He said his suspension on February 17 was “unwarranted and most certainly unjustified”.

“I did not swear nor did I make any racist or divisive comments,” he said.

“In fact, the so-called offensive words could have been objected to by points of order as provided for under the Standing Orders. However, the decision has been made by Parliament through a vote and I have complied with the decision.”

But the former coup leader-turned-PM, who was in charge of the country for almost 16 years before losing the 2022 Elections in December, said he would remain the leader of FijiFirst which was “the largest single political party in Parliament”.

“I want to assure all our supporters and all Fijians that you will be seeing more of me on the ground as I engage with you to listen to your needs, wants and concerns,” he said.

Guiding FijiFirst MPs
He said he would be guiding the FijiFirst MPs with his former attorney-general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum.

“So they can continue to fight inside Parliament while we will engage more actively outside Parliament with our FijiFirst supporters and the growing number of unsatisfied Fijians who are now questioning their decision to vote for parties that seem to be not delivering on their promises.”

Bainimarama’s suspension also means that the opposition’s numbers in Parliament will go down to 25. However, he will be replaced by the next ranked FijiFirst candidate from the 14 December election.

“From FijiFirst’s perspective and also for the nearly 43 percent of voters in the 2022 General Elections, it is important that we maintain at all times our 26 seats in Parliament,” Bainimarama said.

He said his party would prevent the incumbent coalition government “from running roughshod over our Constitution, breaches of which are taking place almost on a daily basis, and to highlight the lack of adherence to basic fundamentals of due process and procedural fairness”.

Bainimarama has confirmed that FijiFirst will nominate former defence minister and disaster management minister Inia Seruiratu as the new opposition leader when Parliament sits for its next session at the end of the month.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Five weeks on from Christmas Eve, I think most of us are still a bit stunned at what has happened in Fiji.

A new government came to power in dramatic circumstances.

It took not one but two Sodelpa management board meetings to change it, with razor-thin margins.

The same drama extended into Parliament.

There was definitely a bump in the road when the military openly expressed concern about the speed of change.

But that was navigated smoothly.

One other thing stood on a razor-thin margin.

Nobody in Fiji should forget it.

‘Rule of law’
A little thing called “rule of law”.

In a Fiji Times column last week, I tried to capture the idea of this.

First, the idea that the law is more important than everyone, including the government.

But second, the idea that the law is more than just rules and regulations which restrict us.

Rule of law means also that the government is bound to respect ordinary people’s rights and freedoms.

That rule of law was seriously at risk under the FijiFirst government.

Things had gotten to the point where, using bullying and fear, unafraid of the courts or any other institution which might restrain it, the FijiFirst government just did what it wanted.

In its last year of power, the only restraint on FijiFirst was the fact that an election was coming.

Turned on opponents
Had it won that election, FijiFirst would have turned its guns on the only opponents it had left — the opposition political parties, the independent news media and the few non-government organisations that continued to criticise it.

Fiji would have fallen firmly into that growing group of countries now called “democratic dictatorships” — places which have elections and the other trappings of democracy, but which in truth severely restrict the democratic rights and freedoms of their people.

Four key officials holding important constitutional positions — the Chief Justice, the Commissioner of Police, the Commissioner of Corrections and the Supervisor of Elections — have been suspended inside of four weeks.

That tells us one of two things.

Either the new government is particularly vengeful.

Or there are complaints against these officials that date back to the FijiFirst party’s time in power and which are only now coming to light.

After all, they’ve hardly had time to offend us under the new government.

And if these are in fact complaints about things which happened long ago, we must ask — why were they not actioned under the FijiFirst government?

No one dared complain
Or was fear of the government so pervasive that no one dared to complain against these officials — and the complaints are only being made now?

We need to know about these complaints.

Yes, each of these officials is innocent until proven otherwise.

But they are public officials, occupying some of the most powerful and critical positions in the country.

The decisions they make concern our most basic rights and freedoms — whether or not we spend a night in a cell, whether (and when) we will get a ruling on our employment dispute, or whether we are able to vote.

So we, the public, have a right to know what they are accused of.

What has changed?

The overwhelming sentiment for most of us — at least those around me — is a new sense of freedom.

Doesn’t change things
For many of us, that does not really change things from day to day.

Not everyone has the compelling urge to air their opinions on everything (in newspaper columns or elsewhere).

But it is simply the fact that if you want to rant about something on Facebook, you’re not worrying about what the government will think.

Most of us, day to day, are not worrying about whether we will be unfairly held for 48 hours in a jail cell.

Yet only two years ago in the covid crisis, the police were doing that to hundreds of people.

We are not worrying about whether we will be arrested for saying something which will “cause public alarm”.

Yet, every time an NGO or opposition political party leader issued a public statement in the last 10 years, this was a constant worry.

But much of the real damage done was at the next level down — the level where ordinary people like us want to get things done.

This week I met a small group of distinguished doctors.

Climate of fear
I heard with some amazement about the climate of fear which predominated in the Ministry of Health.

Criticism was not permitted.

In November last year, the permanent Secretary for Health publicly told politicians to “leave the Health Ministry alone”.

Nobody, he said, should talk about it.

Nobody should “undermine” it — because it was on the cusp of great things.

One senior medical specialist who famously criticised the state of our hospitals in The Fiji Times was immediately banned from entering them.

This was hardly a hardship — he was only volunteering his skills for free.

But what about all the patients who he was looking after?

He recounted to me, with some wonder the bureaucratic memo-writing process that is now being followed to bring him back.

Cash and volunteers
The International Women’s Association has cash and volunteers ready to improve women’s and children’s health at CWM Hospital.

We are talking about basic things, like hot water and decrepit bathrooms.

How do you run hospital wards without hot water?

IWA’s mistake was to make these deficiencies public on social media.

So the Health Ministry stopped talking to IWA.

Only with the change of government is IWA allowed to openly communicate with the Ministry of Health about what it wants to do — instead of whispers to officials on their gmail accounts.

For years, I have marvelled at the stupidity of the edicts issued from Ministry of Education headquarters.

Schools may not fund-raise without permission.

Schools may not invite speakers to their school assemblies without permission.

Schools may not run extracurricular classes for students without their permission.

‘In name of equality’
The policy seems to be “in the name of equality, we must all be equally dumbed down”.

As the Education Ministry pursued the government’s mad obsession with our “secular state”, schools owned by religious bodies cannot choose their own school heads, even if they pay for them and save the government money.

Education and health are critical issues for all of us.

The government can’t deliver everything.

Governments by nature are unwieldy, bureaucratic and slow (sometimes for good reason, because they have to carefully manage public funds and follow other laws).

So people have to get involved.

Get involved

We also have to get involved on a wide swathe of other issues such as poverty, domestic violence, drug abuse, crime and economic opportunities.

Criticism not welcome
These are all things which, for the past 15 years, we were told, the government had under control — like “never before”.

Our input — and certainly our criticism — were not welcome.

Let’s be clear about our new government.

We might be glad that it’s there.

And we should never take for granted the rights and freedoms it has restored to us and the refreshing new attitude it brings after 15 years.

But soon the honeymoon will end, the shine will come off and we will all have to get down to the work (which never ends) of solving our deep social and economic problems.

The expectations on the new government are huge.

Everybody wants every problem to be solved and every complaint to be answered.

We want every crook who has received an unfair benefit to be (as we now always seem to say) “taken to task”.

Same huge debt
The new government has the same huge debt, the same shortage of cash and the same lack of resources the old government did.

It can move some money around and change some priorities — but it can never solve every problem.

But a government that is prepared to tolerate criticism has at least one advantage over one that is not.

It can hear from real people about where the real problems are.

That’s why freedom of expression is not just a nice thing to have.

It’s actually important to tell us what is going on.

This government, like the old one, will gradually become more complacent and unresponsive as it becomes burdened with the ordinary business of administration.

And that is why every democracy — at least every real one — prizes freedom.

Freedom to march
Freedom for people to criticise, to march in the street, to take the government to court, without being punished for it.

These are some of the tools we use to hold the government to account, to remind the politicians that it is about us, not them, and to embarrass the politicians into action.

But just as important is the responsibility on us not just to talk — but also to act.

Our new freedom also means freedom to get involved.

What are the things that are important to us?

Is it health?

Education?

Child poverty?

Prison reform?

Our local environment?

So what will we do?

Don’t take it for granted
We don’t need to be part of some official committee or NGO to fight for the things that are important to us.

We don’t need the government’s permission to hold a public forum to talk about problems and solutions.

After 15 years we need to be able to say to our leaders: “We’re in charge here. This is what we want. You work for us.”

They won’t always listen — but that’s what freedom is.

It was a close-run thing on Christmas Eve — but freedom is what we got.

So let’s not take it for granted.

Let’s use it.

Richard Naidu is a Suva lawyer who is fairly free with his opinions. The views in this article are not necessarily the views of The Fiji Times. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Politicians can respond to the political rhetoric but claims that the new Fiji government has broken the law are a more serious matter, says prominent Suva lawyer Richard Naidu.

Reacting to FijiFirst general secretary Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum’s claims that there have been a number of incursions into the separation of powers since the government came in, Naidu said Sayed-Khaiyum had made no specific allegations that the People’s Alliance-led coalition had breached the “separation of powers”.

“In layman’s terms, ‘the separation of powers’ means only that the legislature (Parliament), the executive (Cabinet and civil servants) and the judiciary (judges and magistrates) should each ‘stay in their lanes’,” he said.

“They should not interfere in each other’s functions.

“Aiyaz has made no specific allegations that the new government has breached this concept. What law does he say has been broken?”

Naidu also questioned the procedures that were taken to set up the 2013 Constitution.

“Aiyaz’s FijiFirst party government applied the constitution as it suited them.

“It never set up the Accountability and Transparency Commission that the Constitution required (s.121); it never set up a Ministerial Code of Conduct as the Constitution required (s.149); it never set up a Freedom of Information Act as the Constitution required (s.150).

“This was, after all, his own government’s constitution.”

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Who’s broken the law? “Separation of powers” and all that stuff.

Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum’s hour-long news conference on Saturday, January 21, seems mostly to have followed the usual FijiFirst party format.

He pontificated at length while his party’s MPs stood silently behind him.

From what I could tell, Sayed-Khaiyum’s speech was a mixture of political criticism and claims about the law. The politicians can respond to the political rhetoric. But claims that the government has broken the law are a more serious matter.

Sayed-Khaiyum has raised a number of complaints suggesting that the new government has broken the law. He has not been very clear about why this is so. However, for the record, let’s go over these complaints (or at least what he seems to be suggesting):

that former Constitutional Offices Commission members were unlawfully removed from office

Wrong. The Commissioners were asked to resign. They did so. No law prevents them from resigning. If they had refused to resign, they would have remained in place (as others have done).

Sayed-Khaiyum says that the PM had “no authority” to ask them to resign. Wrong. Nobody needs “authority” to ask anyone else to commit a voluntary act. The former Constitutional Offices Commissioners are not the property of the FijiFirst party. No law has been broken.

that the Minister for Home Affairs should not have asked the Commissioner of Police to resign

Wrong. It is a free country. The minister may make any request he wants — and the commissioner may accept or refuse that request.

The commissioner refused the minister’s request, saying he wanted the Constitutional Office Commission process be followed. The commissioner remains in place.

No law has been broken.

that prayers at government functions breach the Constitution

Sayed-Khaiyum read out s.4 of the Constitution (“Secular state”) and claimed that at government functions prayers were now only offered in one religion (presumably the Christian one).

To suggest that this is something new — that this did not happen under the FijiFirst party government — is fantasy. And I too wish that those who offer prayers were sometimes a little more sensitive to other religions.

But that is not the point. The Constitution does not tell any of us how to pray.

No law has been broken.

“not referring to all citizens as Fijians”

The Constitution may refer to all citizens as “Fijians”. But the Constitution also guarantees freedom of speech. There is no law that says we must all call each other “Fijians”. We may call each other what we want.

No law has been broken.

replacing boards of statutory authorities before expiry of their terms

Sayed-Khaiyum should be specific. Which boards is he referring to? If board members have resigned and been replaced, then what I have already said about resignations also applies.

For a number of statutory bodies the minister has, under the relevant law, the power to appoint board members. This power generally includes the power to dismiss them.

Replacing boards or board members mid-term is certainly nothing new. Sayed-Khaiyum may recall a recent example while he was Minister for Housing. He requested the entire Housing Authority board to resign before the expiry of their terms (and they complied).

No law has been broken.

taking back ATS [Air Terminal Services] workers. Sayed-Khaiyum seems to think that because a court decided that ATS is not required to take the workers back, ATS cannot do so.

Wrong. Any parties to litigation — including employers and employees — can decide to settle their differences at any time — including after a court ruling. The new government has requested ATS to take its former employees back. If ATS has a legal problem with this, no doubt it will tell government.

No law has been broken.

that using vernacular languages in Parliament breaches Standing Orders

Other than for the formal process of electing the Speaker and the Prime Minister, Parliament has not yet even sat yet.

The new government wants to allow the use of vernacular languages in Parliament. The current Standing Orders do not permit this.

So, to allow the use of vernacular languages in Parliament, the government will have to propose changes to the Standing Orders and parliamentarians will have to vote for them. That is normal procedure (Standing Order 128).

No law has been broken.

“separation of powers”

Under the FijiFirst party government, this phrase seemed to be thrown around to justify anything. For example, the Parliament Secretariat would frequently refuse to allow opposition MPs to ask questions of government ministers because of “the separation of powers”.

This justification made no sense. Section 91 of the Constitution requires ministers to be accountable to Parliament.

In layman’s terms, “the separation of powers” means only that the legislature (Parliament), the executive (Cabinet and civil servants) and the judiciary (judges and magistrates) should each “stay in their lanes”.

They should not interfere in each other’s functions. Sayed-Khaiyum has made no specific allegations that the new government has breached this concept. What law does he say has been broken?

FijiFirst and the Constitution

Sayed-Khaiyum’s FijiFirst party government applied the Constitution as it suited them.

It never set up the Accountability and Transparency Commission that the Constitution required (s.121) It never set up a Ministerial Code of Conduct as the Constitution required (s.149).

It never set up a Freedom of Information Act as the Constitution required (s.150). This was, after all, his own government’s constitution.

His government treated Parliament — the elected representatives of Fiji’s people — with contempt. Almost all of its laws were passed under urgency (Standing Order 51).

Typically, parliamentarians got two days’ notice of what new laws the government was proposing, sometimes less. That meant no one had time to review the laws
or consult the people on them.

The FFP government treated the people’s laws as its own property. Sayed-Khaiyum complains about board members being removed and public service appointment rules not being followed. He says nothing about the numerous arbitrary terminations of many public servants under the FijiFirst party government, including the Solicitor-General and the Government Statistician.

It was no less than the Fiji Law Society president who this week described rule of law under the FijiFirst government as “sometimes hanging by a thread”.

Against this background, not many lawyers are prepared to listen to Sayed-Khaiyum lecture us on the law.

#LOCALNEWS Who’s broken the law? “Separation of powers” and all that stuff. Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum’s hour-long news conference on Saturday, January 21, seems mostly to have followed the usual FijiFirst party format. #TimesNews #FijiNews #FijiPol https://t.co/sblh8koJBs

— The Fiji Times (@fijitimes) January 22, 2023

If you’ve got a problem, go to court

The “separation of powers” doctrine is also clear that if you have a problem with the lawfulness of any government action, the courts are there to solve that problem. It is the
courts who decide if anyone has breached the Constitution. It is not the secretary of the opposition political party.

So, if Sayed-Khaiyum has a complaint that the law has been broken, he should do what the rest of us do — take it to court. That is what he frequently told the Opposition to do when it complained about what his government did.

Sayed-Khaiyum has a little more time on his hands now. He is a qualified lawyer with a practising certificate. So — get on with it. Bring your complaints to court, because
that is where they belong. Should Sayed-Khaiyum really be lecturing us about the law?

Finally, Sayed-Khaiyum has still not explained to anyone how, in the space of three days in January, he got himself kicked out of Parliament by accepting a position on the Constitutional Offices Commission — and then had to resign from the Constitutional Offices Commission when asked how he could continue as general secretary of the Fiji First Party.

Should we really be taking legal advice from him?

Richard Naidu is a Suva lawyer and a columnist. The views in this article are not necessarily the views of The Fiji Times. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The opposition FijiFirst party still “seems to be confused” about the role of its general secretary Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, says prominent Suva lawyer Richard Naidu.

“Mr Sayed-Khaiyum appears to have triggered his exit from Parliament by accepting a position on the Constitutional Offices Commission,” he said.

“That means he is a ‘public officer’ as defined in the Constitution.

“An MP who accepts appointment as a ‘public officer’ loses his seat in Parliament. That has already happened.

“Mr Bainimarama is now suggesting that Mr Sayed-Khaiyum will continue as general secretary of FijiFirst.

“But Mr Sayed-Khaiyum is still a ‘public officer’.

“Under section 14(1)(b) of the Political Parties (Registration Conduct Funding and Disclosures Act 2013) a ‘public officer’ is not eligible to be a political party official.

“In fact, under section 14(1)(a), while he holds office in the Constitutional Offices Commission, Mr Sayed-Khaiyum is not allowed even to be a member of the FijiFirst party.

“So FFP’s plans for Mr Sayed-Khaiyum, now that he is out of Parliament, still seem confused.

‘Other parties will be writing’
“No doubt other political parties will be writing to the Registrar of Political Parties, Mohammed Saneem, asking him to ensure that the FijiFirst party is complying with the law.”

Naidu was referring to a video statement on the FijiFirst party Facebook page on Tuesday night where FijiFirst leader Voreqe Bainimarama said Sayed-Khaiyum’s exit from Parliament would mean that “he will be able to fully concentrate on FijiFirst matters outside Parliament”.

“I will be leading the charge inside Parliament and he will be leading the charge outside Parliament,” Bainimarama said.

“So to ensure that we are constantly in touch with our supporters and all Fijians on a daily basis, I have tasked our general secretary to be our voice outside Parliament.

“He will be in our parliamentary office, he will give us advice and also issue statements on behalf of FijiFirst when Parliament is not sitting.”

Registrar of Political Parties Mohammed Saneem confirmed that any person taking up public office must ensure that they comply with section 14(1) of the of the Political Parties (Registration, Conduct, Funding and Disclosures) Act 2013.

In a media statement issued after questions from The Fiji Times, he said public office holders according to section 14(1) of the Political Parties (Registration, Conduct, Funding and Disclosures) Act 2013 (Act) were not eligible to be an applicant or a member of a registered political party, not eligible to hold office in a registered political party, are not to engage in political activity that may compromise or be seen to compromise the political neutrality of that person’s office in an election; or publicly indicate support for or opposition to any proposed political party or a registered political party or candidate in an election.

Felix Chaudhary is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The highly anticipated 2022 election last month was a very close, emotionally charged and highly controversial affair.

All that is behind us now and it is time to reflect on it critically and learn some important lessons as we welcome the dawn of 2023.

Despite the Supervisor of Elections’ prediction of a low percentage turnout of around the 50s, the actual turnout of 68.29 percent was surprisingly reasonable given the inconvenient December 14 date and other restrictions such as married women being required to change their names to the birth certificate ones, voting restrictions to one polling station and other legislative and logistical issues.

The postal ballot votes had the highest turnout rate of 75.92 per cent and the others in descending order were: Northern Division (73.88 per cent); Eastern Division (69.98 per cent); Western Division (68.82 per cent); and Central Division (65.6 per cent).

Victim of own PR system
This may sound ridiculous but it all came down to 658 voters, the equivalent of 0.14 percent of the votes, which enabled Sodelpa to stay above the 5 percent threshold.

It was this small number of voters who made the difference by giving Sodelpa the ultimate power broker position which enabled the People’s Alliance Party (PA)-National Federation Party (NFP) coalition to edge out the FijiFirst party (FFP) by a very slim margin after hours of horse trading followed by two rounds of voting.

However, this is what the voting calculus is all about — every vote counts and even one vote can make a substantial difference.

This is even more so in our Proportional Representation (PR) system, which was originally meant to encourage small parties to gain votes and be competitive against the dominant ones when it was first conceived in Europe in the early 1900s.

Theoretically, the idea is to shift the centre of power gravity from dominant parties to diverse groups to ensure that representation was more dispersed and democratic.

Thus, most countries with PR systems (there are different variants) have coalition governments.

New Zealand, which has two electoral systems merged into one (Mixed Member Proportional or MMP), consisting of the PR and First-Past-the-Post (FPP), has a history of coalitions since the PR component was introduced.

Other countries with coalition governments
Other countries which use the PR system are Israel, Columbia, Finland, Latvia, Sweden, Nepal and Netherlands, to name a few, and they all have coalition governments.

But why didn’t this coalition electoral outcome happen in Fiji during the first two elections in 2014 and 2018 although these were held under the PR system?

The reason is because the FFP was able to effectively deploy what political scientists refer to as the “coattail effect” — the tactic of using a popular political leader to attract votes.

So in this case, statistics show that there has been a direct correlation between coattail votes for Voreqe Bainimarama, the FFP leader, and the electoral fortunes of the FFP.

For instance, Bainimarama was able to attract 40.79 percent of the total votes during the 2014 election and this enabled FFP to secure around 59.17 percent of the total national votes. Bainimarama’s votes went down to 36.92 percent during the 2018 election and this reduced the FFP voting proportion by 9.12 percent to 50.02 percent.

The decline in Bainimarama’s votes to 29.08 percent during the 2022 election also reduced the FFP’s votes to 42.55 percent, well below the 50 plus 1 mark needed by the party to remain in power.

The total decline of 11.71 percent of Bainimarama’s votes and 16.62 percent of the FFP votes between 2014 and 2022 is a worrying sign and if the trend continues, they may be hitting the 30 percent mark at the time of the 2026 election.

By and large, the swing of votes away from FFP was around 10 percent or so, with a shifting margin of around 3 to 4 percent.

The long Bainimarama coattail has slowly withered away over time.

Before the election I warned in a Fiji Times interview early in 2022 that given the diminishing trend of the FFP electoral support, together with other data, the party would be lucky to survive the 2022 election and thus would need a coalition partner.

I also said that the PA, NFP, Sodelpa and other parties would need to form a national coalition to be able to rule.

The writing was on the wall and it appeared that the FFP was going to be victim of the PR electoral system they introduced in an ironically Frankensteinian way.

“Wasted votes” and weakness of the PR system
The results of the 2022 election shows that the power gravity has shifted significantly and in future we are going to see governments in Fiji formed on the basis of coalitions and thus elections will need to be fought on the basis of party partnership.

This means that smaller parties, which have no hope of getting over the 5 percent threshold will need to make critical assessments and the only survival option is to join bigger parties which have more chances of winning.

Herein lies one of the weaknesses of our version of the PR system where the votes by the smaller parties, which cannot get over the 5 percent threshold, are considered “wasted”.

This is in contrast to the Alternative Voting (AV) system under the 1997 Fiji Constitution, which provided for losing votes to be recycled and used by other parties based on preferential listing. In the 2022 election, 35,755 votes were “wasted”, which equated to 4.81 percent of the total votes.

By Fiji standard, this was a relatively large number indeed.

However, the idea of “wasted votes” is a contentious one because, while from an electoral calculus point of view, these votes may serve no purpose and are deemed useless, from a political rights perspective, the votes represent people’s inalienable moral and democratic rights to make political choices, whatever the outcome, and thus must be respected and not condemned as wasted.

The new era of transformation
The small margin of 29 to 26 seats and indeed the intriguing 28-27 voting in Parliament should be reason for the Coalition government to be on its toes and not be complacent about the sustainability of the three-party partnership.

They must try as much as possible to maintain a united synergy through a win-win power sharing arrangement.

They have started this so far with the co-deputy prime ministership and portfolio sharing and this needs to deepen to other areas so that it is not seen as a marriage of convenience but a genuine attempt at nation building and transformation.

To keep their momentum going and mobilise more support and legitimacy, they need to use the diverse expertise and wide range of professional skills at their disposal to bring about meaningful, consultative, transparent and transformative policy changes for the country.

Part of the process will be to reverse some of the FFP’s fear-mongering, vindictive, controlling and authoritarian style of policymaking and leadership, which have left many victims strewn across our national landscape and which weakened support for the FFP.

While there are still flames of anger and vengeance burning in some people’s hearts as a result of victimisation by the previous regime, it is imperative now to listen to Nelson Mandela’s advice after he was released from jail — allow the mind to rule over emotions and move on with dignity.

We must break the cycle of political vengeance and vindictiveness, which became part of our political culture since 2006 and as prominent lawyers Imrana Jalal and Graham Leung have advised, it is important to ensure that changes are within the law and not driven by destructive emotions, or else we will be following the same path as the previous regime.

These will take a high degree of levelheadedness and moral restraint, qualities already displayed by the coalition leadership so far.

For the FFP, it is time to go back to the drawing board, rethink about their overreliance on coattail approach, re-strategise and reflect on why voters are deserting them.

They will no doubt be sharpening their daggers to get inside the coalition armour and target the weak links and vulnerable spots.

They will try all the tricks in the book to make the coalition partnership as shortlived as possible through destabilisation strategies and vote poaching by winning over an extra Sodelpa vote to add to the single mysterious vote, which went FFP way during the parliamentary vote for the Speaker and PM.

Sodelpa may need to warn the person concerned and if the betrayal does not stop after the next round of parliamentary vote then they may need to invoke Section 63(h) of the Constitution, which specifies that a parliamentarian can lose his or her seat if the person’s vote is “contrary to any direction issued by the political party…”

This will then open the door for Ro Temumu Kepa, who is next on the SODELPA party list, to take the vacant seat and help stabilise the coalition’s parliamentary position a bit more.

Some electoral lessons for the future
The intense political horse-trading, high pressure power manoeuvring and stressful competition for coalition partnership in the hours after the election has taught us a few lessons.

Firstly, political parties should now start thinking about forging partnerships because future elections can only be won through coalition.

PAP and NFP made a great move by getting into a coalition early and this worked out well for them.

The coalition government now has a head start.

Secondly, political parties should learn to be humble, not burn their bridges when they part with their old comrades nor should they feel super and invincible by trying to do things on their own. Old grievances can come back to haunt you if they are not addressed early

Thirdly, small parties need to pay attention to the electoral calculus and engage with parties, which have potential to propel them above the 5 percent threshold or join together as small parties to form larger political groupings before the election.

Fourth, voters will need to be smart and strategic about their votes to ensure that they are not wasted.

These “wasted” votes do make a difference in the end when the results are tallied.

Fifthly, given the need for partnerships, especially when margins are narrow, forging positive relationship and goodwill with other political parties early before elections can be rewarding political capital while vindictiveness and ill will can be destructive and regrettable political liabilities.

There is still time — about 48 months away before the next election.

Steven Ratuva is distinguished professor and pro-vice chancellor Pacific at the University of Canterbury and chair of the International Political Science Association Research Committee on climate security and planetary politics. This article was first published in The Fiji Times and is republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

FijiFirst Party general secretary and former attorney-general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum is no longer a Member of Fiji’s Parliament, says Speaker Ratu Naiqama Lalabalavu.

Ratu Naiqama said formal notices had been served to Sayed-Khaiyum, advising him that he had lost his seat in the House.

“We have served notices to all his addresses,” the Speaker said.

Under Section 63(1)(b) of the 2013 Constitution, the seat of a Member of Parliament becomes vacant if the member — with the member’s consent — becomes the holder of a public office.

“The leader of the opposition [former PM Voreqe Bainimarama] is advising us to follow the law, so we are following the law.”

Sayed-Khaiyum was nominated to the Constitutional Offices Commission by Bainimarama and appointed by President Ratu Wiliame Katonivere.

Sayed-Khaiyum attended the first commission meeting on Sunday with Bainimarama.

The Constitutional Offices Commission meeting was chaired by Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka.

Attorney-General Siromi Turaga was also present at the forum.

The PM’s nominees were prominent lawyer Jon Apted and lawyer Tanya Waqanika.

Felix Chaudhary is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission

Bainimarama threatens Fiji government
Meanwhile, The Pacific Newsroom’s Michael Field writes that Bainimarama has “made it plain he is “out to bring down Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka and his coalition government”.

“In a Facebook rant, the defeated former prime minister said Rabuka’s “three uneven legged stool government” must be stopped.

‘“We are here to ensure they do not get away with it,” [Bainimarama] said.

‘“We are here to ensure that your voices are heard, in what is already unfolding as an oppressive and vindictive regime that feeds on suppression of a free flow of ideas, division, racism, religious chauvinism, bigotry, exclusivity and colonialism.”’

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

“Merry Christmas Fiji!”

This was the message to Fiji from kingmakers Social Democratic Liberal Party (Sodelpa) management board member and MP Tanya Waqanika after their meeting in Suva ended this evening.

Asked whether her Christmas wishes meant good news for the people of Fiji, she responded: “Free at last.”

Waqanika was one of the 26 management board members who participated in the secret ballot — which voted in favour of a coalition with the People’s Alliance and the National Federation Party, the second time in barely 72 hours that the board backed the coalition.

This vote confirms the end of 16 years of domination of Fiji politics by 2006 coup leader Voreqe Bainimarama — half as the military leader and the rest as an elected FijiFirst party prime minister.

It will usher in a new era with coalition rule and 1987 coup leader and former prime minister Sitiveni Rabuka heading the government.

A secret ballot held at the meeting at the Southern Cross Hotel resulted in 13 votes for the PAP-NFP coalition and 12 for the FijiFirst Party.

‘Anomalies’ forced new vote
In Tuesday’s vote, the numbers were 16-14 in favour of the People’s Alliance-led coalition. However the validity of that vote was challenged over claimed “anomalies”.

Party vice-president Anare Jale said the next step now was to work on a coalition agreement.

He said that agreement would detail all the information and work that would be taking place today and during the holidays.

“Hopefully, something will be concluded and signed on Wednesday next week,” Jale said at the press conference after the day-long Sodelpa meeting.

Timoci Vula is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

#LATEST Fiji’s kingmaker, Sodelpa has announced it’s joining Sitiveni Rabuka-led People’s Alliance-National Federation (PA-NFP) coalition to form the next government.https://t.co/57wLytvuHf

— RNZ Pacific (@RNZPacific) December 23, 2022

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz