With just over a year left in her tenure as Prime Minister of Samoa, Fiame Naomi Mata’afa faces a political upheaval threatening a peaceful end to her term.

Ironically, the rule of law — the very principle that elevated her to power — has now become the source of significant challenges within her party.

Fiame left the Human Rights Protection Party (HRPP) in 2020, opposing constitutional amendments she believed undermined judicial independence. Her decision reflected a commitment to democratic principles and a rejection of increasing authoritarianism within the HRPP.

She joined the newly formed Fa’atuatua i le Atua Samoa ua Tasi (FAST) party, created by former HRPP members seeking an alternative to decades of one-party dominance.

As FAST’s leader, Fiame led the party to a historic victory in the 2021 election, becoming Samoa’s first female Prime Minister and ending the HRPP’s nearly 40-year rule.

Her leadership is now under threat from within her own party.

FAST Founder, chairman and former Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries La’auli Leuatea Polataivao Schmidt, faces criminal charges, including conspiracy and harassment. These developments have escalated into calls for Fiame’s removal from her party.

Deputy charged with offences
On 3 January 2025, La’auli publicly revealed he had been charged with offences including conspiracy to obstruct justice, fabricating evidence, and harassment. These charges prompted widespread speculation, fueled by misinformation spread primarily via Facebook, that the charges were related to allegations of his involvement in an ongoing investigation into the death of a 19-year-old victim of a hit-and-run.

Following La’auli’s refusal to resign from his role as Minister of Agriculture and Fisheries, Fiame removed his portfolio on January 10, citing the need to uphold the integrity of her Cabinet.

“As Prime Minister, I had hoped that the former minister would choose to resign. This is a common stance often considered by esteemed public office custodians if allegations or charges are laid against them,” she explained.

In response to his dismissal, La’auli stated publicly: “I accept the decision with a humble heart.” He maintained his innocence, saying, “I am clean from all of this,” and expressed confidence that the truth will prevail.

La’auli urged his supporters to remain calm and emphasised his commitment to clearing his name while continuing to serve as a Member of Parliament for Gagaifomauga 3.

Following his removal, the Samoan media reported that members of the FAST party wrote a letter to Fiame requesting her removal as Prime Minister.

Three ministers dismissed
In response, Fiame dismissed three Cabinet Ministers, Mulipola Anarosa Ale-Molio’o (Women, Community, and Social Development), Toelupe Poumulinuku Onesemo (Communication and Information Technology), and Leota Laki Sio (Commerce, Industry, and Labor) — allegedly involved in the effort to unseat her.

Fiame emphasised the need for a cohesive and trustworthy Cabinet, stating the importance of maintaining confidence in her leadership.

Amid rumors of calls for her removal within the FAST party, Fiame acknowledged the party’s authority to replace her as its leader but clarified that only Parliament could determine her status as Prime Minister.

She expressed her determination to fulfill her duties despite internal challenges, though she did not specify the level of support she retains within the party.

Samoa’s Parliament is set to convene next Tuesday, where these tensions may reach a critical point. La’auli, facing multiple criminal charges, remains a focal point of the ongoing political turmoil.

A day after the announcement, on January 15, four new Ministers were sworn into office by Head of State Tuimaleali’ifano Va’aleto’a Sualauvi II at a ceremony attended by family, friends, and some FAST members.

The new Ministers are Faleomavaega Titimaea Tafua (Commerce, Industry, and Labour), Laga’aia Ti’aitu’au Tufuga (Women, Community, and Social Development), Mau’u Siaosi Pu’epu’emai (Communications and Information Technology), and Niu’ava Eti Malolo (Agriculture and Fisheries).

FAST caucus voted against Fiame
Later that evening, FAST chairman La’auli announced that 20 members of the FAST caucus had decided to remove Fiame from the leadership of FAST and expel her from the party along with five other Cabinet Ministers — Tuala Tevaga Ponifasio (Deputy Prime Minister), Leatinuu Wayne Fong, Olo Fiti Vaai, Faualo Harry Schuster, and Toesulusulu Cedric Schuster.

In Samoa, if an MP ceases to maintain affiliation with the political party under which they were elected — whether through resignation or expulsion, their seat is declared vacant if they choose to move to another party or form a new party.

These provisions aim to preserve political stability, prevent party-hopping, and maintain the integrity of parliamentary representation, with byelections held as needed to fill vacancies.

Under Section 142 of Samoa’s Electoral Act 2019, if the Speaker believes an MP’s seat has become vacant as per Section 141, they are required to formally charge the MP with that vacation.

If the Legislative Assembly is in session, this charge must be made orally during the Assembly. Fiame and the four FAST members can choose to maintain their seats in Parliament as Independents.

Former Prime Minister and now opposition leader Tuilaepa Sa’ilele Malielegaoi remarked that what should have been internal FAST issues had spilled into the public sphere.

“We have been watching and we continue to watch what they do and how they deal with their problems,” he stated.

Freedom of expression
When asked whether he would consider a coalition or support one side of FAST, Tuilaepa declined to reveal the opposition’s strategy, citing potential reactions from the other side. He emphasised the importance of adhering to democratic processes and protecting constitutional rights, including freedom of expression.

As Parliament prepares to reconvene on January 21, Facebook has become a battlefield for misinformation and defamatory discourse, particularly among FAST supporters in diaspora communities in the US, Australia, and New Zealand.

Divisions have emerged between supporters of Fiame and La’auli, leading to vitriol directed at politicians and journalists covering the crisis. La’auli, leveraging his social media following, has conducted Facebook Live sessions to assert his innocence and rally support.

Currently, FAST holds 35 seats in Parliament, while the opposition HRPP controls 18. If the removal of five MPs is factored in, FAST would retain 30 MPs, though La’auli claims that 20 members support Fiame’s removal. This leaves 10 MPs who may either support Fiame or remain neutral.

If FAST fails to expel Fiame, La’auli’s faction may push for a motion of no confidence against her.

Such a motion requires 27 votes to pass, potentially making the opposition pivotal in determining the outcome. This could lead to either Fiame’s removal or the dissolution of Parliament for a snap election.

As Samoa faces this political crisis, its democratic institutions undergo a significant test.

Fiame remains committed to the rule of law, while La’auli advocates for her removal.

Reflecting on the stakes, Fiame warned: “Disregarding the rule of law will undoubtedly have far-reaching negative impacts, including undermining our judiciary system and the abilities of our law enforcement agencies to fulfill their duties.”

For now, Samoa watches and waits as its political future hangs in the balance.

Lagipoiva Cherelle Jackson is a Samoan journalist with over 20 years of experience reporting on the Pacific Islands. She is founding editor-in-chief of The New Atoll, a digital commentary magazine focusing on Pacific island geopolitics. Junior S. Ami is a photojournalist based in Samoa. He has covered national events for the Samoa Observer newspaper and runs a private photography business. Republished from the Devpolicy Blog with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

“The people of Fiji don’t deserve to go through another coup.”

This was the view shared by Fiji Navy commander Captain Humphrey Tawake while speaking to The Fiji Times during the Fiji Navy Day celebrations at Stanley Brown Naval Base in Walu Bay, Suva, this week.

“Fiji, as a nation doesn’t need another coup,” said Tawake, who is also deputy RFMF commander of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces (RFMF).

“The RFMF commander has made his stance and we will abide by that.

“We will abide by the rule of law, there will be no more coups.

“We will respect the democratic process that has taken place and we must be mindful that we all have a role to play.”

Captain Tawake said at the event on Thursday that people or institutions should stop using the RFMF for their personal or political agenda.

‘Steadfast’ over rule of law
“RFMF is a professional institution and we stand steadfast to the rule of law and democracy.

“I stand by the RFMF commander, and I want to reiterate that again.”

RFMF commander Major-General Ro Jone Kalouniwai said last week he had made it clear during the Commander’s Parade earlier this month that the constitutional process must be followed.

He said they would continue to abide by the rule of law and order and continue to respect the decision of the people for voting in this particular government — the ruling coalition of Sitiveni Rabuka, who is both a former coup leader and prime minister.

Meanwhile, he said Thursday’s event was about commemorating 48 years of existence and the institution’s humble beginning in 1975.

Arieta Vakasukawaqa is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Papua New Guinea police in Madang and the National Capital District have arrested a total of 101 men suspected of being involved in two separate incidents reported in both provinces over the long weekend.

In Madang, 34 villagers were arrested after they clashed with police over the death of a local man from Korak village identified as Joseph Masul.

After the death of Masul was reported, the villagers along the Bogia-Madang Highway were up in arms and retaliated by blocking the main highway.

The blocking of the highway, according to Madang police, hindered services and movement of people into Madang over the long weekend.

Police moved in after Assistant Commissioner of Police-Northern Peter Guinness assisted with police officers from Lae, who removed the roadblock and picked up 34 suspects.

While in NCD, 67 men were rounded up by police at Gerehu Stage 5 over a fight that erupted after the death of a man was reported during the third game of Australia’s State of Origin rugby league series two weeks ago.

The 67 men were on their way to instigate another fight when police were informed and moved in swiftly, arresting all 67 men and removing their weapons.

Murder suspect in hiding
NCD Metropolitan Superintendent Silva Sika said the suspect in the initial murder case had been hiding from police, angering the victim’s relatives.

The relatives approached a youth who lives at Banana Block who was about to leave for school and questioned him about what had happened a week earlier.

Superintendent Sika said the youth then went to the block, organised his friends who painted their faces black and and marched towards where the deceased’s haus krai (house of mourning) was. They were about to attack the mourners when police stopped them.

He said they would be charged for unlawful assembly, armed with offensive weapons and about to cause a fight in public.

Sika said the men were all armed and were moving in a public place that instilled fear in the public.

While speaking to the suspects at Waigani police station, Superintendent Sika told the suspects that people living Port Moresby must try to respect the rule of law.

‘Respect rule of law’
“I will not hesitate to demolish the areas where you are residing. Moving around in public places with weapons shows no respect for the rule of law,” he said.

“I am happy that the police responded on time to arrest and remove all the weapons from you. If they had not done that it [would] be another disaster in the city where innocent lives and properties will be lost or damaged.

“The weapons that you had in your possession are dangerous and life threatening so you must be charged for that to show others that carrying offensive weapons and moving in groups in public places is against the law.”

Republished with permission.

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

Papua New Guinean security forces have been authorised to use the full force of the law to secure the four captives being held hostage by an armed gang in Bosavi, Nipa-Kutubu, Southern Highlands province since Sunday.

Police Commissioner David Manning said the abductors were being offered “a way out”.

Manning described the gang as having no “established motive but greed”.

“We are working to negotiate an outcome, it is our intent to ensure the safe release of all and their safe return to their families. However, we also have contingencies if negotiations fail,” he said.

“It is in everyone’s interest to ensure we progress this effort as responsibly and safely as possible.”

The four captive researchers are reported to be an Australian anthropology professor and three PNG women.

“We have taken into consideration all factors and possible outcomes, we remain committed to ensuring a successful outcome,” said Commissioner Manning.

“We are satisfied with the amount of information that we are receiving, pointing us as to the area where they are kept and the identity of their captors.

‘Treated fairly’
“They can release their captives and they will be treated fairly through the criminal justice system, but failure to comply and resisting arrest could cost these criminals their lives.

“The full force of the law will be used to immobilise and apprehend the criminals,” Commissioner Manning said.

“Our specialised security force personnel will use whatever means necessary against the criminals, up to and including the use of lethal force, in order to provide for the safety and security of the people being held.”

Hela Governor Philip Undialu has called upon the captors of the four hostages to release them as they entered the second day of captivity.

In a response to questions by the Post-Courier, Governor Undialu said: “The location of the hostages is like two days’ walk from Komo with no communication network.

“The only access we have now is through a missionary based at Bosavi connected via a satellite phone.

“I have asked the LLG president, ward members and community leaders of Komo to find who’s missing in the community after speculation that some Komo youths are involved.

‘Act of terrorism’
“At this stage we do not have the identities of the individuals. Whatever the case maybe, no one has any right to abduct, kidnap, hold them hostage and ask for cash payment.

“This is an act of terrorism, like we hear of in other countries. Law enforcement agencies must take this seriously and deal with such crimes appropriately.”

His response comes after police said the armed men were allegedly from Komo in Hela.

He said that the situation was being closely monitored by the government.

Prime Minister James Marape, who is in Suva for the Pacific Islands Forum “unity” summit, has also confirmed that security personnel were monitoring the situation.

Across the nation, many people in the country have condemned the actions of the 21 men who are holding the four researchers hostage.

Republished from the PNG Post-Courier 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

Fijian national, jurist and lawyer Imrana Jalal has been awarded the Ruth Bader Ginsburg Medal of Honour by the World Jurists Association.

The award is given in recognition of inspiring women jurists who fight to defend and strengthen the rule of law, and to consolidate society’s advances in gender equity.

She is the first woman from the Australia, New Zealand and Pacific Island region to receive the award.

Jalal said she was stunned to receive the news, and that she was deeply honoured to be one of the recipients.

She said Justice Bader Ginsburg was her hero and one of her dreams was to meet her while she worked in the US at the World Bank but owing to covid that did not happen.

Jalal added that to receive this award in Justice Bader Ginsburg’s name was personally and deeply moving for her.

She will be one of eight women jurists to receive the award in a ceremony in Madrid, Spain, on May 8 and will be hosted by King Felipe VI of Spain at the Rule of Law Centre of the World Jurist Association.

The Ruth Bader Ginsburg Medal of Honour is a new international recognition, established by the World Jurist Association and presented for the first time in 2021.

It will be the second time since the death of the iconic Justice Bader Ginsburg of the Supreme Court of the United States that the award will be presented.

Jalal was selected by an eminent jury comprising members of the World Jurists Association, including the daughter of the Justice Bader Ginsburg, Professor Jane Ginsburg of Columbia Law School, New York, who was the president of the jury.

In 2021, the Medal of Honour was bestowed on eight distinguished female jurists and leaders from around the world including Christine Lagarde, president of the European Central Bank and former IMF head; Luz del Carmen Ibáñez Carranza, vice-president of the International Criminal Court; Maite Oronoz, chief justice of the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico; Navi Pillay, judge of the Supreme Court of South Africa; Rosario Silva de Lapuerta, vice-president of the European Court of Justice; Sujata Manohar, retired judge of the Supreme Court of India; and Young Hye Kim, senior judge, Commissioner at National Human Rights Commission.

Rashika Kumar is a FijiVillage News reporter.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Fiji’s Home affairs Minister has held an urgent meeting with the nation’s military chief after he expressed concern about the new People’s Alliance-led government.

The government, a three-party coalition led by Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka, has been in power for less than a month.

Major-General Jone Kalouniwai yesterday warned that the government was taking “shortcuts that circumvent the relevant processes and procedures” which could lead to “long-term national security consequences”.

Kalouniwai’s statement also highlighted the military’s “guardian role” in the constitution, which he claimed was to ensure “excesses [of power] of the past are not repeated”.

The Home Affairs Minister, Pio Tikoduadua, who has responsibility for defence, said he and Kalouniwai had a frank exchange of views, but both were committed to respecting the result of last month’s election.

In a statement, Tikoduadua said he assured the commander that all the government’s actions had been guided by the law.

“The commander and I have spoken, and we have expressed our views frankly to each other. We both believe in the rule of law, democracy, and the rights of every citizen to go about their affairs in peace,” he said.

‘Respecting will of people’
“We are both committed to respecting the will of the people through the outcome of the 2022 general election and protecting that decision, let come what may.

“No one should forget that the commander and the military have also helped us navigate our way, democratically, to a new government a month ago when many people were uncertain that Fiji could achieve a successful transition of government.

“All of us are learning. We are slowly undoing all the misconceptions about democratic governance that have been allowed to take root over the last 16 years. Our institutions are absorbing the impact of a new govemment with different ideas and new priorities.

“But through all of this, we will be talking to each other, in the spirit of consultation to provide the best for the Fijian people.”

The FBC News reports Prime Minister Rabuka said he was not concerned about the public utterances made by Jone Kalouniwai.

He said he had no concerns over the relationship he shared with the military, and he was confident in the RFMF leadership and also the force members.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Fiji lawyer and former human rights activist Imrana Jalal has offered a “warning” to her motherland that should people be investigated, prosecuted or dismissed, it must be done within the rule of law.

In a social media posting on her Facebook page, Jalal wrote: “A WARNING to ourselves in Fiji — it’s very important that if people are going to be investigated, dismissed, prosecuted or asked to resign voluntarily (without coercion) whether in a State-Owned Enterprise (SOE) or otherwise; or a commission of inquiry be set up, example, to look at the judiciary, that this all be done within the rule of law.

“There should be no victimisation or targeted prosecutions unless there is genuine evidence by independent investigators.

“I speak with authority on this having been targeted by the former regime personally.

“If we do otherwise, then we are no better than the corrupt regime [that has been] in power for the last 16 years.

“We need to start off the right way or we are tainted from the beginning.”

Jalal, a former Fiji human rights commissioner and previously a gender specialist with the Asia Development Bank, asked those calling for heads to roll to “be careful”.

She is the first woman to be appointed as a special project facilitator of the ADB.

‘Give our fragile democracy a chance’
“Be cautious. Refrain from this type of diatribe. No good will come of it. There can be no restoration to the rule of law like that,” she said.

“Let the government slowly make its way. Give them a chance: step by step we can restore our fragile democracy.”

Prominent Suva lawyer Graham Leung voiced similar sentiment, calling on Fijians to be patient and follow the law. He added that due process must be followed in dismissing or removing people from office.

“Arbitrary and unlawful dismissals must be avoided at all costs. There are constitutional processes for removal for some posts,” Leung said on his Facebook social media page.

“In some cases, there are legally binding contracts in place. Negotiations for early termination of contracts can take place by mutual agreement. These should be carried out professionally without malice or bad faith.

“We would be no better than the last government if we did this. Due process will take time.

“You cannot rectify and address 16 years of bad governance overnight. The change we all voted for will not happen at the press of a button.

“I urge the people of Fiji celebrating the new government’s victory and the removal of the previous authoritarian government to be patient. We will get there eventually.

“Let us not, in the excitement of the change, lose our sense of reason, fairness and logic.

“I completely accept that those [who] have broken the law must be held personally accountable, whether in the courts or according to law.”

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The alleged shooting of Indonesian fishermen by Papua New Guinean soldiers last week where one Indonesian was reportedly killed is a very serious matter and must be attended to immediately.

Prime Minister James Marape has given word that an investigation will be carried out to ascertain the facts behind the shooting.

Mr Marape said: “PNG will be conducting a full investigation into this matter and will inform the nation and Indonesia government too as to what happened.”

We hope the investigation that the PNG Defence Force Commander starts should include him urging his senior officers to quickly identify who among the soldiers had to use such extreme force in such a situation and the correct penalty should be placed on all who were responsible.

A few months back, a report came from the PNG-Solomons border where members of Solomon Islands police force forced a PNG fisherman to jump off his canoe and swim to shore.

Such bad tactics of border police officers or soldiers must be stopped by all governments, the PNG government or its neighbours.

The police and Defence Force hierarchies must monitor those officers who are patrolling the borders, whether at the western end or eastern end, are at all times aware of the rules and regulations that they should follow in policing the waters.

At no time, and under no circumstance, should an officer point a gun at a civilian, a fisherman or border crosser from either side of the border as part of conducting a routine check.

There is no need to threaten anyone with a gun, much less discharge a firearm.

Those fishermen or travellers are not terrorists or robbers.

They are not pirates, they are working people who may have got to the wrong side of the border.

The top hierarchies of the forces engaged in border patrols must also ensure that the soldiers or police officers engaged in such duties as policing a border must be the most intelligent of the lot, not some new graduate or someone with a bad history.

In these pandemic days where stress levels are high and opportunities for simple people to make ends meet are scarce, extreme care too much be taken by military or police personnel when conducting a check on a vessel.

Refrain from always using a firearm to make a point. Refrain from unnecessarily discharging a firearm.

Use your head and heart to do your job and do it properly.

We all hope that the investigation into the matter regarding the PNG soldiers and Indonesian fishermen is commenced quickly to hold people responsible with appropriate penalties to be effected forthwith.

The PNG Post-Courier editorial published today, 29 August 2022. Republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

A Fiji political leader is calling out the Australian and New Zealand governments on their “deafening silence” over human rights issues in the region.

The leader of the opposition National Federation Party, Professor Biman Prasad, has called out the two countries for not acknowledging what he described as “the declining standards” of democracy, governance, human rights, media freedom and freedom of speech issues in some Pacific countries.

Prasad said the recent 2022 Pacific Islands Leaders’ Forum ended with prime minister Anthony Albanese and Jacinda Ardern refusing to speak up on the decline in the standards of democracy.

“What concerns me is that the Pacific Forum is an important leaders’ meeting and both Australia and New Zealand are members,” Professor Prasad told RNZ’s Pacific Waves.

“One would have expected, even to the dislike of some within the forum, at least some mention of how the Pacific Forum is going to deal with declining standards of democracy, good governance, human rights, media freedom and freedom of speech,” he said.

“[But] no word from leaders, particularly Australia and New Zealand, was a bit concerning.”

Failed over glaring issues
The forum leaders’ meeting, he said, failed to address glaring issues, such as:

• the Fiji government’s spat with the head of the regionally-owned University of the South Pacific;
• questionable governance practices and attacks on free speech in Solomon Islands;
• a judiciary under siege in Kiribati;
• ongoing human rights abuses in West Papua; and
• the deterioration of decolonisation arrangements in New Caledonia.

According to Prasad, Albanese and Ardern refused to discuss these in Suva because they feared it would push Pacific nations “further into the arms of China”.

Such a stance gives credibility to the claim that “Australia and New Zealand are preoccupied with their own strategic interests first, before the interests of Pacific Island countries,” he wrote in a Development Policy Centre blog last week.

“I can speak about Fiji more specifically. As leader of an opposition political party in Parliament, I experienced first-hand the bullying, the intimidation by this government and the declining standards of democracy, of transparency and accountability,” he said.

“Fiji continues to behave in the guise of championing climate change around the world that everything is hunky dory in Fiji. It is not and that is why the forum is important.”

He said “appeasing autocratic leaders” to keep Beijing at bay was unacceptable and the sooner Canberra and Wellington realised appeasement was not the best strategy, the better it would be for the region.

NZ’s ‘no comment’
RNZ Pacific contacted both the Australian and New Zealand governments for comment.

New Zealand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade said it had no comment to make on Professor Prasad’s blog.

However, a spokesperson for Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade said Australia had a long-standing history of supporting work to strengthen regional action in support of human rights.

“Our focus was on the contributions we can make as a member of the Pacific family, rather than what others may be doing,” it said.

“Australia will talk to partner governments directly where we have concerns about democracy, transparency and the rule of law.”

Australia will be contributing up to A$7.7 million (NZ$8.6 million] over the next four-and-a-half years to support the Pacific Community in implementing the Human Rights and Social Development Division Business Plan to strengthen human rights in the region.

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Brij Vilash Lal, banished from the land of his birth by the Bainimarama government in November 2009 for championing democracy and barred from entering Fiji upon the orders of the Prime Minister, has died in Brisbane, 12 years after the draconian act of a heartless government.

The sudden and shocking death of Professor Brij Lal at the age of 69 should create a moment for all Fiji citizens to pause and reflect, even while we are distracted by our many personal challenges brought on by the pandemic and our other deep national problems.

Professor Lal was a giant on the international academic stage. But for the last 12 years of his life he was banned by the Bainimarama and FijiFirst governments from returning to the place of his birth.

Some of Fiji’s most outstanding people, with international reputations, are sporting figures, business people or international diplomats. But among historians and scholars, Professor Lal stood tall around the world.

From a poor farming family in Tabia, Vanua Levu, Professor Lal rose to be an emeritus professor of Pacific and Asian history at the Australian National University, one of the world’s highest-ranked places of learning.

He was an acknowledged expert on the Indian diaspora around the world. He was recognised as the pre-eminent historian on the history of indenture and Girmitiya.

Among his many books, he wrote authoritative biographies on A D Patel and Jai Ram Reddy, two of Fiji’s most influential political leaders.

1997 Fiji Constitution architect
Professor Lal will be remembered as one of the architects of the 1997 Fiji Constitution. His membership of the three-man Reeves Commission, with former Parliamentary Speaker Tomasi Vakatora, ushered in multiparty government and a national governing law strongly protective of good governance, human rights and multiracialism.

It is this constitution that current Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama, as Army Commander, twice abrogated in May 2000, only for it to be restored by the Fiji Court of Appeal in March 2001, and again in April 2009, bringing in a new legal order.

However, Professor Lal may be best remembered in Fiji as the target of a small-minded two-man government of Voreqe Bainimarama and Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, which banned him and his wife Dr Padma Lal indefinitely from returning to Fiji.

This was because Professor Lal spoke up for democracy and rule of law at a time the Bainimarama government did not want to be criticised. Professor Lal remained excluded from Fiji to the day of his death because Fiji’s insecure political leaders could never say they were wrong.

And they repeatedly refused to reconsider their reprehensible act despite resumption of parliamentary democracy 7 years ago in October 2014.

Pettiness of Fiji leaders
The pettiness of Fiji’s leaders will not take away Professor Lal’s towering achievements and scholarship, for which he will one day be fully recognised in the place he was born. All of us in Fiji are the poorer for his irreplaceable loss.

The opposition National Federation Party will be organising a condolence gathering to remember Professor Lal and details on this will be announced soon.

The party offers its deepest sympathies and heartfelt condolences to Dr Padma Narsey Lal, children Yogi and Niraj and the Lal and Narsey families in Fiji and abroad.

“I do not know whether I will ever be able to understand the mystery that is Fiji, and whether I will ever be allowed to return to again embrace the land of my birth. But I know one unalterable truth whatever happens, the green undulating hills of Tabia will always be a special place for me. Home is where the heart is.”

– Professor Brij Vilash Lal, October 2020

Professor Biman Prasad is leader of the Fiji opposition National Federation Party (NFP) and a former colleague of Professor Brij Lal at the University of the South Pacific.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Samoa’s incoming leader has condemned the actions of the former government and demanded it hand over power.

Fiame Naomi Mata’afa, speaking formally as the country’s elected prime minister, slammed the behaviour of Tuila’epa Sa’ilele Malielegaoi and his Human Rights Protection Party (HRPP).

Fiame’s FAST party, which won 26 seats in last month’s election – a majority of one, and the previous ruling party, HRPP, are waiting for the Supreme Court to rule on several contentious issues.

Speaking in a broadcast from FAST headquarters, Fiame said MPs and officials must move from their roles and offices and allow the public service to focus on its work in a business like and orderly way.

She warned the 25 HRPP MPs they must take steps to have themselves sworn in or risk being forced into byelections.

Fiame also said the recent attacks on the judiciary by the caretaker prime minister, Tuila’epa, and some government officials, had severely undermined the rule of law.

She called this “a perversity” and said it would be addressed shortly, “make no mistake”.

‘Severely undermined by corruption, abuse …’
“While all of democracy’s checks and balances and the public officeholders meant to protect us, have been severely undermined by corruption, nepotism and the abuse of power, help is on the way as we move into a time for restoration and revival,” she said.

Fiame, though, praised the previous achievements of Tuila’epa.

She said his legacy was a remarkable one, both nationally and internationally, for which the country is grateful, but it was being undermined by Tuila’epa’s recent actions.

“The more disruptive and disrespectful you become the more that unique legacy is diminished and tarnished, by your own words and your own deeds,” she said.

“Please think of our people and allow our government to take the reins of power from you, peacefully, respectfully and honourably.”

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

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The arrest, detention, and deportation of University of the South Pacific vice-chancellor Pal Ahluwalia and his wife are significant issues for Fiji and the “Sea of Islands”.

As a son of the Pacific committed to Oceania, I am dismayed by recent events at USP. I write in support of all the peoples of Fiji. Moreover, I uphold the mana of the many artistic and intellectual ancestors USP has provided for the education of younger generations of Pacific people across Oceania.

I acknowledge USP’s educational leadership for all peoples in Oceania with humility and respect. I extend solidarity to all USP staff and students from Fiji and around the Moana.

I do not arrogate the right to tell USP staff or students how they might resolve their issues. We Pasifika in Aotearoa are not qualified to lecture our brothers and sisters at USP about conflict resolution. USP has the collective culture, history, people, and protocols to resolve some of the issues about the expulsion of their vice-chancellor, Professor Pal Ahluwalia.

But I wish to provide some humble suggestions to empower those seeking to resolve the issues that USP in Fiji confronts today.

Speaking as a Pasifika activist, I acknowledge that the only resolutions will be holistic ones involving all parties. But I think the Fiji government can perform an important role in resolving all issues. In broader terms, I feel the Fiji government could perform an important leadership role in allowing USP to heal and move forward in a spirit of Moana unity.

Ramifications for Fiji, region
The Fiji government’s expulsion of Professor Pal Ahluwalia and his wife from Fiji has had tremendous ramifications for Fiji and the region.

Academic organisations, activists, legal organisations, NGOs, journalists, Fiji members of Parliament, regional politicians, and USP alumni, staff, and students have all clarified relevant issues about the Fiji government’s unilateral decision to expel Ahluwalia and his wife.

In summary, some of these issues are:

1. The rule of law and the right of due process;
2. Protection of human rights;
3. The protection of the right to dissent;
4. Academic freedom;
5. Unilateral government intervention into the affairs of USP;
6. Protection of USP staff from unfair dismissal,
7. Safety and the wellbeing of USP staff, students at USP in Fiji, including safe from arrest or detention;
8. Claims of corruption at USP;
9. Allegations against Pal Ahluwalia;
10. Claims of punitive action against Ahluwalia by the Fiji government and Fiji members of the USP Council;
11. Issues of staff remuneration;
12. The health of relationships between Fiji and other member states who co-own USP;
13. Distinctions between state and civil society, i.e. the distinctions between the Fiji government and the regional university campus in Fiji; and
14. Calls for a relocation of the office of USP’s vice-chancellor from Fiji to other member nations, such as Samoa or Vanuatu.

Helpful resolutions
The Fiji government could help resolve these matters by engaging in a number of actions, discussions and processes. It could:

• Invite Professor Pal Ahluwalia and his wife back into the country so the issues could be resolved in Fiji.
• Clarify precisely what part of the law Ahluwalia his wife are alleged to have breached.
• Recommit to protecting the human rights of all in Fiji. More specifically, the government could ensure that all USP employees’ human rights are guaranteed so academic freedom can be exercised responsibly.
• Acknowledge that Pal Ahluwalia and his wife’s human rights have been breached. Moreover, the government could act to ensure this does not happen again to any other USP employee.
• Take precautions not to directly intervene in the affairs of USP again by expelling employees of the university. Moreover, Fiji government representatives on the USP Council could work to ensure this is never carried out again at the university.
• Release the funding the Fiji government owes USP without strings attached.
• Work closely with USP’s member nations to work out collective resolutions to enhancing the regional nature and character of the institution. This could be achieved through the creation of innovative policies that ease current immigration restrictions on the recruitment and retention of staff particularly from the region, and, further, by helping to facilitate an easing of inter-country movement of USP staff and students among member countries.
• Uphold the sanctity of USP as a learning space and strongly discourage police and military units from entering any USP grounds in Fiji and elsewhere.
• Respect the autonomy of USP’s staff and student organisations.
• Ensure the University Council-commissioned 2019 BDO Report, which independently investigated all allegations of corruption, is officially released to all stakeholders including staff and students. The only way to investigate criticisms of Ahluwalia is for independent people to assess the truth of these allegations. Similarly, only independent voices can consider the truth of claims made on Ahluwalia’s behalf. The government agrees to accept the outcomes of such investigations. The search for truth and fact are being politicised because of the Fiji government’s interference in university matters. Truth can only prevail if it is not weaponised for political purposes.
• Ensure all concerns regarding staff remuneration are scrutinised fully and fairly by investigators acting independently of both the Fiji government and USP. The government could respect the independence of investigator’s findings. Moreover, the issue of remuneration for those staff who have served the region selflessly over long years could be examined with sensitivity and respect by investigators.
• Allow USP staff and students privacy to work through issues raised by Professor Ahluwalia’s deportation. The government could step back and encourage USP’s people on all sides of this issue to engage in toktok or talanoa in order to heal and move forward in unity. This might encourage people not to settle scores with one another via government and/or university politics.
• Articulate and clarify the lines of autonomy existing between the spheres of the Fijian state – and USP as part of Moana civil society. Then healthy lines of intersection between state and civil society might be established. If such lines are not clearly established, the Fiji government could be accused of trying to absorb USP in Fiji into an apparatus of the state.
• Seek assistance from Pacific neighbours to help sort out issues. Pacific unity is perhaps best demonstrated when we support one another. Working with Pacific Island friends ensures USP’s vision of re-shaping the future in Oceania continues. Moreover, working in partnership with other Pacific Island peoples ensures USP’s mission of empowering Moana peoples in the region continues for the foreseeable future.

Tony Fala is an activist, volunteer community worker and researcher living in Auckland, Aotearoa. He has Tokelau ancestry. According to genealogies held by family elders, Fala also has ancestors from Aotearoa, Samoa, Tonga, and other island groups in Oceania. He works as a volunteer for the Community Services Connect Trust rescuing food and distributing this to families in need. Fala is currently producing a small Pan-Pacific research project, and is also helping organise an Auckland anti-racist conference.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Maria Ressa and the Philippines “war on truth”. Video: Al Jazeera’s Witness

Pacific Media Watch Newsdesk

International human rights lawyers Amal Clooney and Caoilfhionn Gallagher QC will lead a legal team representing Maria Ressa, the award-winning Philippines journalist, editor and publisher who has been repeatedly arrested this year on charges that critics say are designed to silence her, reports CNN.

“It is clear that the government is manipulating the law to muzzle and intimidate one of its most credible media critics,” said the Committee to Protect Journalists after her arrest in March.

“Maria Ressa is a courageous journalist who is being persecuted for reporting the news and standing up to human rights abuses. We will pursue all available legal remedies to vindicate her rights and defend press freedom and the rule of law in the Philippines,” Clooney said in a press statement released by London-based law firm Doughty Street Chambers announcing the relationship.

READ MORE: Maria Ressa – targeted by Duterte

Ressa is the cofounder and editor of online news site Rappler, which has gained prominence for its unflinching coverage of Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte and his brutal war on drugs.

She has been indicted multiple times on libel and tax evasion charges that critics have described as designed to silence independent media in the southeast Asian country. She worked for CNN as an investigative journalist before starting Rappler.

In an op-ed published this year by Columbia Journalism Review, Ressa accused Duterte of leading a systematic campaign against news organisations in the Philippines, and against herself personally.

“Legal hassles can take up 90 percent of my time; a day after our May midterm elections, I was arraigned for cyber libel in the morning and appeared for a case of securities fraud in the afternoon,” she wrote.

Cyber libel charges
After being arrested on cyber libel charges in February, she told CNN it was an example of how the law was being “weaponised” against critics of the country’s president.

Speaking to CNN’s Kristie Lu Stout, Ressa said the law was “draining … democracy dry”.

Ressa had been charged with a lawsuit relating to a story written in 2012, which alleged that businessman Wilfredo Keng had links to illegal drugs and human trafficking.

However, the article was published by Rappler two years before the new cyber libel laws came into effect in the Philippines.

In March, she was detained at Manila airport and later charged with violating the anti-dummy law, legislation related to securities fraud.

Clooney has previously represented Reuters reporters Wa Lone and Kyaw Soe Oo, who were jailed in Myanmar under the country’s Official Secrets Act for reporting on a massacre of Rohingya civilians. The Pulitzer Prize-winning pair were released in May.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz