Search here...
Home Blog Page 63

Yamin Kogoya: Arrest of Papuan governor Enembe condemned as illegal Jakarta ‘kidnap’

By
Cafe Pacific Publisher
-
0
Papuan Governor Lukas Enembe
Papuan Governor Lukas Enembe . . . arrest in handcuffs over corruption allegations widely regarded as the "humiliation" of an elected Papuan leader by Indonesian authorities. Image: Liputan 6

ANALYSIS: By Yamin Kogoya

Following months of legal limbo and a health crisis, Papua Governor Lukas Enembe was arrested this week by the country’s Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) in a dramatic move condemned by critics as a “kidnapping”.

At noon on Tuesday, January 10, Governor Enembe was dining in a local restaurant near the headquarters of Indonesia’s Mobile Brigade Corps, known as Brimob.

After the arrest the Brimob transported him directly to Sentani Theys Eluay airport — an airport named in honour of another prominent Papuan leader who was callously murdered by the same security forces in 2002, not far from where the governor was arrested.

Governor Enembe was immediately flown to Jakarta to arrive at the Army Central Hospital (RSPAD), Gatot Soebroto, Central Jakarta, reports Kompas.com.

In what seems to be a cautiously premeditated arrest, Jakarta targeted Governor Enembe while he was alone and without the support of thousands of Papuans who had barricaded his residence since September last year.

Once the news of his arrest was leaked, supporters attempted to gather in Sentani at the airport, but they were outnumbered by heavy security forces. A few protesters were shot, and several were injured, with one protester dying from his injuries.

1 shot dead, several wounded
Papua Police Public Relations Officer Kombes Ignatius Benny Prabowo said when contacted by Tribunnews.com in Jakarta: “Yes, it is true that someone was shot dead on Tuesday.”

Among those who were shot were Hemanus Kobari Enembe (dead), Neiron Enembe, Kano Enembe, and Segira Enembe.

Surprisingly, they share the same clan names of the governor himself, indicating that only his immediate family were informed of his arrest.

Hemanus Kobari Enembe paid the ultimate price at the hand of Jakarta’s calculated planning and arrest of Papua’s governor.

The crisis began in September 2022, when Governor Enembe was named a suspect by the KPK and summoned by Brimob after it accused him of receiving bribes worth 1 million rupiah (NZ$112,000). This amount was then escalated into a rush of accusations against the governor, including a new allegation that the governor had paid US$39 million to overseas casinos, disclosing details of his private assets such as cars, houses, and properties.

Governor Lukas Enembe arrested
Governor Lukas Enembe . . . ill, but heavily guarded by the BRIMOD police after his arrest. Image: CNN/APR

Voices of prominent Papuan figures
A prominent Papuan, Natalius Pigai, Indonesia’s former human rights commissioner, was interviewed on January 11 by an INews TV news presenter regarding these extra allegations.

“If that’s the case,” Pigai replied, “then why don’t we use these wild extra allegations to investigate all the crimes committed in this country by the country’s top ministerial level, including the children of the president, as a conduit for investigating some of the crimes committed by his office in this country?

“Are we interested in that? Why just target Governor Lukas?”

Papuan Dr Benny Giay
Papuan Dr Benny Giay . . . his view is that the arrest of Governor Lukas Enembe serves the “interests of the political elite” in Jakarta. Image: Jubi screenshot APR

Papuan public intellectual Dr Benny Giay was seen in a video saying that the arrest of Governor Enembe by the KPK in Jayapura was to serve the interests of Jakarta’s political elite, whom he described as “hardliners” in relation to the power struggle to become number one in Papua’s province.

According to him, Governor Lukas Enembe was a victim of this power struggle.

Dr Socrates Yoman, president of the West Papua Fellowship of Baptist Churches, described the arrest as a “kidnapping”. He said the governor had been arrested illegally, without following any legal procedures — and neither the governor nor legal counsel was informed of his arrest.

According to Dr Yoman, Governor Enembe is ill and in the process of recovering from his illness. Thus, this pressure exerted by the state through the military and police violated Governor Enembe’s basic rights to health and humanity.

The behaviour of the state through BRIMOB constituted a crime against humanity or a gross violation of human rights because the governor was arrested during lunchtime without an arrest warrant and while he was unwell, he said.

“The governor is not a terrorist — he was elected Governor of Papua by the Papuan people.

“This kidnapping shows that the nation or country has no law. The country is controlled by people who have lost their humanity, opting instead for animalistic rage and a senseless lust for violence.

“Our goal is to restore their humanity so that they can see other human beings as human beings and become whole human beings,” said Dr Yoman.

The governor’s health
The governor’s health has deteriorated since he was banned from traveling to Singapore for regular medical aid since September last year.

The November 2022 letter from the Singaporean doctors appealing for Governor Enembe's medical evacuation
The 23 November 2022 letter from the Singaporean doctors appealing for Governor Enembe’s medical evacuation . . . ignored by the Indonesian authorities. Image: APR screenshot

Last October, Governor Enembe received two visits from Singapore medical specialists who have been treating him for a number of years.

Despite these visits, his health has continued to deteriorate, which led Singapore’s medical specialists to send a letter in November to authorities in Indonesia requesting that the governor be airlifted to Mount Elizabeth hospital.

The letter from Royal Healthcare in Singapore said:

“We have treated Governor Lukas remotely with routine blood tests, regular zoom consults and monitoring of his glucose and blood pressure levels since November 1, 2022. However, his condition has deteriorated rapidly the last week. His renal function is at a critical range (5.75mg/dl), and he may require dialysis sooner than later. His blood pressure is hovering 190-200/80-100 increasing his risk of morbidity and mortality. He has been advised on immediate evacuation to Singapore with direct admission to Mount Elizabeth Novena Hospital.”

The letters were ignored, and the sick governor was arrested and taken to a hospital in Jakarta, where he had previously refused to go.

Governor Enembe had previously written to KPK requesting that he receive urgent medical treatment in Singapore. Papuan police chiefs and KPK members were asked to accompany him, but this did not happen.

On November 30, 2022, Firli Bahuri, Chairman of KPK, visited the governor at his barricaded residence in Koya Jayapura, Papua, in what appeared to be a humane approach.

But what happened on Tuesday indicates that KPK had already decided to arrest him and take him to the Indonesian capital of Jakarta — almost 4500 km from his home town.

Many Papuan figures who go to Jakarta return home in coffins. Papuan protesters did not want their leader to be taken out of Papua, partly due to this fear.

Despite these protests, letters, and requests, Jakarta completely disregarded the will of the people and of the governor himself.

The plot to kidnap Governor Enembe appears to have been well planned over a period of four months since September, providing enough space for the situation in Papua to calm down and allowing the governor to leave his barricaded house alone without his Papuan “special forces”.

It was during the lunch hour of noon on Tuesday that KPK targeted him in a cunningly calculated manner.

Governor’s image in social media
Governor Enembe is portrayed in the Indonesia’s national narrative as a representative of the so-called “poor and backward” majority of Papuans, while portraying him as a man of a lavish lifestyle, owning properties and cars, and with great wealth.

Comments on social media are flooded with a common theme — portraying Papua’s governor as a “criminal”, with some even calling for his “execution”.

Some social media comments emerging from those fighting for West Papua’s liberation are echoing these themes by claiming that Governor Enembe’s case has nothing to do with the Free Papua Movement– his problem is with Jakarta only as he is a “colonial puppet ruler”.

It is true that Lukas Enembe is governor of Indonesian settler colonial provinces. However, Papuans have failed to understand the big picture — the ultimate fate of West Papua itself.

What would happen if West Papua remains part of Indonesia for the next 20-50 years?

Our failure to see the big picture by both Papuans and Indonesians, as well as the international community, is a result of Jakarta fabrication that West Papua is merely a national sovereignty issue for Indonesia. That is the crux of that fatal error.

The isolation of the governor from the rest of the Papuans as a “corruptor” and other dehumanising labels are designed to destroy Papuans’ self-esteem, stripping them of their pride, dignity, and self-respect.

The images and videos of the governor’s arrest, deportation, handcuffing in Jakarta in KPK uniform, and his admission to the military hospital while surrounded by heavily armed security forces are psychologically intimidating to Papuans.

Through brutal silence, politically loaded imagery has been used to convey a certain message:

“See what has happened to your respected leader, the big chief of the Papuan tribes; he is no longer a person. Jakarta still has the final say in what happens to all of you.”

Papuans are facing a highly choreographed state-sponsored terror campaign that shows no signs of abating.

For Papuans, the new year of 2023 should be a time of hope, new dreams, and new lives, but this has been marred once again by the arrest and kidnapping of a well-known and popular Papuan figure, as well as the death of a member of the governor’s family on Tuesday.

As human miseries continue to unfold in the Papuan homeland, Jakarta continues to conduct business as usual, pretending nothing is happening in West Papua while beating the drum of “development, prosperity, and progress” for the betterment of the backward Papuans.

With such prolonged tragedies, it is imperative that the old theories, terminologies, and paradigms that govern this brutal state of affairs be challenged.

A new paradigm is needed
The very foundation of our thinking between West Papua and Indonesia must be re-examined within the framework of what Tunisian writer, Albert Memmie, described as “coloniser and colonised”, when examining French treatment of colonised Tunisians, who emerged concurrent with Franz Fanon, the leading thinker of black experience in white, colonised Algeria.

The works of these thinkers provide insight into how the world of colonisers and colonised operates with its psychopathological manipulations in an unjust racially divided system of coloniser control.

These great decolonisation literature treasures will help Papuans to connect the dots of this last frontier to a bigger picture of centuries of war against colonised original peoples around the world, some of which were obliterated (Tasmania), able to escape (Algeria), or escaped but are still trying to reorganise themselves (Haiti).

Therefore, the coloniser and colonised paradigm is a useful mental framework to view Jakarta’s settler colonial activities and how Papuans (colonised) are continuously being lied to, manipulated, dissected, remade and destroyed — from all sides — in order to prevent them from uniting against the entity that threatens their very existence.

The real culprits in West Papua and proper Papuan justice
Most ordinary Papuans are unable to gain access to information regarding who exploits their natural resources, how much they are making, who receives the most benefits and how or why.

But Jakarta is too busy displaying Governor Enembe’s personal affairs and wild allegations in headline news — his entire existence is placed on public display, as an object of humiliation, just as the messianic Jesus was crucified on a Roman cross in order to convince Galilean followers that their beloved leader failed.

Let us not forget, however, that it was this publicly humiliated and crucified Jesus who forever changed the imperial world order and human history.

If true justice is to be delivered to colonised Papuans, then Papuans must put the Dutch on trial for abandoning them 60 years ago, and then hold the United Nations and the United States responsible for selling them, to Indonesia, 60 years ago.

In addition to arresting all international capitalist bandits that are exploiting West Papua under the disguise of multinational corporations, Indonesia should also be arrested for its crimes against Papuans, dating back over 61 years.

However, the question remains… who will deliver this proper justice for the colonised Papuans? Jakarta has certainly set itself on a pathological path of arresting, imprisoning, and executing any figure that appears to be a messianic figure to unite these dislocated original tribes for its final war for survival.

Yamin Kogoya is a West Papuan academic/activist who has a Master of Applied Anthropology and Participatory Development from the Australian National University and who contributes to Asia Pacific Report. From the Lani tribe in the Papuan Highlands, he is currently living in Brisbane, Queensland, Australia.

‘Up to French people’ to decide on New Caledonia’s future, says academic

By
Cafe Pacific Publisher
-
0
How Les Nouvelles Calédoniennes featured the FLNKS boycott
How Les Nouvelles Calédoniennes featured the FLNKS boycott on the front page for the last of three referendums. Image: Les Nouvelles Calédoniennes screenshot APR

RNZ Pacific

An Australian-based French law professor says it is up to the French people as a whole, and not the voters in New Caledonia, to decide the territory’s future statute.

Professor Eric Descheemaeker of the University of Melbourne’s Law School said New Caledonia’s three votes against full sovereignty meant that legally, the power to determine the future standing of the Pacific territory had reverted from New Caledonian voters to France as a whole.

In the three referendums between 2018 and 2021, a majority of New Caledonians rejected independence from France.

Professor Eric Descheemaeker
Professor Eric Descheemaeker . . . French constitutional framework still applies. Image: Merlbourne Law School

However, the last and third referendum under the 1998 Noumea Accord was boycotted by the pro-independence parties after France refused to postpone the vote to 2022 because of the covid-19 pandemic’s impact on the indigenous Kanak population.

The pro-independence Kanak and Socialist National Liberation Front (FLNKS) has been adamant that it will not recognise the referendum outcome, describing it as a humiliation of the Kanak people.

Amid the political fallout, Professor Descheemaeker has argued in an article in the blog Jus Politicum that the French constitutional framework still applies.

He said the rejection of the proposed sovereignty meant that New Caledonia was subject to the French constitution with its definition of national sovereignty.

The text says “no section of the people nor any individual may arrogate to itself, or to himself, the exercise thereof”.

Process not binding
Professor Descheemaeker also said the referendum process granted by Paris was not binding because a vote for independence would still have had to be approved by the French legislature and in a referendum.

He said the 1988 referendum involving all of France approved the Matignon Accords that paved the way for a vote on independence in New Caledonia within 10 years.

It did not take place, and political leaders deferred a decision by signing the Noumea Accord in 1998, which extended the deadline by another two decades.

Professor Descheemaeker said that with the referendum outcome, the provisions from 1988 could no longer be used to claim a separate entitlement for voters in New Caledonian, similar to there not being one for Parisians.

The political discussions are due to resume later this month once the FLNKS movement, which is a signatory to the Noumea Accord, has held its congress.

Formal talks on a new statute are yet to be launched, but speaking in the French National Assembly last month, Interior Minister Gerald Darmanin ruled out any further voting on the issue for five years.

Days after the last referendum in 2021, the then-Overseas Minister Sebastien Lecornu said he planned to have a vote in New Caledonia on a new statute by June 2023.

Kanaky New Caledonia referendum without the Kanaks
The last of three Kanaky New Caledonia referendums on independence on 12 December 2021 … “no validity without us”, the indigenous Kanak people. Image: FLNKS

Undertaking scuttled
But amid the political impasse and the absence of any substantive talks, the undertaking was scuttled.

The pro-French parties have said that with a new statute the restricted electoral rolls, which were brought in as part of the Noumea Accord process, must be opened to all French citizens.

Reserving voting rights in referendums and provincial elections to long-term residents and indigenous Kanaks, more than 40,000 French residents now lack full voting rights, being allowed to vote in French national elections only.

Professor Descheemaeker said that although there was no specific expiry date to the restrictions in New Caledonia, they would have to be reviewed.

He said the partial withdrawal of the right to vote from certain French citizens living in New Caledonia was contrary to the most fundamental constitutional principles.

He said the measures had only been validated by French and international authorities insofar as they were transitional.

Pro-independence parties are opposed to changing the rolls.

For them, the ringfencing of the electorate was an irreversible gain attained through the Noumea Accord.

They say this forms the bedrock of New Caledonian citizenship and identity as they pursue their campaign for an independent New Caledonia, which has been on the UN decolonisation list since 1986.

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

Why Pacific Islanders are staying put even as rising seas flood their homes and crops

By
Cafe Pacific Publisher
-
0
The village on Serua Island, Fiji
The village on Serua Island, Fiji . . . coastal erosion and flooding have caused severe damage over the past two decades. Image: Merawalesi Yee/The Conversation

ANALYSIS: By Merewalesi Yee, The University of Queensland; Annah Piggott-McKellar, Queensland University of Technology; Celia McMichael, The University of Melbourne, and Karen E McNamara, The University of Queensland

Climate change is forcing people around the world to abandon their homes. In the Pacific Islands, rising sea levels are leaving communities facing tough decisions about relocation.

Some are choosing to stay in high-risk areas.

Our research investigated this phenomenon, known as “voluntary immobility”.

The government of Fiji has identified around 800 communities that may have to relocate due to climate change impacts (six have already been moved). One of these is the village on Serua Island, which was the focus of our study.

Coastal erosion and flooding have severely damaged the village over the past two decades. Homes have been submerged, seawater has spoiled food crops and the seawall has been destroyed.

Despite this, almost all of Serua Island’s residents are choosing to stay.

We found their decision is based on “vanua”, an Indigenous Fijian word that refers to the interconnectedness of the natural environment, social bonds, ways of being, spirituality and stewardship of place. Vanua binds local communities to their land.

Residents feel an obligation to stay
Serua Island has historical importance. It is the traditional residence of the paramount chief of Serua province.

Waves submerge a house
A house on Serua Island is submerged by seawater. Image: A Serua Island resident/The Conversation

The island’s residents choose to remain because of their deep-rooted connections, to act as guardians and to meet their customary obligations to sustain a place of profound cultural importance. As one resident explained:

“Our forefathers chose to live and remain on the island just so they could be close to our chief.”

Sau Tabu burial site
Sau Tabu is the burial site of the paramount chiefs of Serua. Image: Merewalesi Yee/The Conversation

The link to ancestors is a vital part of life on Serua Island. Every family has a foundation stone upon which their ancestors built their house. One resident told us:

“In the past, when a foundation of a home is created, they name it, and that is where our ancestors were buried as well. Their bones, sweat, tears, hard work [are] all buried in the foundation.”

Many believe the disturbance of the foundation stone will bring misfortune to their relatives or to other members of their village.

The ocean that separates Serua Island from Fiji’s main island, Viti Levu, is also part of the identity of men and women of Serua. One man said:

“When you have walked to the island, that means you have finally stepped foot on Serua. Visitors to the island may find this a challenging way to get there. However, for us, travelling this body of water daily is the essence of a being Serua Islander.”

The ocean is a source of food and income, and a place of belonging. One woman said:

“The ocean is part of me and sustains me – we gauge when to go and when to return according to the tide.”

The sea crossing that separates Serua Island from Viti Levu
The sea crossing that separates Serua Island from Viti Levu is part of the islanders’ identity. Image: Merewalesi Yee/The Conversation

Serua Islanders are concerned that relocating to Viti Levu would disrupt the bond they have with their chief, sacred sites and the ocean. They fear relocation would lead to loss of their identity, cultural practices and place attachment. As one villager said:

“It may be difficult for an outsider to understand this process because it entails much more than simply giving up material possessions.”

If residents had to relocate due to climate change, it would be a last resort. Residents are keenly aware it would mean disrupting — or losing — not just material assets such as foundation stones, but sacred sites, a way of life and Indigenous knowledge.

Voluntary immobility is a global phenomenon
As climate tipping points are reached and harms escalate, humans must adapt. Yet even in places where relocation is proposed as a last resort, people may prefer to remain.

Voluntary immobility is not unique to Fiji. Around the world, households and communities are choosing to stay where climate risks are increasing or already high. Reasons include access to livelihoods, place-based connections, social bonds and differing risk perceptions.

As Australia faces climate-related hazards and disasters, such as floods and bushfires, people living in places of risk will need to consider whether to remain or move. This decision raises complex legal, financial and logistical issues. As with residents of Serua Island, it also raises important questions about the value that people ascribe to their connections to place.


Serua Island is one of about 800 communities in Fiji being forced to consider the prospect of relocation. Video: France 24

A decision for communities to make themselves
Relocation and retreat are not a panacea for climate risk in vulnerable locations. In many cases, people prefer to adapt in place and protect at-risk areas.

No climate adaptation policy should be decided without the full and direct participation of the affected local people and communities. Relocation programs should be culturally appropriate and align with local needs, and proceed only with the consent of residents.

In places where residents are unwilling to relocate, it is crucial to acknowledge and, where feasible, support their decision to stay. And people require relevant information on the risks and potential consequences of both staying and relocating.

This can help develop more appropriate adaptation strategies for communities in Fiji and beyond as people move home, but also resist relocation, in a warming world.The Conversation

Merewalesi Yee, PhD candidate, School of Earth and Environment Sciences, The University of Queensland; Dr Annah Piggott-McKellar, research fellow, School of Architecture and Built Environment, Queensland University of Technology; Dr Celia McMichael, senior lecturer in geography, The University of Melbourne, and Dr Karen E McNamara, associate professor, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Queensland. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

Paris court overturns statute of limitation in Tahiti corruption case

By
Cafe Pacific Publisher
-
0
Former Tahiti president Gaston Flosse (left) and businessman Hubert Haddad
Former Tahiti president Gaston Flosse (left) and businessman Hubert Haddad . . . telecommunications kickbacks case revived. Image: Tahiti-Infos

RNZ Pacific

France’s highest court has revived French Polynesia’s largest corruption case, which had been closed almost more than three years ago.

Eight people, including former president Gaston Flosse, were given jail sentences by Tahiti’s criminal court in 2013 for their roles in a kickback scheme to secure public sector contracts from the OPT telecommunications company.

On appeal in 2015, the case was thrown out over a technicality. In 2019, judicial authorities in Tahiti dismissed efforts to revisit the matter, saying the statute of limitations applied in the affair.

However, the court in Paris has now annulled their decision, saying that the relevant texts had been misunderstood.

The alleged misuse of public funds centred on French businessman Hubert Haddad paying US$2 million in kickbacks over 12 years to Flosse and his party to get the OPT contracts.

During the investigations and trial, it was established that Flosse’s secretary Melba Ortas used to collect the money as regular cash payments from Haddad’s local company, and Flosse admitted disbursing the money for private expenses.

While investigations were underway in 2009, Flosse was jailed for three weeks.

Imprisoned for three months
Haddad, who had been arrested in France, was also imprisoned for three months in Tahiti as part of the investigations, but on paying a US$800,000 bail, he secured his release.

The former head of the OPT and Air Tahiti, Nui Geffry Salmon, spent six months in preventive detention until he was freed on US$120,000 bail.

At their trial in 2013, Flosse and Haddad were given five-year prison sentences and fined US$110,000, but they appealed.

Flosse’s lawyers failed, however, in their bid to get France’s highest court to move the appeal case away from Tahiti after claiming they wouldn’t get a fair trial.

The criminal court also ordered that the OPT be reimbursed US$5.6 million.

Four months after the verdict, Flosse was elected president and within months, the lawyer acting for the OPT, James Lau, was dismissed.

Lau noted that those convicted had taken over key aspects of the impending appeal trial, likening the case to a “mafia-style affair”.

Procedural errors
In the appeal court in 2015, the case was thrown out because of procedural errors by the prosecution.

Attempts by the prosecution to revisit the case were quashed in 2019 when the case was closed.

The lawyer acting for Flosse, Francois Quinquis, said the latest decision in Paris to allow the affair to be retested is no surprise as the court tried to save the case.

He told Tahiti-infos he wished the prosecution good luck as the decisions reached so far had made the affair inextricable.

Haddad’s lawyer said the case would end once there were no protagonists left.

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

Behind the News: Media freedom, public interest and The Fiji Times

By
Cafe Pacific Publisher
-
0
Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka (second from left) and Deputy PM Professor Biman Prasad (left) talk to the media in Suva after their meeting with the Sodelpa management before winning the prime ministership vote
Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka (second from left) and Deputy PM Professor Biman Prasad (left) talk to the media in Suva after their meeting with the Sodelpa management before winning the prime ministership vote. Image: Timoci Vula/The Fiji Times

By John Mitchell in Suva

In any true democracy, the role of journalists and the media outlets they represent is to inform the people so that they can make educated and well-informed choices.

The role of politicians is to represent those who elected them.

They are to make decisions that best serve the public interest and to ensure that the concerns of citizens are heard, considered, and, where appropriate, acted upon.

In such a political system, the journalist and the politician must both serve the people but in peculiarly differing ways.

Journalists act on behalf of citizens by exploring and covering issues that concern the people and in doing so they include a diversity of voices and political opinions that offer different viewpoints and opinions.

The bottom line of their job is ensuring that politicians do their job transparently, with accountability and through better public service delivery.

In the end, journalism enhances, encourages meaningful dialogue and debate in society.

On the other hand, politicians use the media to reach the masses, make them understand their policies and through this — get acceptance and approval from the public.

Politicians love media spotlight
Politicians naturally love the media spotlight for without reporters nobody knows their policies and their good deeds, no matter how grand they may be.

Politicians love talking to reporters so they can get publicity.

Reporters like politicians too because they provide them with stories — there goes the long story of the symbiotic relationship between the press and powerful members of the legislature.

What a perfect relationship.

Absolutely wrong!

Some say the relationship is one of “love and hate” and always hangs in the balance.

This liaison of sorts is more than meets the eye and the truth is simple.

Like the legislature, the media has a prominent and permanent place in national leadership and governance (known as the Fourth Estate).

Critical components of democracy
Both are critical components of a democracy.

Because of their democratic mandate, the media and politicians cannot be fulltime bedfellows.

And as the saying goes, they will have their moments.

However, in past years The Fiji Times has always been seen as the “enemy of the state”.

This had nothing to do with the media’s work as a watchdog of society or the Fourth Estate, but rather with the way in which the former government muzzled the media and created an environment of fear through draconian media laws that stifled freedom of expression and constricted media freedom.

Simply put, a newspaper and any truly independent media outlet must be fair and in being fair, its content must reflect the rich diversity of views and opinions that exists in the public sphere, as well as the aspirations, fears and concerns of the varied groups that exist in the community.

Experts, academics or anyone outside of government is welcomed to use this forum of information exchange, dissemination and sharing.

Politicians, if they have nothing to hide, can use it too, provided what they have to say is honest, sincere and accurate.

Listening to pluralistic ‘voices’
A responsible government deliberately chooses to listen attentively to pluralistic “voices” in the media although these expressions may put it in an uncomfortable position.

A responsible government also explores avenues in which valid ideas could be propagated to improve its own practices and achieve its intended outcome.

In other words, a newspaper exists to, among other reasons, communicate and amplify issues of concern faced by citizens.

This includes voicing citizens’ complaints over any laxity in government’s service delivery, especially people in rural areas who often do not enjoy the public services that we so often take for granted in towns and cities.

So whenever, people use the mainstream media to raise concerns over poor roads, water, garbage disposal, education and inferior health services, the public does so with the genuine yearning for assistance and intervention from government.

And in providing this platform for exchange, the media achieves its democratic goal of getting authorities to effectively respond to taxpayers’ needs, keep their development promises and deliver according to their election manifestos.

Remember, a responsible newspaper or media does not exist to act as government’s mouthpiece.

Retaining media independence
If media outlets give up their independence and allow themselves to be used by politicians for political parties’ own political agenda and gains, then citizens who rely on the media as an instrument for meaningful dialogue, discussion and discourse will be denied their participatory space and expressive rights.

A responsible and autonomous newspaper like The Fiji Times does not exist to make government feel good.

For if this ever occurs, this newspaper will compromise its ability to provide the necessary oversight on government powers and actions, without which, abuse of power and corruption thrive to the detriment of ordinary citizens.

If media organisations and journalists who work for them operate in the way they should, then for obvious reasons, all politicians in government will “sometimes” find the media “upsetting” and “meddlesome”.

Copping the flak from ministers and those in positions of authority is part and parcel of the media’s work.

It is a healthy sign that democracy works.

This newspaper was instrumental in calling on the SVT (Soqosoqo Vakavulewa ni Taukei) government and its then prime minister, Sitiveni Rabuka, (now Fiji’s Prime Minister again under the People’s Alliance Party-PAP/National Federation Party (NFP) and Sodelpa coalition) to account for the enormous financial loss which caused the collapse of the National Bank of Fiji in the 1990s.

Our pages can prove that.

This newspaper also scrutinised many of the policies of the coalition government under the leadership of Mahendra Chaudhry and Laisenia Qarase, during whose time, this newspaper was the common foe.

Our pages can prove that.

Last government ‘vindictive, authoritarian’
But no government was as vindictive and authoritarian as the last government.

Today, early in the days of the PAP/NFP and Sodelpa coalition government, we are seeing the good old days of media freedom slowly coming back.

We can now doorstop the Prime Minister and call the Attorney-General at 9pm for a comment and get an answer.

The openness with which ministers talk to the press is encouraging.

We hope things stay that way and the government accepts that we will sometimes put out stories that it finds positive and there will be times when we will make its life difficult and uneasy.

At the end of the day, it is the people that we both work hard to serve.

Sometimes we will step on some people’s toes, be blamed for provoking disquiet and seem unpopular among powerful politicians.

That is to be expected and embraced.

Safeguarding press freedom
But we will continue to play a prominent role in safeguarding the freedom of the press so that all Fijians can enjoy their own rights and freedoms.

With the best intentions, our journalists will continue to forge forward with their pursuit of truth and human dignity, regardless of the political party in power.

As we rebuild Fiji and regain what many people think we’ve lost in 16 years, this newspaper will play a pivotal role in allowing government to reach the people so that they make informed choices about their lives.

We must face it — Fiji is heavily in debt, many families are struggling, the health system is in a poor state, thousands are trapped in poverty and the most vulnerable members of society are hanging in the balance, taking one day at a time.

It is in this environment of uncertainty that the media and politicians must operate in for the common good.

And as a responsible newspaper, we will listen to all Fijians and provide a safe space to express their voices.

That is our mandate and our promise.

John Mitchell is a senior Fiji Times feature writer who writes a weekly column, “Behind The News”. Republished with permission.

Rabuka tells Bainimarama: provide evidence ‘for your lies’ or face law

By
Cafe Pacific Publisher
-
0
Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka
Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka . . . “Members of our coalition have a message for Bainimarama." Image: Fijivillage

By Arieta Vakasukawaqa in Suva

Fiji’s opposition leader Voreqe Bainimarama has been warned to provide evidence of allegations he has made against the coalition government or face the full brunt of the law.

Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka issued the warning in a national address yesterday in response to Bainimarama’s claims that the situation in Fiji had deteriorated since Rabuka came into office.

Rabuka said he offered a hand of co-operation and wished to develop a positive relationship with the FijiFirst party, but Bainimarama has made it clear that he rejects the idea of both sides of Parliament working together.

“In recent days, Mr Bainimarama has been bombarding the country with lies and misinformation,” Rabuka said.

“He alleges that Fiji is in some sort of crisis, that our new coalition government is engaged in repressive, oppressive conduct.”

He said Bainimarama went on to claim that Fiji was reliving the “dark ages” and that families were living in fear of job losses.

He said the former prime minister had also attempted to terrify the public by trying to create racial disharmony along with former attorney-general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum.

‘Message for Bainimarama’
“Members of our coalition have a message for Bainimarama,” Rabuka said.

“On behalf of the people, we demand specific details of reports that you have received that we have acted unconstitutionally, contrary to the rule of law and in violation of good governance, and committed other transgressions.

“If he fails to provide the details of what he has published in his attempt to smear the image of our coalition, then he and those who are working with him are going to face consequences within the law.”

In a statement this week, Bainimarama claimed they had received “further reports of certain matters” that were taking place in government and that were detrimental to the Constitution, rule of law and governance.

Meanwhile, police public relations officer Ana Naisoro yesterday confirmed receiving complaints against the former prime minister, alleging his statements were inciteful.

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

Fiji sacks PR consultants Qorvis Communications and Vatis

By
Cafe Pacific Publisher
-
0

Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka confirms termination of the Corvis contract. Video: The Fiji Times

By Arieta Vakasukawaqa in Suva

Qorvis Communications and Vatis — the two controversial public relation companies employed by the FijiFirst government to manage its public relations work — have been terminated.

This was confirmed by Fiji’s Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka outside Suvavou House yesterday during an interview with journalists.

Rabuka said the two companies would be investigated without disclosing more details.

FBC News reports that Rabuka said: “I gave instructions earlier for their termination, the cessation of any appointment with them, and investigations on how the funds have been used and how much.”

He said the Ministry of Information would carry out work for the government.

Corvis has been highly controversial over its handling of Fiji public relations.

Heated debate over Qorvis budget
In 2017, there was heated debate over a motion to decrease the budget allocation for Qorvis Communications was moved by the opposition, now the government.

A budget of $1 million had been allocated for services from Qorvis Communications which was described as an “international public relations, advertising, media relations and crisis communications firm”.

National Federation Party leader Professor Biman Prasad, then in opposition but now co-Deputy Prime Minister said the government did not need Qorvis Communications.

However, then Economy Minister Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum interjected and told the NFP leader to “stick to the motion” and not “make speculation”.

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

FijiFirst seems to be ‘confused’ over role of Aiyaz, says Naidu

By
Cafe Pacific Publisher
-
0
Former Fiji Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum
Former Fiji Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum . . . under fire over the Constitutional Offices Commission. Image: The Fiji Times

By Felix Chaudhary in Suva

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.

Martyn Bradbury’s 17 editorial ‘no go’ zones for the NZ media

By
Cafe Pacific Publisher
-
0
The Daily Blog publisher Martyn Bradbury lists his 2022 New Zealand media
The Daily Blog publisher Martyn Bradbury lists his 2022 New Zealand media "blind spots". Image: The Big Smoke

COMMENTARY: By Martyn Bradbury

The Daily Blog gongs
THE DAILY BLOG’S 2022 INFAMOUS MEDIA GONGS

Last month The Daily Blog offered its New Year infamous news media gongs — and blasts — for 2022. In this extract, editor and publisher Martyn Bradbury names the mainstream media “blind spots”.

Graham Adams over at The Platform made the argument this year that the failure of mainstream media to engage with the debates occurring online is a threat to democracy.

With trust in New Zealand media at an all time low, I wondered what is the list of topics that you simply are NOT allowed to discuss on NZ mainstream media.

Here is my list of 17 topics over 30 years in New Zealand media:

  1. Palestine: You cannot talk about the brutal occupation of Palestine by Israel in NZ media. It’s just not allowed, any discussion has to be framed as “Poor Israelis being terrorised by evil angry Muslims”. There is never focus on the brutal occupation and when it ever does emerge in the media it’s always insinuated that any criticism is anti-Semitism.
  2. Child Poverty NEVER adult poverty: We only talk about child poverty because they deserve our pity. Adults in poverty can go screw themselves. Despite numbering around 800,000, adults in poverty are there because they “choose” to be there. The most important myth of neoliberalism is that your success is all your own, as is your failure. If an adult is in poverty, neoliberal cultural mythology states that is all on them and we have no obligation to help. That’s why we only ever talk endlessly about children in poverty because the vast majority of hard-hearted New Zealanders want to blame adults in poverty on them so we can pretend to be egalitarian without actually having to implement any policy.
  3. The Neoliberal NZ experiment: You are never allowed to question the de-unionised work force that amputated wages, you can never question selling off our assets, you can never criticise the growth über alles mentality, you are never allowed to attack the free market outcomes and you can’t step back and evaluate the 35-year neoliberal experiment in New Zealand because you remind the wage slaves of the horror of it all.
  4. Class: You cannot point out that the demarcation line in a capitalist democracy like New Zealand is the 1 percent richest plus their 9 percent enablers vs the 90 percent rest of us. Oh, you can wank on and on about your identity and your feelings about your identity in a never ending intersectionist diversity pronoun word salad, but you can’t point out that it’s really the 90 percent us vs the 10 percent them class break down because that would be effective and we can’t have effective on mainstream media when feelings are the currency to audience solidarity in an ever diminishing pie of attention.
  5. Immigration: It must always be framed as positive. It can never be argued that it is a cheap and lazy growth model that pushes down wages and places domestic poor in competition with International student language school scams and exploited migrant workers. Any criticism of Immigration makes you a xenophobe and because the Middle Classes like travelling and have global skills for sale, they see any criticism of migrants as an attack on their economic privileges.
  6. Hypertourism: We are never allowed to ask “how many is too many, you greedies”. The tourism industry that doesn’t give a shit about us locals, live for the 4 million tourists who visit annually. We are not allowed to ask why that amount of air travel is sustainable, we are not allowed to ask why selling Red Bull and V at tourist stops is somehow an economic miracle and we are certainly not allowed to question why these tourists aren’t directly being taxed meaningfully for the infrastructure they clog.
  7. Dairy as a Sunset Industry: We are never allowed to point out that the millisecond the manufactured food industry can make synthetic milk powder, they will dump us as a base ingredient and the entire dairy industry overnight will collapse. With synthetic milks and meats here within a decade, it is time to radically cull herds, focus on only organic and free range sustainable herds and move away from mass production dairy forever. No one is allowed to mention the iceberg that is looming up in front of the Fonteera Titanic.
  8. B-E-L-I-E-V-E victims: It’s like How to Kill a MockingBird was never written. People making serious allegations should be taken seriously, not B-E-L-I-E-V-E-D. That’s a tad fanatical Christian for me. It’s led to a change in our sexual assault laws where the Greens and Labour removed the only defence to rape so as to get more convictions, which when you think about it, is cult like and terrifying. Gerrymandering the law to ensure conviction isn’t justice, but in the current B-E-L-I-E-V-E victims culture it sure is and anyone saying otherwise is probably a rape apologist who should be put in prison immediately.
  9. The Trans debate: This debate is so toxic and anyone asking any question gets immediately decried as transphobic. I’ve seen nuclear reactor meltdowns that are less radioactive than this debate. I’m so terrified I’m not going to say anything other than “please don’t hurt my family” for even mentioning it.
  10. It’s never climate change for this catastrophic weather event: Catastrophic weather event after catastrophic weather event but it’s never connected to global warming! It’s like the weather is changing cataclysmically around us but because it’s not 100 percent sure that that cigarette you are smoking right now is the one that causes that lump inside you to become cancer, so we can’t connect this catastrophic weather event with a climate warming model that states clearly that we will see more and more catastrophic weather events.
  11. Scoops: No New Zealand media will never acknowledge another media’s scoop in spite of a united front being able to generate more exposure and better journalism.
  12. Te Reo fanaticism: You are not allowed to point out that barely 5 percent of the population speak Te Reo and that everyone who militantly fires up about it being an “official language” never seem that antagonistic about the lack of sign language use. Look, my daughter goes to a Māori immersion class and when she speaks Te Reo it makes me cry joyfully and I feel more connected to NZ than any other single moment. But endlessly ramming it down people’s throats seems woke language policing rather than a shared cultural treasure. You can still be an OK human being and not speak Te Reo.
  13. Māori land confiscation: Māori suffered losing 95 percent of their land in less than a century, they were almost decimated by disease and technology brought via colonisation, they endured the 1863 Settlements Act, they survived blatant lies and falsehoods devised to create the pretext for confiscation, and saw violence in the Waikato. Māori have lived throughout that entire experience and still get told to be grateful because Pākehā brought blankets, tobacco and “technology”.
  14. The Disabled: Almost 25 percent of New Zealand is disabled, yet for such a staggeringly huge number of people, their interests get little mention in the mainstream media.
  15. Corporate Iwi: You can’t bring up that that the corporate model used for Iwi to negotiate settlements is outrageous and has created a Māori capitalist elite who are as venal as Pākehā capitalists.
  16. Police worship: One of the most embarrassing parts about living in New Zealand is the disgusting manner in which so many acquiesce to the police. It’s never the cop’s fault when they shoot someone, it’s never the cop’s fault when they chase people to their death, it’s never the cop’s fault for planting evidence, it’s never the cops fault for using interrogation methods that bully false confessions out of vulnerable people. I think there is a settler cultural chip on our shoulders that always asks the mounted constabulary to bash those scary Māori at the edge of town because we are frightened of what goes bump in the night. We willingly give police total desecration to kill and maim and frame as long as long as they keep us safe. It’s sickening.
  17. House prices will increase FOREVER! Too many middle class folk are now property speculators and they must see their values climb to afford the extra credit cards the bank sends them. We can never talk about house prices coming down. They must never fall. Screw the homeless, scre the generations locked out of home ownership and screw the working poor. Buying a house is only for the children of the middle classes now. Screw everyone else. Boomer cradle to the grave subsidisations that didn’t extend to any other generation. Free Ben and Jerry Ice Cream for every Boomer forever! ME! ME! ME!

You’ll also note that because so many media are dependent on real estate advertising, there’s never been a better time to buy!

Martyn “Bomber” Bradbury is a New Zealand media commentator, former radio and TV host, and former executive producer of Alt TV — a now-defunct alternative music and culture channel. He is publisher of The Daily Blog and writes blogs at Tumeke! and TDB. Republished with permission.

Steven Ratuva: What an election in Fiji – some reflections, lessons

By
Cafe Pacific Publisher
-
0
Mohammed Riyaz and his family after voting at Conua District School at Kavanagasau, Nadroga, in last month's Fiji general election
Mohammed Riyaz and his family after voting at Conua District School at Kavanagasau, Nadroga, in last month's Fiji general election. Image: Jona Kontaci/The Fiji Times

ANALYSIS: By Professor Steven Ratuva

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.

1...626364...82Page 63 of 82

Popular Posts

Twitter

Follow, subscribe, interact via Café Pacific's social platforms (below).

DavidRobie.nz

The latest

How the US became blind to Israeli terror

Analysis 0
ANALYSIS: By Derek Leebaert The International Court of Justice’s (ICJ)...

Caitlin Johnstone: On human rights, ‘friendly’ war crimes and Western hypocrisy

Analysis 0
COMMENTARY: By Caitlin Johnstone The death toll has risen to...

Great journalism overview of troubling politics and violence in the Pacific region

Articles 0
BOOK REVIEW: By Anna-Karina Hermkens Don't Spoil My Beautiful Face:...

Subscribe

© 2023 DavidRobie.nz. All Rights Reserved. Served by Multimedia Investments Ltd.