Kanak Harvard law graduate Joe Xulue . . . "It can mean a lot to a young Kanak kid who is unsure of the dreams and aspirations that they have about themselves." Image: Joe Xulue/RNZ Pacific
By Finau Fonua
New Caledonian Joe Xulue has made history by becoming the first person of Kanak heritage to graduate from Harvard University in the United States.
During his graduation in Boston on June 6, he proudly wore the Kanak flag as he received a diploma in law — and photos of the moment have since gone viral, celebrated by fellow Kanaks across social media.
Xulue said his accomplishment is collective because it sets an example to fellow Kanaks.
“I see it as a service — a way of giving back to my community — even by just going to Harvard . . . it can mean a lot to a young Kanak kid who is unsure of the dreams and aspirations that they have about themselves,
“When I was up there holding the flag, despite alot of the things that my people have gone through because of colonisation, it felt so proud to showcase how much we can achieve.
“Getting to Harvard wasn’t easy, I’ve had to go through more rejection than acceptance to get to where I am today.”
Joe Xulue with his wife Yasmin at Harvard University . . . “It’s pretty clear that colonisation has dis-enfranchised so many of our people.” Image: Joe Xulue/RNZ Pacific
Kanak successes An avid New Caledonia pro-independence supporter, Xulue said his and other Kanak successes contributes to the indigenous movement for self-determination.
“It’s pretty clear that colonisation has dis-enfranchised so many of our people,” said Xulue.
“Young Kanaks like me are trying to change the narrative — to effectively reverse years and years of colonial rule, and policy guidelines and directions that have left us in a poor state.”
The French territory has seen recent political turbulence, with pro-independence supporters disputing a referendum in 2021 that rejected independence from France.
Political dissatisfaction is widespread among the Kanak people who inherit a history marred by war and oppression. The majority of native Kanaks, who make up over 41 percent of New Caledonia’s population, support independence.
Xulue is one of them, and he said getting a Harvard degree is one way of improving the socio-political condition of Kanaks.
“This idea of a neocolonial territory to exist in a world where we are supposed to be allowing countries to have independence is disconcerting,” he said.
Effects of colonisation “I find it so strange that a country like France will talk about equality and freedom for all, but won’t guarantee it to a nation like New Caledonia where they can clearly see the effects of colonisation on an indigenous group.
“On one hand, the French government talks about freedom and rights, but they don’t guarantee them to people who inherently deserve those rights.”
Outside Harvard University in Boston on graduation day when former Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern received an honorary doctorate. Image: Harvard Gazette/Kris Snibbe/RNZ Pacific
Before going to Harvard, Xulue completed a law degree at Auckland University — a hub for Pasifika academics.
He applied to Harvard after being encouraged to do so by others including Samoan Harvard graduate Dylan Asafo.
A key focus of his study was creating cultural spaces to improve justice systems.
“My application was based on the idea of using indigenous ideas and practices, to shape the more traditional legal structures that we have in New Zealand,” said Xulue.
“That was the basis for why I wanted to study and I knew it would give a platform to the Kanak struggle for independence.
“We see alot of the ways that different tikanga practices are in the New Zealand justice systems . . . we see how changing the settings like allowing for the kaumatua to get involved or allowing for the marae for youth justice processes can occur . . . simple ways we can use indigenous knowledge within the current colonial hegemony.”
“I look at the law as a tool to effect positive change for our people . . . I think that’s what Harvard saw and why they accepted me into their university.”
French President Emmanuel Macron (centre) and overseas minister Annick Girardin (right) meet Kanak leaders at the customary Senate in Noumea, the capital of New Caledonia. Image: Twitter/@EmmanuelMacron/RNZ Pacific
Finau Fonua is an RNZ Pacific journalist. This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
Tongan entrepreneur ‘Anau Mesui-Henry and her photographer husband Todd Henry . . . kava as "a tool to help us as people to heal and the silent battles that we face." Image: PMN News
By Alualumoana Luaitalo
A new business initiative in Aotearoa New Zealand aims to open up conversations about the benefits of kava on mental health.
Tongan entrepreneur ‘Anau Mesui-Henry and her photographer husband Todd Henry own Four Shells Kava Lounge in Auckland, creating a space for the community to use the Pacific Island drink to maintain its value and cultural identity.
They have started talanoa on kava and mental health in Auckland, Wellington and Gisborne.
The couple say the KAVAX sessions bring in people from all walks of life, and they get to enjoy some authentic kava for the night.
Mesui-Henry says because it is talanoa, it is open for everyone to come together and speak.
“Not all people will open up and share, but it’s a safe space where they can come through, indulge in some kava and explore solutions on how we can heal using our Pasifika culture,” she says.
“It’s the mana in knowing your natural tāonga, a tool to help us as people to heal and the silent battles that we face.”
Pasifika tools to connect
Mesui-Henry says although organisations like the Mental Health Foundation are doing great work with the resources they have, a “white approach” will not work alone.
She says Pasifika people have the tools to connect through kava, and improve mental health.
Mesui-Henry says some of the misconceptions around kava they have to work on dispelling are that it is bad for you, it’s “muddy water”, or once it numbs you, you are drunk.
“We are a community grassroots kind of place, and knowing our cultural keystone, kava has a place in society.”
Kava is part of significant cultural practices in different Pacific Islands, is known internationally for its relaxing properties, and is used as a herbal remedy.
The website of the Alcohol and Drug Foundation NZ advises that if a large amount of kava is consumed the following effects may be experienced: drowsiness, nausea, loss of muscle control, mild fever and pupil dilation and red eyes.
It is legal to drink kava in New Zealand.
Alualumoana Luaitalo is a Te Rito journalism cadet. A Pacific Media Network News article under the Public Interest Journalism Fund and republished with permission.
Papua Governor Lukas Enembe with members of his legal team as they briefly appeared on a video screen at the adjourned indictment hearing last Monday - June 12. He is due to appear in court again today for the trial. Image: Fedrik Tarigan/Java Post/Asia Pacific Report
SPECIAL REPORT: By Yamin Kogoya
Next month, on July 10, six months will have passed since Papua’s Governor Lukas Enembe was “kidnapped” and flown to Jakarta for charges over alleged one million rupiah (NZ$100,000) graft.
Despite his deteriorating health, he has been detained in a Corruption Eradication Commission’s cell (KPK) in the Indonesian capital — more than 3700 km from his hometown of Jayapura.
He is due to appear in court today, but that depends on his health status.
His drawn out ordeal has been full of drama and trauma. There has been indecisiveness around the case and the hearing date has been repeatedly rescheduled — from 20 more days, to 40 more days, and now into months.
There are no clear signs of any definite closure. For his family, friends, colleagues, and the Papuan people, this has been a nightmare.
While being held captive and tortured in the KPK’s prison cell in Jakarta, his kidney, stroke, and heart specialists in Singapore are concerned about what has been happening to their long-term patient.
In December 2020, Governor Enembe had a major stroke — for the fourth time. He lost his voice completely in Singapore, but his medical specialists at Mount Elizabeth hospital brought his voice back.
Since then, during a covid lockdown in 2021, he had another stroke, and was flown to Singapore.
Between 2020 and 2022 he had been receiving intensive medical assistance from Singapore. He was about to go to Singapore last September as part of his routine check-ups, only to discover that his bank account had been frozen, and his overseas travel blocked.
The trip in September was supposed to fix his already failing kidneys. He was unable to walk properly, his foot kept swelling and he began to lose his voice again.
He was on a strict diet as advised by his doctors in Singapore.
After Jakarta’s special security forces and KPK “abducted” him during a happy lunch hour at a local restaurant in his homeland on January 10, all his routine medical treatment in Singapore came to an abrupt halt.
Governor’s health
Following the abduction, medical specialists in Singapore expressed their concern in writing and requested that the medical report of his latest blood test from KPK Jakarta be released so that they could follow up on his critical health issues.
On 24 February 2023, the medical centre in Singapore wrote a medical request letter and addressed it directly to KPK in Jakarta.
“The above mentioned (Lukas Enembe) is a patient at Royal Healthcare Heart, Stroke and Cancer Centre under Patrick Ang (Senior Consultant Cardiologist) and Dr Francisco Salcido-Ochoa (Senior Renal Physician). He was last reviewed by us in October 2022. As his primary physicians, we are gravely concerned about his current medical status.
“We are aware that his renal condition has deteriorated over the last few months with suboptimal blood pressure control. We are humbly requesting a medical report on his renal parameters via biochemistry, blood pressure readings and a list of his current medications.”
To date, however, KPK has prevented his trusted long-time Singaporean medical specialists and family members from obtaining any reports regarding his health.
The governor’s family in Jakarta have repeatedly requested for an independent medical team to oversee his health, but KPK has refused.
Only KPK’s approved medical team is allowed to monitor his health and all the results of his blood tests, types of medications he has been offered and overall report on his treatment since the kidnapping has not been released to the governor, his family, medical specialists in Singapore or the Papuan people.
Elius Enembe, spokesperson of the governor’s family said they want the panel of judges at the Tipikor Jakarta court to appoint a team of independent doctors outside the Indonesian Doctors Association (IDI) to check the governor’s health condition.
According to the family, it was important to ensure Enembe’s current health conditions are verified independently before the court hearing takes place. This is because “we consider IDI to no longer be independent”, Lukas Enembe’s brother, Elius Enembe, told reporters in Jakarta, reports Medcom.
“After all,” he continued, “Indonesia’s Human Rights Commissioner had issued a recommendation that Lukas continue his treatment, rights that had been obtained before being arrested by the KPK, a service to be received from the Mount Elisabeth Singapore hospital doctor’s team.”
An independent opinion of the governor’s actual health condition is critical before the hearing so that judges have a clear, objective picture on his health condition.
“If there is an independent doctor, then there is another opinion that could be considered by the judge to ensure the governor’s health condition. This is what we are hoping for, so that the panel of judges can objectively make its decisions,” said Elius Enembe.
The court hearing
One of his five times failed case hearing attempts was supposed to be held in Central Jakarta’s District Court at 10am last Monday, 12 June 2023. This highly publicised and anticipated hearing did not take place.
Two conflicting narratives emerged about why this was adjourned.
Papua Governor Lukas Enembe on a video monitor inside Jakarta’s Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) building last Monday – June 12. Image: Irfan Kamil/compas.com
KPK’s view
According to the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), Lukas Enembe’s actions hampered the legal process. In fact, the head of the KPK news section, Ali Fikri, stated that his first session was met with a very uncooperative attitude.
“We regret the attitude of the defendant, which we consider uncooperative,” Fikri said in his statement quoted by Holopis.com on June 12.
“The confession of Lukas Enembe, who was ill and could not attend the trial, was considered strange and far-fetched by the KPK. The defendant can answer the judge’s questions and explain his situation, even though he later claims that he is ill,” he said.
Fikri also threatened Lukas Enembe by saying that the Governor would face consequences during the prosecution process.
“The KPK Prosecutor Team and the panel of judges will assess his attitude separately when conducting prosecutions or drafting charges,” he said. ‘
“Of course, there are aggravating matters or mitigating issues, which will be a consideration when a defendant is uncooperative in the trial process,” he continued.
“When the trial process takes place, the KPK will always include a doctor’s health report to anticipate Luke’s uncooperative attitude in the retrial,” Fikri said. “The KPK Prosecutor Team will convey to the court in detail the defendant’s health condition during the next [hearing],” he said.
The first hearing in Lukas Enembe’s gratuity case has been postponed until this week. The reason for this is that Lukas Enembe claimed he was sick and could not participate in the virtual trial.
The Governor’s legal team protest The Governor’s legal team protested against the KPK, saying that it was a “deliberate attempt” by the agency to manipulate public opinion based on biased and inaccurate information about what actually happened on Monday, June 12.
The following is the account provided by the Governor’s legal team after KPK was accused of spreading media news that the hearing had failed due to an “uncooperative governor” in terms of the legal proceedings on that day.
Monday, 12 June 2023, around 9.30am local Jakarta time, a guard entered the KPK’s detention room where Papua’s Governor, Lukas Enembe, was detained. The guard was requested to accompany the detained Governor to the hearing room.
Upon arriving at the door, the Governor asked the guard where the hearing was being held. The guard explained that he was taking him to the online courtroom in the red and white KPK building (red and white symbolise the colours of Indonesia’s flag or Bendera Merah Putih in Bahasa Indonesian).
The Governor said he would not attend the hearing via tele link. The Governor wanted to attend the hearing in person, not virtually via a screen.
Afterwards, the Governor went to his detainee room and wrote a letter of protest, explaining his aversion to viewing the proceedings on television. After the letter was written, the guard accompanied the Governor to the detention room to inform them of his desire to appear in court physically.
The court hearing was scheduled for 10am that day. Guards from KPK’s detention arrived at 9.30am to escort the Governor, allowing him only 30 minutes to prepare.
The Governor’s legal team was waiting outside the KPK’s building. As 10am approached, the legal team (Petrus, along with Cosmas Refra and Antonius Eko Nugroho), went to KPK’s receptionist and asked why they were not called to enter the hearing room.
The receptionist replied that they were still in the process of coordination since Enembe was not yet awake. Moments later, officers took the legal team into the detention visiting room, where there were masses of visitors because it was visiting time.
At one corner of the room, Governor Enembe was surrounded by prison guards working on a laptop. The governor’s lawyers were then told that the hearing would begin when the audio system was fixed.
When the Governor and the legal team finally met, the legal team asked Enembe why he was wearing shorts and a T-shirt to court. Governor Lukas said he was annoyed at the guard for suddenly arriving to escort him without warning, which is why he had not dressed neatly. He could not wear sandals because his feet were swollen.
Governor Enembe refused to have an online hearing because he had not been informed in advance of Monday’s hearing and the summons was only signed once the hearing was opened by the judges.
If the KPK prosecutor had notified him at least the day before the hearing, Governor Enembe would have cooperated. But he was only notified 30 minutes earlier.
As the judge covered the trial, the legal team led by Petrus, informed Governor Enembe to appear before the court on 19 June 2023. The governor nodded in agreement.
“In light of this explanation, we must emphasise that Mr Lukas does not intend to be uncooperative in facing the alleged case,” said the legal team.
According to Petrus, “the detained Governor Lukas Enembe did not immediately leave the detention room because he was still writing a statement that the prosecutor had not informed him in advance of the trial scheduled for Monday, 12 June 2023”.
The Governor’s next court hearing has been rescheduled for today and whether he can physically attend will depend on his health.
However, the main issue is will he be found guilty of the charges? There is a lot at stake.
Governor Lukas Enembe’s wife, Yulce Wenda (left) on the front bench in court last Monday. Yunus Wonda, chairman of Papua’s People Parliament, is on the front right and the governor’s family and staff are sitting behind. Image: ebcmedia.id.
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.
Media research director at Harvard University Dr Joan Donovan speaking to news executives and editors at Koi Tū's workshop on "disinformation and media manipulation" at the University of Auckland this week. Image: RNZ Pacific
External experts are poring over the “inappropriate editing” of international news published online by RNZ. It has already tightened editorial checks and stood down an online journalist. Will this dent trust in RNZ — or news in general? Were campaigns propagating national propaganda a factor? Mediawatch asks two experts with international experience.
MEDIAWATCH: By Colin Peacock
The comedians on 7 Days had a few laughs at RNZ’s expense against a backdrop of the Kremlin on TV Three this week.
“A Radio New Zealand digital journalist has been stood down after it emerged they’d been editing news stories on the broadcaster’s website to give them a pro-Russian slant, which is kind of disgusting,” host Jeremy Corbett said.
“You’d never get infiltration like that on 7 Days. Our security is too strong. Strong like a bear. Strong like the glorious Russian state and its leader Putin,” he said.
“I love this Russian strategy: ‘First, we take New Zealand’s fourth best and fourth most popular news site — then the world!” said Melanie Bracewell, who said she had not kept up with the news.
Just a joke, obviously, but this week some people have been asking if Kremlin campaigns played a role in the inappropriate editing of online world news.
It was on June 9 that the revelation of it kicked off a media frenzy about propaganda, misinformation, Russia, Ukraine, truth, trust and editorial standards that has been no laughing matter at RNZ.
The story went up a notch last weekend when TVNZ’s Thomas Mead revealed Ukrainian New Zealander Michael Lidski — along with 20 others — had complained about a story written by the journalist in May 2022, which RNZ had re-edited on the day to add alternative perspectives after prompting from an RNZ journalist who considered it sub-standard.
The next day on RNZ’s Checkpoint, presenter Lisa Owen said the suspended RNZ web journalist had told her he edited reports “in that way for five years” — and nobody had ever queried it or told him to stop.
RNZ chief executive Paul Thompson, who is also editor-in-chief, then told Checkpoint he did not consider what he had called “pro-Kremlin garbage” a resignation-worthy issue.
“I think this is a time for us actually working together to fix the problem,” he said.
RNZ had already begun taking out the trash in public by listing the corrupted (and now corrected) stories on the RNZ.co.nz homepage as they are discovered.
Thompson said the problem was “confined to a small area of what RNZ does” but by the following day, RNZ found six more stories — supplied originally by the reputable news agency Reuters — had also been edited in terms more favourable to the ruling regimes.
“RNZ has come out with a statement that said: ‘In our defence, we didn’t actually realise anyone was reading our stories’,” said 7 Days’ Jeremy Corbett.
That was just a gag — but it did actually explain just how it took so long for the dodgy edits to come to light and become newsworthy.
7 Days’ comedians have a laugh at RNZ against the backdrop of the Kremlin in last Thursday night’s episode. Image: TV Three screenshot RNZ/APR
Where the problem lay Last Wednesday’s cartoon in the Stuff papers — featuring an RNZ radio newsreader with a Pinocchio-length nose didn’t raise any laughs there either — because none of the slanted stories in question ever went out in the news on the air.
They were only to be found online — and this was a significant distinction as it turned out, because the checks and balances are not quite the same or made by the same staff.
“In radio, a reporter writes a story and sends it to a sub-editor who will then check it. And then a news reader has to read it so there’s a couple of stages. Maybe even a chief reporter would have checked it as well,” Corin Dann told RNZ Morning Report listeners last Monday.
“What I’m trying to establish is what sort of checks and balances were there to ensure that that world story was properly vetted,” he said.
That question — and others — will now be asked by the external experts appointed this week to run the rule of RNZ’s online publishing procedures for a review that will be made public.
On Thursday a former RNZer Brent Edwards made a similar point in the National Business Review where he’ is now the political editor.
“For a couple of years, I was the director of news gathering. I had a large responsibility for RNZ’s news coverage but technically I had no responsibility whatsoever for what went on the web,” he said.
“Done properly the RNZ review panel could do all news media a favour by providing a template for how online news should be curated. It should reinforce the importance of quality, ethical journalism,” Edwards added.
His NBR colleague Dita di Boni said “there but for the grace of God go other outlets” which have “gone digital” in news.
“I worked at TVNZ and there was a rush to digital as well with lots of resources going in but little oversight from the main newsroom.”
Calls for political action Prime Minister Chris Hipkins has made it clear he doesn’t want the government involved in RNZ’s editorial affairs.
David Seymour of the ACT party wanted an inquiry — and NZ First leader Winston Peters called for a Royal Commission into the media bias and manipulation.
Former National MP Nathan Guy told Newshub Nation this weekend “heads need to roll” at RNZ.
“If I was the broadcasting minister, I would want the chair in my office and to hold RNZ to account. I want timeframes. I want accountability because we just can’t afford to have our public broadcaster tell unfortunate mistruths to the public,” he said.
In the same discussion, Newsroom’s co-editor Mark Jennings reminded Guy that RNZ’s low-budget digital news transition happened under his National-led government which froze RNZ’s funding for almost a decade.
“This is what happens when you underfund an organisation for so long,” he said.
Jennings also said “trust in RNZ has been hammered by this” — and criticised RNZ chairman Dr Jim Mather for declining to be interviewed on Newshub Nation.
Earlier — under the headline Media shooting itself in the foot — Jennings said surveys have picked up a decline and trust and news media here.
“And the road back for the media just had a major speed bump,” he concluded.
How deep is the damage to trust?
The Press front page is dominated by the RNZ story. Image: The Press/RNZ Pacific
While the breach of editorial standards is clear, has there been an over-reaction to what may be the actions of just one employee, which took years to come to light?
Last week the think-tank Koi Tū: The Centre for Informed Futures at Auckland University hosted a timely “disinformation and media manipulation” workshop attended by executives and editors from most major media outlets.
It was arranged long before RNZs problems arose — but those ended up dominating discussion on this theme.
Among the participants was media consultant and commentator Peter Bale, who has previously worked overseas for Reuters, as well as The Financial Times and CNN.
“I really feel for RNZ in this, for the chief executive and everybody else there who does generally a great job. The issue of trust here is in this person’s relationship with their employer and their relationship with the facts.”
The exposure of the “inappropriate editing” undetected for so long has created the impression a lot of content is published online with no checking. That is sometimes the case when speed is a priority, but the vast majority of stuff does go past at least two eyes before publication.
“I think it is true also that editing has been diminished as a skill. But I don’t think it’s necessarily a failure of editing here but a failure of this person’s understanding of what their job is,” Bale told Mediawatch.
“You shouldn’t necessarily need to have a second or third pair of eyes when processing a Reuters story that’s already gone through multiple editors. The critical issue for RNZ is whether they took the initial complaints seriously enough,” he said.
‘Pro-Kremlin garbage’?
Peter Bale, editor of WikiTribune . . . “This person has inserted what are in some people’s views genuine talking points [about] the Russian view . . . But it was very ham-fisted.” Image: RNZ Pacific
There have been many reports in recent years about Russia seeding misinformation and disinformation abroad.
Last Tuesday, security and technology consultant Paul Buchanan told Morning Report that RNZ should be better prepared for authoritarian states seeking to mess with its news.
“This incident that prompted this investigation may or may not be just one individual who has certain opinions about the war between Russia and Ukraine. But it is possible that . . . stories were manipulated from abroad,” he said.
Back in March the acting Director-General of the SIS told Parliament: “States are trying, in a coercive disruptive and a covert way, to influence the behaviors of people in New Zealand and influencing their decision making”.
John Mackey named no nations at the time, but his GCSB counterpart Andrew Hampton told MPs research had shown Russia was the source of misinformation many Kiwis were consuming.
Is it really likely the Kremlin or its proxies are pushing propaganda into the news here? And if so, to what end?
“I think there’s been a little bit of ‘too florid’ language used about this. This person has inserted what are in some people’s views genuine talking points from those who . . . want to have expressed what the Russian view is. But it was very ham-fisted,” said Bale.
“There are ways to do this. You could have inserted the Russian perspective to highlight the fact that there is a different view about things like the Orange Revolution when the pro-Kremlin leader in Kyiv was overthrown,” he said.
Not necessarily ‘propaganda’
“I don’t think it is necessarily ‘Kremlin propaganda’ as it’s been described. It was just a misguided attempt to bring another perspective, I suspect, but it still represents a tremendous breach of trust,” he said.
“I write a weekly newsletter for The Spinoff about international news, and I try sometimes to show . . . there are other perspectives on these stories. Those things are legitimate to address — but not just surreptitiously squeeze into a story in some sort of perceived balance.
“I don’t think in this particular case that it is to do with the spread of disinformation or misinformation by Russia. I think this is a different set of problems. But I agree (there’s a) threat from the kind of chaos-driving techniques that Russia is particularly brilliant at. They’re very skilled at twisting stories . . . and I think we need to be ready for it,” he said.
The guest speaker at that Koi Tū event last Wednesday was Dr Joan Donovan, the research director of the Shorenstein center on Media and Politics at Harvard University in the US, where she researches and tracks the sources of misrepresentation and misinformation in the media, and the impact they have on public trust in media — and also how media can prepare for it.
At the point where 15 supplied news stories had been found to be “inappropriately edited” by RNZ, she took to Twitter to say: “This is wild. Fake news has reached new heights.”
Set against what we’ve seen in US politics — and about Russia and Ukraine — is it really that bad?
“Usually what you see is the spoofing of a website or a URL in order to look like you’re a certain outlet and distribute disinformation that way. It’s very unlikely that someone would go in and work a job and be editing articles without proper oversight,” said Donovan — who is also the co-author of recently published book,Meme Wars, The Untold Story of the Online Battles Upending Democracy.
“I think when it comes to one country, wanting to insert their views into another country — even though New Zealand is very small — it does track that this would be a way to influence a large group of people.
“But I don’t think if any of us know the degree to which this could be an international operation or not,” she told Mediawatch.
“What you learn is that their pattern is that they happen over and over and over again until a news agency or platform company figures out a mitigation tactic, whether it’s removing that link from search or writing critical press or debunking those stories.
“When I think about the fallout of it . . . using the legitimacy of RNZ in a parasitical kind of way and that legitimacy to spread propaganda is one of the most important pieces of this puzzle that we would need to explore more,” she said.
Colin Peacock is the RNZ Mediawatch presenter. This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.
"We are all learning lessons about the FijiFirst party (FFP). Six months ago it was all-powerful. Its leaders sat in taxpayer-funded government offices and did (pretty much) whatever they wanted." Image: FijiFirst FB
ANALYSIS: By Richard Naidu in Suva
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.
The FijiFirst party 2022/3 balance sheet . . . “Why pretend otherwise?” Image: Elections Office screengrab FT/APR
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 is also a National Federation Party member and the chair of the Coalition government’s Fiscal Review Committee. He has enough sulu. Republished with permission.
A group of Papuan women and children wave Melanesian state flags as they declare their support for full MSG membership and plead for a "safe West Papua". Image: ULMWP
Seven executives representing all the customary regions of West Papua have declared their support for the United Liberation Movement for West Papua (ULMWP) gaining full membership of the Melanesian Spearhead Group.
The executives are of the ULMWP ‘provisional government’ in the Indonesian-ruled Melanesian region.
ULMWP’s executive, legislative and judicial councils had earlier made a declaration in support of full membership in Jayapura on 4 June 2023.
ULMWP president Benny Wenda had separately announced his support for MSG full membership, saying “our agenda is now totally focused on consolidating support for full membership”.
According to the statement, the whole of the West Papuan liberation movement stood united behind the shared goal of MSG full membership.
The seven customary regions of West Papua and the executives representing them are: Anim-Ha Region – Mathias Tambai; Bomberay Region – Erik Fimbay; Domberay Region – Markus Yenu; Lapago Region – Herman Kossay; Mamta/Tabi Region – Beny Yantewo; Meepago Region – Habel Nawipa; Saireri Region – Edison Kendi.
While MSG membership comprises the Melanesian states of Fiji, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands and Vanuatu, there is a long-established precedent in a political grouping, the Kanak and Soclalist National Liberation Front (FLNKS), representing New Caledonia as a full member.
19 arrested
Meanwhile, the human rights watchdog Tapol reports that the Indonesian government “continues to tread on the right to peaceful free expression in West Papua”.
“This can be seen from arrests and treason charges against three members of the peaceful independence campaign group, the National Committee for West Papua (Komite Nasional Papua Barat, KNPB), in Tambrauw Regency, Southwest Papua province,” the agency said in a statement.
The arrests took place on 9 June 2023, in Sarwom village, where 19 people were taken into custody.
Those arrested were a mixture of members of the coordinating body for the KNPB from neighbouring Maybrat regency, as well as local members.
The head of West Papua area police claimed that those arrested had been proclaiming the founding of the KNPB in Tambrauw, and calling for the independence of West Papua from Indonesia.
Police also claimed that the group put up a fight, being arrested with TNI support.
However, activist groups stated that they were actually only eating food and drinking coffee together without disturbing anybody in the local area, when the police arrived with weapons.
Activist groups also fiercely denied the “police insinuation” that the KNPB had links to the West Papua National Liberation Army – Free Papua Movement (Tentara Pembebasan Nasional Papua Barat – Organisasi Papua Merdeka (TPNPB-OPM)).
West Papua’s seven customary regions . . . united behind Papuan full membership of the MSG. Image: Tabloid Jubi
A PNG Post-Courier newsboy on the streets in Port Moresby . . . a reminder that Parliament belongs to the people. Their voice must be heard. Image: PNG Post-Courier
EDITORIAL: PNG Post-Courier
Mister Speaker, our collective question without notice is to you mister Speaker. We want the Prime Minister and his deputy to take note Sir.
Our question from the Media Gallery is specifically directed to you, Mr Speaker, because of events that have transpired in the last 48 hours in which the freedom of the media in the people’s House has been once again curtailed.
Mr Speaker, we are aware of proposed changes to laws that are yet to reach the House that have been circulated by the Minister for Communications for consultation with all stakeholders in the media industry on the media development policy document, we are still concerned about what these will further impinge on the operations of mainstream media in PNG in covering, questioning and investigating Parliament, politicians and government departments and their activities.
Last week, our members’ movements in and around the National Parliament at Waigani was further restricted by members of the Parliamentary Security Services.
We are now restricted to the press gallery and cannot further venture around the House in search of news. Mr Speaker, is the media really a serious threat to you and the members of the House that you have to apply such stringent measures to curtail our movements?
Parliament is an icon of our democracy. It is rightfully the people’s House, might we remind you mister Speaker, that we are guaranteed freedom of movement, freedom of speech, freedom to engage with all leaders mandated by the people to represent them here.
What then is the reason for you to set up barriers around the hallways, offices of MPs and public walkways, Mr Speaker?
Your Parliamentary Clerk is lost, Mr Speaker. In our queries not aware of any order to gag the media in the people’s House. His deputy is muted and cannot find a reason for this preposterous decision to restrict our movements in the House.
Acting Speaker’s defiant reply to the Post-Courier about his media restrictions . . . “the Speaker is responsible for upholding the dignity of Parliament.” Image: The National screenshot APR
Mr Speaker, we consider this a serious impingement on the freedom of journalists to access Parliament House, report on the proceedings, seek out and question MPs on the spot.
Sir, Mr Speaker, we are well aware of the processes, procedures and decorum of the house, and where we as political reporters and photographers can traverse and that we always stay on our side of the fence.
Mr Speaker, let us remind you once again that Parliament belongs to the people. Their voice must be heard. Their MPs must be on record to deliver their needs and wants and their views.
The people cannot be denied. This will be a grave travesty Mr Speaker, if you deny the people their freedom to know what is transpiring in Parliament by silencing the media.
In the past, the media had a very good relationship with your office and we are pleased to say that the Speaker has on more than one occasion, assisted the members of the media with accreditation, and even transportation.
But Mr Speaker, don’t entertain any point of order from other Members on our question. They have had their day on the floor.
Mister Speaker, we members of the media are not primitives. Far from it, we are just the messengers of the people.
One last friendly reminder Mr Speaker. The very people that you are trying to restrict are the ones that you will need to get the message out to the people and to the world.
We are not your enemies. We are here to ensure your all 118 MPs do a proper job transparently without fear or favour.
Thank you Mr Speaker.
This PNG Post-Courier editorial was published under the headline “A Question without Notice” on 12 June 2023. Republished with permission.
Former PNG prime minister Peter O'Neill . . . "We are conceding our jurisdiction over to the US government so we just need to be careful about what we are saying." Image: PNG post-Courier
By Jeffrey Elapa in Port Moresby
Former Papua New Guinean prime minister Peter O’Neill says the controversial US-PNG Defence Cooperation Agreement threatens the country’s sovereignty.
He said the agreement negotiation was started in 2016 by his government but it was different in content from the one signed with the US.
O’Neill said the agreement encroached into sovereignty of Papua New Guinea, particularly Article 3 of the Agreement that relates to giving immunity to US military personnel.
He said this section stated that PNG was conceding its jurisdiction over to the visiting forces and it further stated that the US forces would have exclusive rights over criminal jurisdictions against US military personnel.
“Bear in mind the Australian ECP that was challenged by the Morobe Governor Luther Wenge and the Supreme Court nullified the agreement and this agreement is similar in nature.
“By when we are adopting in this Parliament, we are conceding our jurisdiction over to the US government so we just need to be careful about what we are saying.
“Additionally [the] agreement says that the US government has exclusive rights to exercise civil and administrative jurisdiction over the US personnel for all their acts while on duty.
Notification of arrest
“Any act done outside of duty will come under PNG jurisdiction but PNG authorities will immediately notify the US authorities, and properly transfer the personnel over to the US authorities, that the US authorities will be notified of the detention or arrest and that their properties will be inviolable.
“This is not in line with the provisions of our Constitution. That was tested by the Wenge challenge so I think Parliament and government need to take heed of this,” he said.
O’Neill said Paragraph 4 stated that US personnel would have the authority to impose discipline measures in the territory of PNG in accordance with US laws and regulations.
He said Manus, Jackson International Airport, Nazab Airport, Lae Port, Lombrum, and Momote Airport were areas the US would have “unlimited access” to and control over these facilities and areas.
“This is what we have agreed to and they will not pay one single toea and, according to Article 5 Paragraph 2, these properties will be given access without rental and charges to the US.
“And further on Article 6, US forces can position their equipment, their personnel, supplies and materials at any of these places.”
O’Neill said that when talking about “ownership” of infrastructure, nothing would be fixed to the ground and they would remove them and go away with them.
Exempt from all fees
He said the agreement, according to Article 9 paragraph 2, said that all the people that would come to PNG (US military personnel and contractors) would be exempted from all other immigration requirements — including payment of fees, taxes and duties — for entry or exiting the country.
He said that under Article 12 Paragraph 4, the US personnel would be exempted from paying taxes, including on income, salary and emoluments.
“So there will be no revenues from salary and wages tax and in Paragraph 5 [it] states that includes their contractors [that] they engaged [who] will be also exempted,” O’Neill said.
“I can’t see any agreement about training of our personnel, I can’t see any of our personnel being engaged with the US Army and I can’t see any specific investment in the infrastructure in the country.
“So what are we doing this agreement for?
“There is no specifics of what benefit is coming as it is not mentioned in the agreement.
“In the Ship Rider Agreement, we are giving almost exclusive rights to our waters. Therefore we need to be careful.
“I know our lawyers are having a look at it, and probably see [if] that it is in compliance with our Constitution, but I think there needs to be further clarity into this agreement,” he said.
Jeffrey Elapa is a PNG Post-Courier reporter. Republished with permission.
New Zealand pilot Phillip Mehrtens was photographed with his rebel captors in Indonesia's Papua region . . . since his kidnapping, violence has escalated between the Indonesian Army and the guerrilla TPNPB. Image: TPNPB
ANALYSIS:By Damien Kingsbury
New Zealand pilot Philip Mehrtens has now been held hostage in West Papua for four months. Stalled attempts to negotiate his release, and an unsuccessful Indonesian military rescue attempt, suggest a confused picture behind the scenes.
Members of the West Papua National Liberation Army (TPNPB) kidnapped Mehrtens on February 7, demanding Indonesia recognise West Papua’s independence.
The Nduga regency, where Mehrtens was taken and his plane burnt, is known for pro-independence attacks and military reprisals.
New Zealand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade has said: “We’re doing everything we can to secure a peaceful resolution and Mr Mehrtens’ safe release, including working closely with the Indonesian authorities and deploying New Zealand consular staff.”
Meanwhile, the Indonesian military (TNI) has continued its military operation to hunt down the TPNPB — including by bombing from aircraft, according to Mehrtens in one of several “proof of life” videos released by the TPNPB.
Early negotiations From late February, I was authorised by the TPNPB to act as an intermediary with the New Zealand government. This was based on having previously worked with pro-independence West Papuan groups and was confirmed in a video from the TPNPB to the New Zealand government.
In this capacity, I communicated regularly with a New Zealand Police hostage negotiator, including when the TPNPB changed its demands.
The TPNPB had initially said it would kill Mehrtens unless Indonesia recognised West Papua’s independence. But, after agreeing to negotiate, the TPNPB said it would save Mehrtens’ life while seeking to extract concessions from the New Zealand government.
Its current position is that New Zealand stop its citizens from working in or travelling to West Papua, and also cease military support for Indonesia.
In late May, however, frustrated by the lack of response, the TPNPB again said it would kill Mehrtens if talks were not forthcoming.
My involvement with the New Zealand government ended when I was told the government had decided to use another channel of communication with the group. As events have unfolded, my understanding is that the TPNPB did not accept this change of communication channels.
West Papua rebels threaten to shoot New Zealand pilot if independence talks denied https://t.co/03CakUChHu
Latest in a long struggle
The TPNPB is led by Egianus Kogeya, son of Daniel Yudas Kogeya, who was killed by Indonesian soldiers in an operation to rescue hostages taken in 1996. The TPNPB is one of a small number of armed pro-independence groups in West Papua, each aligned with a faction of the Free West Papua movement.
The West Papua independence movement grew out of Dutch plans to give West Papua independence. Indonesia argued that Indonesia should be the successor to the Dutch East Indies in its entirety, and in 1963 assumed administration of West Papua with US backing. It formally incorporated West Papua in 1969, after 1035 village leaders were forced at gunpoint to vote for inclusion in Indonesia.
As a result of Indonesians moving to this “frontier”, more than 40 percent of West Papua’s population is now non-Melanesian. West Papuans, meanwhile, are second-class citizens in their own land.
Despite the territory having Indonesia’s richest economic output, West Papuans have among the worst infant mortality, average life expectancy, nutrition, literacy and income in Indonesia.
Critically, freedom of speech is also limited, human rights violations continue unabated, and the political process is riven by corruption, vote buying and violence. As a consequence, West Papua’s independence movement continues.
There have been a number of mostly small military actions and kidnappings highlighting West Papua’s claim for independence.
“Flag-raising” ceremonies and street protests have been used to encourage a sense of unity around the independence struggle.
These have resulted in attacks by the Indonesian military (TNI) and police, leading to killings, disappearances, torture and imprisonment. Human rights advocates suggest hundreds of thousands have died as a result of West Papua’s incorporation into Indonesia.
Illustrating the escalating conflict, in 2018 the TPNPB kidnapped and killed more than 20 Indonesian workers building a road through the Nduga regency. It has also killed a number of Indonesian soldiers, including some of those hunting for Mehrtens.
Negotiations stalled TPNPB spokesperson Sebby Sambom has said foreigners were legitimate targets because their governments support Indonesia. Despite Kogeya’s initial claim that Mehrtens would be killed if demands were not met, Sambom and TPNPB diplomatic officer Akouboo Amadus Douw had responded positively to the idea of negotiation for his release.
Since talks broke down, however, the TPNPB has said there would be no further proof-of-life videos of Mehrtens. With the TPNPB’s late May statement that Mehrtens would be killed if New Zealand did not negotiate, his kidnapping seems to have reached a stalemate.
The TPNPB has told me it is concerned that New Zealand may be prioritising its relationship with Indonesia over Mehrtens and has been stalling while the TNI resolves the situation militarily.
At this stage, however, Mehrtens can still be safely released. But it will likely require the New Zealand government to make some concessions in response to the TPNPB’s demands.
Meanwhile, the drivers of the conflict remain. Indonesia continues to use military force to try to crush what is essentially a political problem.
And, while the TPNPB and other pro-independence groups still hope to remove Indonesia from West Papua, they feel they have run out of options other than to fight and to take hostages.
Palestinian Kiwi children at a Nakba rally in Auckland's Aotea Square last month . . . Palestinians do not get sympathetic coverage to those killed, on a near daily basis, by the illegal Israeli occupation. Image: David Robie/Asia Pacific Report
It is ironic because Radio New Zealand reporting is consistently and systematically biased against Palestinians — in large part because RNZ relies significantly on BBC reporting which is methodically dreadful.
PSNA has raised this time and again with RNZ head of news Richard Sutherland, but to no obvious effect.
Whatever tweaks may have been made to some news reports, it cannot erase the ongoing RNZ misreporting from the Middle East that comes courtesy of the BBC.
Systemic anti-Palestinian bias
RNZ wire stories typically talk about the West Bank, Gaza, and East Jerusalem when they should be reported as the occupied West Bank, occupied Gaza and occupied East Jerusalem.
“Occupied” is the status these territories have under international law and United Nations resolutions and NZ government policy and should be consistently reported as such.
BBC stories, and by default RNZ, consistently refer to Palestinians resisting occupation as Palestinian “militants” or “terrorists” or similar derogatory and dismissive descriptions.
We would not call Ukrainian teenagers throwing stones at occupying Russian soldiers as “militants” so why does RNZ think it is okay to use this term to describe Palestinian teenagers throwing stones at Israeli occupation troops?
Under international law, Palestinians have the right to resist Israel’s military occupation and should not be abused for doing so by RNZ. Palestinian resistance groups should be described as “resistance fighters” while Israeli soldiers should be described as “Israeli occupation soldiers”.
The BBC, and by default RNZ, will often give wide sympathetic coverage to Israelis killed by Palestinians but do not give similar sympathetic coverage to Palestinians killed, on a near daily basis, by the Israeli occupation.
For example, when two British Israelis were killed earlier this year they received wide sympathetic coverage on RNZ and TVNZ while the hundreds of Palestinians, including dozens of children, killed this year are simply reported as statistics.
Wide coverage is given to Israeli spokespeople in most stories with rudimentary reporting, if any, from Palestinian viewpoints.
RNZ’s consistent Eurocentric reporting from the Middle East, particularly in its uncritical use of BBC reports, is insulting to New Zealanders.
