LET US CALL HIM, GP: Sources close to Kuruleca claim to Fijileaks that GP and his wife were assigned to Kuruleca for marriage counselling after the violent husband GP had beaten his wife so badly that she nearly lost both her eyes.Fijileaks: Did the Public Service Commission carry out a due diligence on Kuruleca before processing her application for approval by the Commission and Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka? |
"Kai, LQ (Laisenia Qarase) did not help me at all to buy shares from FHL. I bought 100,000 shares from FHL in 1992 at $1, from my savings of $20k, and top up loan from NBF of $80k. Mr Mosese Waqavonovono, who was NBF manager Samabula Branch facilitated my loan. I was ADC to Ratu Sir Penaia Ganilau then. No help from Qarase or anybody else to help me buy shares with FHL. Siti Weleilakeba was CEO FHL at the time. I gave him the $100,000 in his office before the $1 shares was closed." Raivoce to Fijileaks Founding Editor |
* However, it has never stopped me from holding my good old friend to account, if and when I felt the need to confront him through Fijileaks.
*No holds barred.
*He has always taken it on the chin without threatening retaliation through the legal system, unlike PAP's Deputy Prime Minister Manoa Kamikamica, who some months ago warned me,
'Victor, I will sue you, if you publish it'.
*As a reputable news and investigative website, I had dared to ask Kamikamica if the allegations on the social media that his wife's trip to NZ (she was spotted with him) was on the taxpayers expense. He denied the social media reports but went on to threaten me with lawsuit.
*Of course, I politely reminded Kamikamica that while we fought the Bai-Kai dictatorship, he was no where to be seen for years.
*In any case, I reminded him that I had fought throughout the 1990s for his late father Joseva Kamikamica (RIP, again a very dear old friend) to become Prime Minister instead of the Coupist Sitiveni Rabuka.
*But I respected Manoa's decision to join PAP and to serve as one of three Deputy Prime Ministers under Sitiveni Rabuka.
*Meanwhile, for some years now, I have been inundated with claims against Raivoce regarding the FHL Class A shares. The claims are as follows:
*He (Raivoce) was one of the major beneficiaries of LQ’s (Laisenia Qarase's) Fijian Holdings Class A shares scheme which netted him $100,000 without having to pay anything upfront. (LQ himself acquired $200,000 for his Q10 family).
*LQ rewarded him because in 1992, R[aivoce] succeeded in sweet talking then President Rt Sir Penaia (R was his ADC at the time) to buy $180,000 class A shares for his Qeleni Holdings Ltd in order to dissuade Rt Mara from calling for an inquiry into the corrupt Class A scheme at the GCC.
*Rt Mara was determined to move a motion at the GCC in 1991/2 for such an investigation to be carried out (How come Class B shareholders like Lau and the other 14 provinces have to pay 1/3 upfront while some individuals in Lau like LQ, Raivoce, Sitiveni Weleilakeba, Isikeli Mataitoga, Tavola, etc were given the whole $200,000, $100,000 without having to pay anything up front.
*Just before Rt Mara was going to move his motion, he was given a list of Class A shareholders and right at the top of the list was his tavale's name, Rt Sir Penaia, so he (Ratu Mara) threw the list away and walked out of the GCC meeting.
*Victor, in 1991, an acquaintance of yours went to inquire at FDB to buy shares when David Toganivalu (now Acting DPP) was Desk Officer and he actually recommended it to him but when he consulted LQ by phone from his office, he was told to inform your friend that the sales of those shares had closed.
*Yet, two weeks later LQ approached Raivoce for Rt Penaia to buy $180,000 shares for his Qeleni Holdings.
SAKIUSA RAIVOCE RESPONDS TO THE ABOVE CLAIMS:
"Kai, This is not true. I cannot influence my Chiefs to buy shares from FHL. Lau Province is the only Province out of the 14 x Provinces in Fiji that does not have any shares in FHL (2022 FHL Annual Report refers). LQ (Laisenia Qarase) did not help me at all to buy shares from FHL. I bought 100,000 shares from FHL in 1992 at $1, from my savings of $20k, and top up loan from NBFof $80k. Mr Mosese Waqavonovono, who was NBF manager Samabula Branch facilitated my loan. I was ADC to Ratu Sir Penaia Ganilau then. No help from Qarase or anybody else to help me buy shares with FHL. Siti Weleilakeba was CEO FHL at the time. I gave him the $100,000 in his office before the $1 shares was closed."
Raivoce to Fijileaks Founding Editor
LAU PROVINCIAL COUNCIL HAS NO SHARES IN THE FHL, 2022 Report
"Laisenia Qarase, you have been convicted of 6 Counts of "Abuse of Office" for gain punishable under section 111 of the Penal Code Cap 17 and of 3 Counts of "Discharge of Duty with Respect to Property in which he has a Private Interest" punishable in terms of section 109 of the Penal Code. The facts are that the FHL was established as a limited liability company to be the investment vehicle of the indigenous people in Fiji and to accelerate and broaden their participation in commerce and industries. You were the Financial Advisor of the Fijian Affairs Board (FAB) and Great Council of Chiefs (GCC). You were appointed to Directorship of the Fijian Holdings Limited (FHL) board to represent Class B shares of FHL by the Minister of Fijian Affairs. Fijian Affairs Board being a government entity held Class B shares of FHL. On behalf of the companies Q-Ten Investments Ltd, (Q-Ten), Cicia Plantations Co-operation Society Ltd. (CPCS), and Mavana Investments Ltd. (Mavana), you applied for allotment of Class A shares of FHL. You also facilitated the approval of the issuance and allotment of Class A shares to the three companies Q-Ten, CPCS and Mavana. It was done in priority to other eligible Provincial and Tikina Councils, FAB and indigenous Fijian people. In doing so, you failed to disclose your interest and the relationship with the 3 companies to FHL, FAB or GCC. Your acts were prejudicial to the rights of Provincial and Tikina Councils, FAB and all other indigenous Fijian people. You also attended and participated at the board meetings of FHL at which the board decided on payment of dividends to those 3 companies in which you have private interest. On Counts No. 1 – 6 "Abuse of Office" you are convicted of a felony on each count. When imposing the sentence I also take into account the absence of remorse or repentance by you. This is a case which warrants an immediate custodial sentence as mentioned before. Therefore your final sentence is 12 months imprisonment."
Fiji High Court, Sentencing, 3 August 2012
Once again, the fingerprint of Coupist Rabuka lies behind Qarase TRIAL
![Picture](/uploads/1/3/7/5/13759434/screenshot-2022-02-03-at-19-40-58-rabuka-1987-coups-google-search-orig_orig.png)
By VICTOR LAL
After Sitiveni Rabuka's 1987 coups, the late Laisenia Qarase was called in by the Mara led interim government to help salvage and rebuild the shattered economy. Obliging, Qarase introduced a nine-point plan which oversaw extended government assistance to i-taukei Fijians and the creation of the Fijian Holdings Ltd. In 1994, Qarase became chairman of Fiji Television but clashed with the Rabuka government for not consulting him over its plans to introduce US investment in the television company. In May 2006 his SDL party won the general election but, as we all know, Frank Bainimarama overthrew the SDL-FLP multi-ethnic government.
In 2011, Bainimarama regime brought retrospective charges against Qarase, accusing him of applying for Class A FHL shares and then facilitated the issuance and allotment of the shares to Cicia Plantation Co-op Society Ltd, Q-Ten Investments Ltd and Mavana Investments Ltd. Qarase was financial adviser for the Fijian Affairs Board and the now disbanded Great Council of Chiefs, as well as director of FHL. He was charged with six counts of abuse of office and three counts of discharge of duty with respect to a property in which he had a private interest. These were charges against him while he was the Director of FHL.
SITIVENI JITOKO WELEILAKEBA:
A close associate of Laisenia Qarase, and Chief Executive of FHL, Sitiveni Weleilakeba, also secured a loan of FJ$120,000 from the FDB on 17 March 1992 to buy FHL shares for FJ$150,000 (Office of Registrar of Companies 1997).
He was former FHL Secretary and CEO. In 2008, he was charged by FICAC with one count of giving false information by a public servant. FICAC told the Suva Magistrates Court that on 27 October 1992, Weleilakeba had given false information to the Registrar of Companies thereby causing the Registrar to declare that FHL was a public company. Later, Weleilakeba was charged jointly with Qarase but in 2011, FICAC informed the Suva High Court that FICAC had considered representations made by defence counsel CAESAR LATEEF to review the charges against his client Weleilakeba.
FICAC prosecutor Vinsent Perera stated that based on the grounds and the materials submitted by Lateef and a plain statement made by Weleilakeba, FICAC had decided to discontinue the proceedings against Weleilakeba. He was discharged of one count of Conspiracy to Effect an Unlawful Purpose that is to Contravene the Provisions of the Comapnies Cap Act, one count of Forgery and one count of Uteering a Forged Document after FICAC filed a Nolle Prosqui.
FICAC informed the Suva High Court that Weleilakeba would become a State Witness against deposed Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase. So, he did, and Qarase was convicted and sent to prison.
After Sitiveni Rabuka's 1987 coups, the late Laisenia Qarase was called in by the Mara led interim government to help salvage and rebuild the shattered economy. Obliging, Qarase introduced a nine-point plan which oversaw extended government assistance to i-taukei Fijians and the creation of the Fijian Holdings Ltd. In 1994, Qarase became chairman of Fiji Television but clashed with the Rabuka government for not consulting him over its plans to introduce US investment in the television company. In May 2006 his SDL party won the general election but, as we all know, Frank Bainimarama overthrew the SDL-FLP multi-ethnic government.
In 2011, Bainimarama regime brought retrospective charges against Qarase, accusing him of applying for Class A FHL shares and then facilitated the issuance and allotment of the shares to Cicia Plantation Co-op Society Ltd, Q-Ten Investments Ltd and Mavana Investments Ltd. Qarase was financial adviser for the Fijian Affairs Board and the now disbanded Great Council of Chiefs, as well as director of FHL. He was charged with six counts of abuse of office and three counts of discharge of duty with respect to a property in which he had a private interest. These were charges against him while he was the Director of FHL.
SITIVENI JITOKO WELEILAKEBA:
A close associate of Laisenia Qarase, and Chief Executive of FHL, Sitiveni Weleilakeba, also secured a loan of FJ$120,000 from the FDB on 17 March 1992 to buy FHL shares for FJ$150,000 (Office of Registrar of Companies 1997).
He was former FHL Secretary and CEO. In 2008, he was charged by FICAC with one count of giving false information by a public servant. FICAC told the Suva Magistrates Court that on 27 October 1992, Weleilakeba had given false information to the Registrar of Companies thereby causing the Registrar to declare that FHL was a public company. Later, Weleilakeba was charged jointly with Qarase but in 2011, FICAC informed the Suva High Court that FICAC had considered representations made by defence counsel CAESAR LATEEF to review the charges against his client Weleilakeba.
FICAC prosecutor Vinsent Perera stated that based on the grounds and the materials submitted by Lateef and a plain statement made by Weleilakeba, FICAC had decided to discontinue the proceedings against Weleilakeba. He was discharged of one count of Conspiracy to Effect an Unlawful Purpose that is to Contravene the Provisions of the Comapnies Cap Act, one count of Forgery and one count of Uteering a Forged Document after FICAC filed a Nolle Prosqui.
FICAC informed the Suva High Court that Weleilakeba would become a State Witness against deposed Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase. So, he did, and Qarase was convicted and sent to prison.
![Picture](/uploads/1/3/7/5/13759434/screenshot-2022-02-03-at-19-22-43-fijian-chiefs-posts-facebook-orig_orig.png)
The late Ratu Timoci Vesikula
Another ghost from Rabuka's 1987 Coups also testified against Qarase. Vesikula told the Qarase trial that he had been the Minister for Fijian Affairs and Regional Development from 1992 June to October 1993 and was also the Deputy Prime Minister. He had also been a member of the GCC established under the Fijian Affairs Act. He stated that the FAB was the Secretariat of the GCC and explained the role of the GCC. He set out the purpose of establishing FHL which was in 1984 being the need for greater Fijian participation in areas of industrial and commerce in Fiji for the Fijian people to contribute more to the economy of the nation.
He also spoke about the Fijian Society being communalistic where everything was shared. In June 1992 Qarase was already the Financial Advisor to the FAB and the GCC. Qarase had been involved in the establishment of FHL from the very beginning and was appointed as a Director to represent the Class B shares. He had expected Qarase to be the protector of the interests of the Fijian Affairs and the GCC, the institutions of the Fijians, Provincial Councils, Tikina Councils and Village Councils.
Qarase was in FHL as a Director on appointment of the FAB to protect the interests of the Fijian people at large. Vesikula said that it was Qarase's fiduciary duty to protect the interests of the Fijian Affairs, the GCC and other Fijian Institutions under them. Though the Minister of Fijian Affairs was the ultimate protector, as Financial Advisor to the FAB and to the GCC, the Financial Advisor had a greater responsibility there because of that role. He had not come across any declaration of interests by the Appellant in respect of Q-Ten, CPCS and Mavana in the files of the Ministry of Fijian Affairs nor in the GCC.
When he assumed office, Vesikula had occasion to see the file pertaining to FHL shares and was shocked to see that 80% of A Class shares were owned by Fijian families and the Provincial Councils, NLTB, FAB and the Koula people owned only 20% shares as the Company was established for Fijian Institutions on behalf of the Fijian people.
Another ghost from Rabuka's 1987 Coups also testified against Qarase. Vesikula told the Qarase trial that he had been the Minister for Fijian Affairs and Regional Development from 1992 June to October 1993 and was also the Deputy Prime Minister. He had also been a member of the GCC established under the Fijian Affairs Act. He stated that the FAB was the Secretariat of the GCC and explained the role of the GCC. He set out the purpose of establishing FHL which was in 1984 being the need for greater Fijian participation in areas of industrial and commerce in Fiji for the Fijian people to contribute more to the economy of the nation.
He also spoke about the Fijian Society being communalistic where everything was shared. In June 1992 Qarase was already the Financial Advisor to the FAB and the GCC. Qarase had been involved in the establishment of FHL from the very beginning and was appointed as a Director to represent the Class B shares. He had expected Qarase to be the protector of the interests of the Fijian Affairs and the GCC, the institutions of the Fijians, Provincial Councils, Tikina Councils and Village Councils.
Qarase was in FHL as a Director on appointment of the FAB to protect the interests of the Fijian people at large. Vesikula said that it was Qarase's fiduciary duty to protect the interests of the Fijian Affairs, the GCC and other Fijian Institutions under them. Though the Minister of Fijian Affairs was the ultimate protector, as Financial Advisor to the FAB and to the GCC, the Financial Advisor had a greater responsibility there because of that role. He had not come across any declaration of interests by the Appellant in respect of Q-Ten, CPCS and Mavana in the files of the Ministry of Fijian Affairs nor in the GCC.
When he assumed office, Vesikula had occasion to see the file pertaining to FHL shares and was shocked to see that 80% of A Class shares were owned by Fijian families and the Provincial Councils, NLTB, FAB and the Koula people owned only 20% shares as the Company was established for Fijian Institutions on behalf of the Fijian people.
REPRODUCED from Fiji Sun, 31 October 2008
From Fijileaks Archive, 4 Febraury 2022
Fijileaks: If there is going to be a COUP, it will be carried out by a rank outsider, a 'sleeper' within the RFMF ranks, who will follow in Coupist Sitiveni Rabuka's 1987 boots.
*Since coming to power, the Coalition has been repeatedly violating the 2013 Constitution (whether we accept the Constitution or not) and is taking Fiji perilously close to the dark, violent, racist i-Taukei days of 1987, disguised as a mandate from the voters to form Coalition government. NFP is assisting in the i-Taukeinization of Fiji.
*If Ro Jone Kalouniwai has chosen to sleep and snore on Section 131 of the Constitution, we have no doubt a 'SLEEPER' at the RFMF will wake up and read Section 131 to the Coalition regime. God Help Fiji, Amen
Fijileaks: In 1987, all focus was on the then RFMF Commander Ratu Epeli Nailatikau after his father-in-law, Prime Minister and Alliance Party leader Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara lost the general election to Dr Timoci Bavadra's FLP-NFP coalition. Nailatikau informed the tense nation that the RFMF will support the incoming Bavadra government.
*But treasonously lurking in the dark was an obscure third-ranking colonel who was to strike after 33 days, overthrowing the Bavadra government, imprisoning them, jailing his opponents, shutting down the media, ripping up the 1970 negotiated Constitution, and imposing a racially biased 1990 Constitution, stripping Indo-Fijians of all political, social, religious, cultural, and educational rights.
*The first of many NFP traitors gave weight to his two coups, beginning with NFP deputy leader Mrs Irene Jai Narayan, later followed by Jai Ram Reddy, and now Biman Prasad.
*Below is the COUP DOCUMENT of Rabuka, ending with Amen. It should have ended with AMIN, for he became the new DADA IDI AMIN of Fiji.
He was assisted in the coup by Filipo Tarakinikini, Isikeli Mataitoga, Isireli Dugu, Iowane Naivalarua, Inoke Kubuabola, Apisai Tora and many chiefs, thieves, and others, mostly i-Taukei from Northern, Central and Eastern divisions.
The Coupist's Coup Charter |
RABUKA RAKES IN $100,000+ after Coup
While Indo-Fijians were reduced to second-class citizens, Rabuka pocketted over $100,000 in films and book deals, all with the following secret coup plan on 14 May 1987. Since 1994, the political NFP pimps (bhajaruus) had been campaigning, and eventually succeeded, in making RABUKA prime minister once again.
*Now he is PRIME MINISTER, from Pio Tikoduadua to Biman Prasad, they are screaming NO MORE COUPS.
*As we have pointed out, the COUPIST, TREASONIST has never been arrested, charged, and prosecuted for his two racially motivated coups because he acquired IMMUNITY at the barrel of the gun
*When someone has impeccable character, it means that they are of the highest moral standards and are free from any wrongdoing. Naidu has abused his legal connection with the Fiji Times to spew out relentless propaganda on behalf of the Coalition parties before and after the election, and had ridiculed a court judgement on social media.
*As we pointed out previously, when Naidu spotted the word 'injection' instead of 'injunction' in a court judgment in which one of his colleagues was involved, he could have had a good laugh at the expense of the Judge in the Munro Leys office or better still, as a senior lawyer of so-called 'Impeccable Character', he could have written to the Chief Registrar and got the error corrected.
Instead, the NFP propagandist took to his Facebook and Twitter accounts and ridiculed the Judiciary, with others joining him.
*He, along with other lawyers and the Fiji Law Society, never stood up for lawyer Aman Ravindra-Singh, and stood down Singh after promising to have a cup of coffee in downtown Suva.
*In agreeing with Siromi Turaga that the scandalizing the court case against Naidu (where he ridiculed Goundar's brother Sri Lankan Judge) should NEVER have been brought to court, Goundar has opened the court and the judges for ridicule and abuse, as our tongue-in-cheek headline reads, 'Impeccable Character, Your A*se, Judge Goundar'.
* A-G Siromi Turaga cannot substitute the position that was taken by the A-G's Office with his own opinion, "I am of the view that these proceedings should never have been instituted in the first place".
Turaga gave no legal reason for his decision. Goundar glibly accepted it.
*It was wrong for Justice Goundar to even consider Turaga's opinion that these proceedings against Naidu should never have been instituted.
*Justice Goundar is also clearly saying in his judgment that the correct forum for the case was the Appellate Court and not the Trial Court?
*Why did the Fiji High Court (Trial Court) dismiss Naidu's conviction then?
*Why did Goundar venture into considering portions of the Sentencing and Penalties Act when Nadiu did not subject himself to a sentencing hearing?
*How can Goundar say at para.28 that Naidu is of Impeccable Character and that it was not necessary to call for Naidu to tender his mitigation?
* Since when has the Fiji courts begun to add their own opinion about litigants and their characters?
*How well does Goundar know RICHARD NAIDU to pass judgment on his character - the man who arrogantly sat on the Fiscal Review Committee as Chair while being a convicted lawyer?
*At the time of his application in court, he was guilty of contempt of court. He was guilty of scandalizing the Fijian judiciary?
*What is so impeccable about his character?
He was found guilty of this (he cleverly chose not to give evidence) - he was guilty of ridiculing judges.
*He was found guilty of making a mockery out of the court system and lowering the administration of justice.
*Yet Justice Goundar didn't care about the protection of the Bench accorded to it under the Constitution of Fiji.
*As for Naidu, “I think there is still a question that I still want to raise with the authorities on how this case ever got to this point, but that is something I will do in the course of time.”
*Fijileaks: It got to this point, and it should have gone further to the Appellate Court, because you cynically, and deliberately, abused your political connections and the social media to ridicule the Sri Lankan Judge, and your mob hounded another Sri Lankan judge out of Fiji before your sentencing.
Now, the Attorney-General has abused his powers to set you free.
*Both, Justice Goundar and Attorney-General Siromi Turaga have set a dangerous precedent by dismissing the charge of contempt, leaving the RFMF to ask if now is time to deploy S131 of the Constitution of Fiji.
*Hanif Tuitoga Lawyers for the Attorney-General
*Munro Leys Lawyers for the Respondents
JON Apted, law partner with Richard Naidu at Munro Leys, is Sitiveni Rabuka's nominee to the Constitutional Offices Commission, whose chairman is Attorney-General SIROMI TURAGA
From Fijileaks Archive, 25 June 2023
JUDGE SHOPPING? Last Monday, the Fiji Law Society president Clarke was spotted having lunch together with the self-proclaimed CONVICTED LAWYER Richard Naidu at the foodhall above BSP Bank in Suva.
*As we chewed on Clarke's call for the Naidu negotiated Coalition government to transfer FICAC prosecution powers to the DPP, we wondered why Clarke had chosen not to comment and remain silent on Naidu's case that raise many fundamental legal questions.
*Of course, Clarke will retort with the usual 'bullsh*t' that the matter is before Justice Daniel Goundar in the Fiji High Court.
*Well, the first question that Clarke should have raised (and must) is why Naidu's case, which is a CIVIL MATTER, is being heard before Justice Goundar who presides over CRIMINAL MATTERS
*Richard Naidu's case should have been sent to JUSTICE ANJALA WATI who hears CIVIL MATTERS.
*It is right to ask if it could be because under criminal litigation Naidu's case can be retried?
*However, Naidu has been found guilty in a civil court thus he must be sentenced, and then only, he can appeal through the normal legal process.
*During submissions before Justice Goundar, he was reminded by Attorney-General's delegated lawyer Feizal Haniff that Naidu's case is a CIVIL MATTER?
*Naidu's lawyer and legal partner JON APTED also submitted that the proceedings were civil, governed by the High Court Rules of Civil Procedure. Apted is also Sitiveni Rabuka's nominee on the CoC.
*No wonder there is disquiet and a CRISIS OF CONFIDENCE in the judicial system, with lawyers and laymen asking whether this is not another case of JUDGE SHOPPING.
*Why is Haniff appearing for the A-G, when he (Haniff) began his legal career with Munro Leys and worked closely with Richard Naidu?
*Since Munro Leys and Naidu, the serial Coalition and NFP propagandist in the Fiji Times Opinion columns, are also legal advisers to the Fiji Times, we stand no chance to challenge Clarke, hence its here, in the Fijileaks, including the OPTIONS we had written some months ago that was available and not available to Naidu and his legal team.
In cases with a conviction, there are a couple of options
Option 1
The first option is for the parties to make submissions relating to sentencing and see how the Court sentences the Defendant. The matter is before Justice Daniel Goundar.
Option 2
If the Defendant wants to set aside the conviction his lawyers could apply to arrest the Judgment similar to the powers under s. 239 of the Criminal Procedure Act 2009 i.e.
Motion in arrest of judgment
239. — (1) The accused person may, at any time before sentence, whether on a plea of guilty or otherwise, move in arrest of judgment on the ground that the information does not, after any amendment which the court has made and had power to make, state any offence which the court has power to try.
(2) The court may, in its discretion, either hear and determine the matter during the same sitting, or adjourn the hearing of it to a future time to be fixed for that purpose.
(3) If the court decides in favour of the accused he or she shall be discharged from that information.
Option 3
If the Defendant wants the Court to discharge him even after he has been convicted using the principles under the Sentencing and Penalties Act he could apply to do the same. This is possible even where there has been a conviction i.e
Release after conviction
44. — (1) A court may discharge a person whom it has convicted of an offence.
(2) A court, on convicting a person of an offence, may adjourn the proceedings for a period of up to 5 years and release the offender upon the offender giving an undertaking to comply with the conditions applying under sub-section (3), and any further conditions imposed by the court.
(3) An undertaking under sub-section (2) shall have conditions --
(a) that the offender shall appear before the court if called onto do so during the period of the adjournment, and if the court so specifies, at the time to which the further hearing is adjourned;
(b) that the offender is of good behaviour during the period of the adjournment; and
(c) that the offender observes any special conditions imposed by the court.
(4) A court may make an order for restitution or compensation in accordance with Part X in addition to making an order under this section.
(5) An offender who has given an undertaking under sub-section (1) may be called upon to appear before the court --
(a) by order of the court;
(b) by notice issued by a court officer on the authority of the court.
(6) If at the time to which the further hearing of a proceeding is adjourned the court is satisfied that the offender has observed the conditions of the undertaking, it must discharge the offender without any further hearing of the proceeding.
Option 4
The Defendant could appeal against the conviction and any sentence and take his chances in the Fiji Court of Appeal.
A Fijileaks investigation reveal that the accident happened two years ago on Reservoir Rd, Suva. The Black Ford Ranger was owned by WATISONI NATA Jnr. |
*She got her Insurance and it is nearly two years and allegedly she is yet to fork out $70,000 to Watisoni Nata Jnr as compensation from her.
*Now, PSC chairman Luke Rokovada and Sitiveni Rabuka are trying to drive her appointment through the Ministry of Education despite objection from teachers unions to Education Minister Radrodro.
*Meanwhile, instead of asking Radrodro to resign, Rabuka and Rokovada should be the ones resigning for reneging on the Coalition Agreement to always consult each other on all issues, especially those affecting the Ministry of Education, which is a SODELPA Party assigned Ministry.
COMING SOON: One of the five PSC Commissioners who interviewed and approved Kuruleca's appointment MERESEINI BALEILEVUKA, the failed PAP candidate, was reported to the Namaka Police Station last year by the Free Bird Institute but so far POLICE are dragging feet on case.
"All five (5) PSC Commissioners conducted the interviews with Kuruleca'
PSC chairman LUKE ROKOVADA
From Fijileaks Archive, 11 January 2023:
We wrote to her daughter Unaisi Baleilevuka to ask her mother Mereseini to comment on the allegations that had been passed to us, and which read as follows:
Dishonest declaration by PAP candidate Mereseini Baleilevuka
"Mereseini had been working for Freebird Institute in Fiji & Japan for more than 10years. She was terminated at the end of June. She had been receiving her Board allowances from both companies but Freebird Institute company's accountant states that Mereseini never asked the accountant to prepare her income & tax certificate.
*Then ________went to FEO to check her declaration. Her declaration said she declared only an annual income of $5,000 as her private business. *She didn't declarae her allowance income from Japan, her salary income from Fiji, money she had received as dividend.
In other words, she allegedly didn't declare $80,000 to the Supervisor of Elections. The matter was brought to Saneem's attention but he is yet to respond to the allegations'. 6 December 2022.
Fijileaks: We are also waiting to hear from the Baleilevukas' that they allegedly provided FAKE RECEIPTS acknowledging donations of $1,700 and PAP leader and now Prime Minister had to be involved to obtain proper receipts. The argument was whether the money was 'a donation or gift' to PAP.
*We are also waiting for comments that the Baleilevukas' allegedly illegally appropriated $170,000 that was compensation money to a family overseas - two Freebird Institute students (Mother & Daughter) were involved in a car accident in Fiji.
The mother was killed. The daughter suffered life-changing serious disability.
FULL EXPOSURES TO FOLLOW SOON.
The two, Mereseini and Unaisi, were also accused of providing fake receipts and Rabuka was dragged into the matter
Fijileaks: We will soon focus on Bainimarama-Qiliho case, for we had revealed most of the USPGATE Reports. We have long fought against Qiliho and Bainimarama, only to wake up and discover that the Coalition THUGS are wearing the same corrupt shoes
"Hope you understand _______ the Minister for Education is a different type of person to deal with and the composition of and conditions for the People's Coalition Government makes it even more difficult to manage him. Perhaps you could offer your ______ skills to try to address the intransigent Minister." Luke Rokovada
Coming Soon: RFMF alarmed that KURULECA might compromise national security, for as newly appointed PS, on appointment as a Civil Servant, she LEAKED her Private Viber messages with Radrodro to her Australian supporters to post them all over social media
Fijileaks: Perhaps Kuruleca may be of better use to the Health Ministry, but not at PS level as that will set the qualified medical doctors (and may be nurses too who have their own union) working in Health on a path of frustration and resistance.
*The fact that she is Director of Kuruleca Consultants, is not equivalent administratively in any way at all to the very large Ministry of Education, nor to schools.
*Any person in Fiji can register a consultancy.
*She has a Masters in Counselling and Psychology from Santa Clara University (a private Jesuit university), in Santa Clara, California. Emphasis in Health Psychology and trained as a marriage and family therapist.
Graduated in 2003, Ms Kuruleca returned to Fiji and joined the Department of Psychology, University of the South Pacific, before venturing into full time private practice in 2006.
*Meanwhile, ROKOVADA also lied that he had on-going discussions with Radrodro when the Education Minister told a press conference that he was never informed of SELINA KURULECA'S appointment as his new Permanent Secretary
"Thank you ______for your thoughts and views on the appointment of Selina Kuruleca as PS Education. Consultation with Minister for Education was ongoing throughout the process and still ongoing now. The Commission interviewed more than ten shortlisted candidates for the position of PS Education. The usual number of shortlisted candidates for interview for the PS positions ranged from 4 - 8 depending on the number of well qualified applicants. All five (5) PSC Commissioners conducted the interviews and the KPMG senior partner's role was to introduce the shortlisted candidates and thank them for participating in the interview process at the end.
Hope you understand _______ the Minister for Education is a different type of person to deal with and the composition of and conditions for the People's Coalition Government makes it even more difficult to manage him. Perhaps you could offer your ______ skills to try to address the intransigent Minister."
SWEET [KAMIKAMICA] REWARDS: While Manoa Kamikamica and Biman Prasad were allowed to retain their PS' from the FFP government era, Radrodro was not extended the same opportunity or even asked if he wanted to keep the old PS Education. Rabuka and Rokovada, indulging in constitutional gymnastics, dumped Kuruleca on Radrodro and the teachers unions in Fiji.
*The former veteran permanent secretary JIOJI KOTOBALAVU agrees with our initial argument that RADRODRO should have been consulted on Kuruleca's appointment.
![Picture](/uploads/1/3/7/5/13759434/published/web-capture-15-7-2023-103754-www-fijitimes-com.jpeg?1689414043)
APPOINTMENT OF PERMANENT SECRETARIES TO GOVERNMENT MINISTRIES SHOULD A MINISTER BE CONSULTED BEFORE HIS OR HER MINISTRY's PERMANENT SECRETARY IS APPOINTED?
By Jioji Kotobalavu
According to media reports, the Minister for Education, Aseri Radrodro, is not happy with the Permanent Secretary recently appointed by the Public Service Commission to serve in his ministry. The officer concerned, Ms Selina Kuruleca, has confirmed that she has signed with the PSC her contract of service.
She has also publicly said that she is ready to serve in this capacity.
Commenting on this appointment, the chairperson of the Public Service Commission, Luke Rokovada, and the Prime Minister, Sitiveni Rabuka, the two constitutional authorities for the appointment of permanent secretaries have asserted that Ms Kuruleca's appointment was made fully in accordance with the law.
Section 126-(1)(a) of the 2013 Constitution empowers the PSC to appoint permanent secretaries, with the agreement of the Prime Minister.
So, both the PSC chairperson and the Prime Minister have acted correctly in accordance with their constitutional powers. However, in order to ensure that what has happened in this particular case does not recur in future, it is important to look at the procedures for appointing permanent secretaries, from other pertinent perspectives.
Considering this issue from the perspective of administrative justice and employment law, the question that arises is: in the appointment of permanent secretatiries to Government Ministries, should there be an informal and good faith procedural requirement that before the PSC makes a decision in exercise of its powers under section 126-(1)(a) of the 2013 Constitution, the Minister in the Ministry involved should be first consulted either by the Prime Minister. or by the chairpersion of the PSC with prior clearance from the Prime Minister.
The public purpose to be served by this procedural requirement for prior consultation with the Minister is to ensure that the two; ie, the Minister and the Permanent Secretary can work together in mutual confidence and trust.
This is very important because in managing a ministry and its departments the permanent secretary does not act alone. In fact, consider the following provisions from the 2013 Constitution:
*Section 127-(3 ): The permanent secretary of a ministry is responsible to the Minister concerned for the efficient, effective, and economical management of the ministry or any department under the ministry
*Section 127-(7): The permanent ministry shall have the authority to appoint, remove and institute disciplinary action against all staff of the ministry, with the agreement of the Minister responsible for the ministry
*Section 127-(8): The permanent secretary of each ministry, with the agreement of the Minister responsible for the ministry, has the authority to determine all matters pertaining to the employment of all
staff in the ministry, including...
One can clearly see from these provisions the crucial importance of enabling a smooth and effective working relationship between the Minister and the permanent secretary based on, in employment law parlance, mutual confidence and trust.
In administrative law, the courts have always emphasised in relation to section 16 of the 2013 Constitution-on Executive and administrative justice- the importance of public authorities exercising their statutory powers in good faith and in adopting procedures that are procedurally fair to those that are directly affected by the exercise of a statutory power.
Clearly, the PSC should consider these administrative justice and fair employment practises when making appointments of permanent secretaries to Government Ministries.
This is especially in light of the provisions of the 2013 Constitution under section 127 empowering the Minister with a role in the management of the ministry's and its associated departments' staff and budget.
From my own experience as a permanent secretary, what has happened on this issue underscores the importance of the PSC and senior management staff in the civil service and other public service agencies of the state investing time in educating themselves on the principles of administrative law and employment law
Jioji Kotobalavu is a former permanent secretary in the Fiji civil service and currently lectures in public
law and in international relations and diplomacy at the University of Fiji's JDP School of Law. The views
he expresses are his own and are not necessarily shared by this newspaper
By Jioji Kotobalavu
According to media reports, the Minister for Education, Aseri Radrodro, is not happy with the Permanent Secretary recently appointed by the Public Service Commission to serve in his ministry. The officer concerned, Ms Selina Kuruleca, has confirmed that she has signed with the PSC her contract of service.
She has also publicly said that she is ready to serve in this capacity.
Commenting on this appointment, the chairperson of the Public Service Commission, Luke Rokovada, and the Prime Minister, Sitiveni Rabuka, the two constitutional authorities for the appointment of permanent secretaries have asserted that Ms Kuruleca's appointment was made fully in accordance with the law.
Section 126-(1)(a) of the 2013 Constitution empowers the PSC to appoint permanent secretaries, with the agreement of the Prime Minister.
So, both the PSC chairperson and the Prime Minister have acted correctly in accordance with their constitutional powers. However, in order to ensure that what has happened in this particular case does not recur in future, it is important to look at the procedures for appointing permanent secretaries, from other pertinent perspectives.
Considering this issue from the perspective of administrative justice and employment law, the question that arises is: in the appointment of permanent secretatiries to Government Ministries, should there be an informal and good faith procedural requirement that before the PSC makes a decision in exercise of its powers under section 126-(1)(a) of the 2013 Constitution, the Minister in the Ministry involved should be first consulted either by the Prime Minister. or by the chairpersion of the PSC with prior clearance from the Prime Minister.
The public purpose to be served by this procedural requirement for prior consultation with the Minister is to ensure that the two; ie, the Minister and the Permanent Secretary can work together in mutual confidence and trust.
This is very important because in managing a ministry and its departments the permanent secretary does not act alone. In fact, consider the following provisions from the 2013 Constitution:
*Section 127-(3 ): The permanent secretary of a ministry is responsible to the Minister concerned for the efficient, effective, and economical management of the ministry or any department under the ministry
*Section 127-(7): The permanent ministry shall have the authority to appoint, remove and institute disciplinary action against all staff of the ministry, with the agreement of the Minister responsible for the ministry
*Section 127-(8): The permanent secretary of each ministry, with the agreement of the Minister responsible for the ministry, has the authority to determine all matters pertaining to the employment of all
staff in the ministry, including...
One can clearly see from these provisions the crucial importance of enabling a smooth and effective working relationship between the Minister and the permanent secretary based on, in employment law parlance, mutual confidence and trust.
In administrative law, the courts have always emphasised in relation to section 16 of the 2013 Constitution-on Executive and administrative justice- the importance of public authorities exercising their statutory powers in good faith and in adopting procedures that are procedurally fair to those that are directly affected by the exercise of a statutory power.
Clearly, the PSC should consider these administrative justice and fair employment practises when making appointments of permanent secretaries to Government Ministries.
This is especially in light of the provisions of the 2013 Constitution under section 127 empowering the Minister with a role in the management of the ministry's and its associated departments' staff and budget.
From my own experience as a permanent secretary, what has happened on this issue underscores the importance of the PSC and senior management staff in the civil service and other public service agencies of the state investing time in educating themselves on the principles of administrative law and employment law
Jioji Kotobalavu is a former permanent secretary in the Fiji civil service and currently lectures in public
law and in international relations and diplomacy at the University of Fiji's JDP School of Law. The views
he expresses are his own and are not necessarily shared by this newspaper
Coming Soon: RFMF alarmed that KURULECA might compromise national security, for as newly appointed PS, she LEAKED her private Viber messages with Radrodro to her Australian supporters to post them all over social media
FWRM Disappointed with reaction to Dr Kuruleca's Appointment
Fijileaks: As is standard procedure, questions are being asked whether any background checks were conducted to find out if the applicant, during her career, abused her position while attending to her vulnerable clients? The PSC is refusing to respond to our questions, and whether Kuruleca holds a DOCTORATE in Pyschotherapy
'As a former school teacher, a USP lecturer, a mental health professional, an iTaukei and a woman, I am the best for PS Education Job.' | MISSED OUT: |
![Picture](/uploads/1/3/7/5/13759434/published/web-capture-14-7-2023-175438-www-fwrm-org-fj.jpeg?1689353914)
FWRM Disappointed with reaction to DrKuruleca's Appointment
The Fiji Women's Rights Movement (FWRM) is disappointed with the way the appointment for the Permanent Secretary (PS) position for the Ministry of Education has been handled by the Minister for Education and union representatives.
Dr Selina Kuruleca, whose appointment was confirmed by the Public Services Commission (PSC) and due to have begun work on July 3rd this week, has been rejected by her own Minister, Aseri Radrodro, an act that not only undermines the qualifications and capabilities of Dr Kuruleca - a professional woman in her own right -but also the decision made by PSC.
"We are disappointed with this turn of events. In the line-up of new PS appointments, we only have three women. Dr Kuruleca has contributed immensely to the fields of teaching and mental health. Why is she not the right candidate for the PS role? This reeks of gender bias.
Dr Kuruleca is not being given the chance to take up her post, despite meeting the criteria and deemed the best candidate. What are the justifications of the Minister and the unions rejecting her appointment to the education ministry? And why do they think they have to be consulted when the law clearly states otherwise. Section 126 –1 of the constitution confirms that ministers are not required to be consulted about appointment of Permanent Secretaries," FWRM Executive Director Nalini Singh said.
Ms Singh said gender prejudices and stereotypes are often a major barrier of women at work, issues that women's rights groups have continuously advocated against as it prevents the recognition of women's contributions and limits their achievements at work.
"Gender bias impedes the advancement of women's careers – when we talk about the glass ceiling – this is the glass ceiling for women. Dr Kuruleca is more than capable of handling the role of the PS. We are saddened that issues around her appointment have been thrashed about in the media after processes have been followed as there could have been better ways to address this issue. PSC has done what needs to be done. We call on the Minister and the unions to respect the decisions made by the Commission," Ms Singh said.
FWRM believes that to truly provide an opportunity for women's advancement into leadership positions, organisations including the state ministries and departments need to overcome gender bias in the workplace and other professional settings.
A research on leadership perceptions in Fiji conducted by FWRM in 2022 found that 69 percent of 906survey respondents indicated that “gender stigmatisation” decreased a woman’s chances of being 'elected' as a leader.A combined 74% (agreed and strongly agreed) that performance rewards are easily awarded to men, while women have to work twice as much.
"Our society lacks the provision of enabling working environments for women. In order to truly give both women and men an equal platform and chance to excel into leadership positions, we need to be aware of our own unconscious bias and stereotyping," Ms Singh said
.
FWRM hopes that a solution is met and chaos over Dr Kuruleca's appointment diminishes.
The Fiji Women's Rights Movement (FWRM) is disappointed with the way the appointment for the Permanent Secretary (PS) position for the Ministry of Education has been handled by the Minister for Education and union representatives.
Dr Selina Kuruleca, whose appointment was confirmed by the Public Services Commission (PSC) and due to have begun work on July 3rd this week, has been rejected by her own Minister, Aseri Radrodro, an act that not only undermines the qualifications and capabilities of Dr Kuruleca - a professional woman in her own right -but also the decision made by PSC.
"We are disappointed with this turn of events. In the line-up of new PS appointments, we only have three women. Dr Kuruleca has contributed immensely to the fields of teaching and mental health. Why is she not the right candidate for the PS role? This reeks of gender bias.
Dr Kuruleca is not being given the chance to take up her post, despite meeting the criteria and deemed the best candidate. What are the justifications of the Minister and the unions rejecting her appointment to the education ministry? And why do they think they have to be consulted when the law clearly states otherwise. Section 126 –1 of the constitution confirms that ministers are not required to be consulted about appointment of Permanent Secretaries," FWRM Executive Director Nalini Singh said.
Ms Singh said gender prejudices and stereotypes are often a major barrier of women at work, issues that women's rights groups have continuously advocated against as it prevents the recognition of women's contributions and limits their achievements at work.
"Gender bias impedes the advancement of women's careers – when we talk about the glass ceiling – this is the glass ceiling for women. Dr Kuruleca is more than capable of handling the role of the PS. We are saddened that issues around her appointment have been thrashed about in the media after processes have been followed as there could have been better ways to address this issue. PSC has done what needs to be done. We call on the Minister and the unions to respect the decisions made by the Commission," Ms Singh said.
FWRM believes that to truly provide an opportunity for women's advancement into leadership positions, organisations including the state ministries and departments need to overcome gender bias in the workplace and other professional settings.
A research on leadership perceptions in Fiji conducted by FWRM in 2022 found that 69 percent of 906survey respondents indicated that “gender stigmatisation” decreased a woman’s chances of being 'elected' as a leader.A combined 74% (agreed and strongly agreed) that performance rewards are easily awarded to men, while women have to work twice as much.
"Our society lacks the provision of enabling working environments for women. In order to truly give both women and men an equal platform and chance to excel into leadership positions, we need to be aware of our own unconscious bias and stereotyping," Ms Singh said
.
FWRM hopes that a solution is met and chaos over Dr Kuruleca's appointment diminishes.
JULY 12, 2023Crime: Remain cautious and alert in public places. Urban areas experience a higher incidence of crime than rural areas, but there are specific locations to avoid. Most crime is opportunistic. If you are not familiar with an area, ask hotel staff about areas to avoid.
Report crimes to the local police at 911 and contact the U.S. Embassy at + (679) 331-4466, or after hours at +(679) 772-8049. Remember that local authorities are responsible for investigating and prosecuting crime.
- Several assaults and robberies have occurred in the bar and nightclub district of downtown Suva, the waterfront/seawall area during hours of darkness, as well as on Victoria Parade street. Consider taking door-to-door transportation.
- Violent robberies and assaults continue to occur within the Colo I Suva Forest Park and as of July 2023 there is no security presence on the trails.
- Be attentive to your personal safety and be cautious about sharing too much personal information about where you are from and where you are staying while traveling.
- Reports of sexual assault against female tourists have increased. You should not walk alone after dark and always be sure to avoid isolated and deserted areas.
- Since some crime takes place in taxis, do not allow taxis to pick up other passengers while you are enroute. Similarly, you should never enter a taxi already carrying other passengers.
- Although demonstrations are not common in Fiji, you should avoid marches and large crowds, remembering that even peaceful demonstrations can turn violent unexpectedly
Report crimes to the local police at 911 and contact the U.S. Embassy at + (679) 331-4466, or after hours at +(679) 772-8049. Remember that local authorities are responsible for investigating and prosecuting crime.
KEEP AWAY FROM FARM HOUSES: Otherwise, you might become VICTIM of Drug Lord and Sex Trafficker running a joint farm with his former jailor and now Minister of I-Taukei Affairs
Vasu told Fijivillage News that when he was removed from the post of Commissioner of Corrections and charged with abuse of office, Jason Zhong approached him to start farming on his land.
*He says they continue to develop the farm until early this year when he entered politics so he transferred his shares to his wife.
*Vasu says his business is purely on farming, and Zhong has served his time, let’s give him a second chance.
*The Minister says Zhong is committed to farming, and helping other farmers, food security and export of farm products.
[email protected]
ARCHIVES
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
October 2012
September 2012