Since they’re off to Dubai eh? Well we thought we’ll pull this one out from the archives to remind you of these scums


Other travel details provided without receipts included at least $75,000 worth of airfares, hotel accommodation and meals for the Commander and his wife on a personal visit to NZ to visit family members. This amount also included trips to Iraq via up to three weeks of stopovers in New York, London, Paris, Tel Aviv and Honolulu.

He wanted to clean up the SDL Coalition government but only unearth dirt about himself. This Pig is the mother of all hypocrites.

(The above is an extract form the Auditor General’s Report on auditing the RFMF’s accounts of 2005)


109 Responses to “Since they’re off to Dubai eh? Well we thought we’ll pull this one out from the archives to remind you of these scums”

  1. bilolevu Says:

    What geniuses who when things are NOT GOING WELL in Fiji, decide to swan off to dubai on a junket, fully paid by TAXPAYERS, where the RETURN is not guaranteed or even LIKELY.

    AS IF investment is IN THE PIPELINE… warai, sebera ni dua na O ni investment mai dubai, ratou sa vakaliuliu na cavitamadratou oqo!

    e dua na guaranteed investment mada na TOURISM – e saumi e $10m na PROMOTION, e lesu mai e $300m mai vei ira na dausaravanua. Leqa gona ni so na yavu ta sukulu gona qo!

    Junket cost to taxpayers:
    Return airfare to Dubai – $8,000 x 7 junketeers – $56,000
    Per diem $400 x 14 days x 7 junketeers – $39,200 ($5600 each for 14 days)
    Total of about $95,000 of taxpayers money on these thieves latest trip
    So a gift of about $13,000 to each of these 7 thieves who are dubai now!

    Each junketer got $5600 per diem (at $400FJD per day including travel days) and is travelling on $8,000 ticket. and what will fiji get in return??

    qai kena i tui o la qo me dua mada na brushcutter e kesuna, sa rui balavu na uluna, o tricky ricky ram.

    WHY THE HELL WOULD RISHI NEED TO MEET FRANK IN SINGAPORE?? can’t they meet in Fiji? is berkely crescent too far away from government building for these dumb fucks to meet in Suva on their failed civil service reforms??


    The Public Service Commission has today admitted that certain reforms being undertaken within the civil service are not working and are not showing the results which were expected.

    PSC Chairman Rishi Ram confirmed that his visit to Singapore later this month, where he will meet up with the Interim Prime Minister Commodore Frank Bainimarama and his entourage and they hope to explore ways of overcoming some of these difficulties. He said amongst this is the size of the civil service.

    Ram said they have not been able to reach their targets in terms of numbers in the civil service.

    Meanwhile, the Fiji delegation led by Interim Prime Minister Commodore Frank Bainimarama are currently in Dubai for the 8th Global Travel and Tourism Summit to be held tomorrow his Sunday.

    They will then join Ram in Singapore and have meetings and discussions with government officials there to learn more about public Service and public sector reforms.

  2. Kai Veikau Says:

    Voreqe ,
    O kaya ni Matanitu butabutako ka lasulasu na Matanitu nei Qarase. O kaya ena retio kei na TV ka vakadewataka talega vei ira na nomu cauravou mai na loma ni keba ni Mataivalu ni Matanitu duka na Matanitu na SDL. Sa evei na i vakadinadina ni nomu veibeitaki ya?. O iko kaya ni ko na vakasava -sava taka na veiliutaki. Sa evei na veiliutaki savasava ya?.
    E dua ga na ka sa matata votu mai. O iko na tamata lawaki ca. Tamata lasulasu ka ko vakayacora walega na vuaviri ena nomu via taqomaki iko ga mai na savasava ni veilewai ka sa vakarau vakayacora vei iko na tabana vakalawa ni Matanitu donuya na veiliutaki nei Qarase. Ko sa mai coko toka qo ena nomu vosa ko lasutaki keimami raraba kina. Rai ki na nomu i mawi kei na nomu i matau. Era sa wavokiti iko toka qori na tamata lawaki ca ke butabutako kece. Sa qai vakaraitaki mai qo ni o iko ga o tamata lasulasu, lawaki ca ka sivia vei iko na butobuto. E sega ni rawa ni ko na dro bula mai kina. Se ko lako ki Dubai se ki vei tale, mo kila ni ko iko ga na tamata butobuto ka ko na vakarau raica qo na i sau ni cakacaka lawaki ca ko vakayacora..Tamata lasulasu oiko….

  3. Ma'afu Says:

    If VB was building a better Fiji, why are the people sliding down even further to the bottom of the food chain while he milks the coffers and jetset’s around the world?

    His true colours manifest more and more with each passing day and it doesn’t seem to be in the people’s favour nor interest because he is doing everything contrary to what he set out to do.

  4. Justman Says:

    Has anyone read Victor Lal’s devastating piece directly pointed to Chodoplus in Saturdays Fiji SUN. Its not online for some reason – mabe Chodos hackers are blocking it

  5. anon Says:

    Vore, boci, vakalosilavu you kulina vavaku!! sonalevu!!!!

  6. Arrested Development Says:

    Scums indeed! laughing all the way 2 our tax coffers.

    Gee, that idiot in green uniform looks a little loony to me, everyone’s looking in one direction whilst he’s busy smiling at the fairies in the opposite direction. God help us all, the loonies are running the country!

    Agree with u Manning!

  7. Mark Manning Says:

    I know you all know , that it is impossible that Frank has done all this on his own and without huge amounts of money and outside help .
    I don’t understand how none of the legal advisers from outside Fiji , haven’t been arrested or even questioned for there part in advising the Fiji Military on how to overthrow a Sovereign State . Isn’t that treason or terrorism ?
    If it is , then why are they still able to practice law , in Fiji or in New Zealand ?
    There must be some International Law , if not one from within Fiji or their own country , that has been broken . As Solicitors , they should be disbarred at least .

  8. Mark Manning Says:

    Tui , enlighten me please with your legal knowledge of these matters .

  9. anon Says:

    MM, you need a prick up your ass.

  10. Tim Says:

    I seem to recall somewhere that Pryde justified his position by saying that people who break the law have a right to representation – or words to that effect. When I saw that, I thought there’s an admission if ever there was one. The man is obviously trying to ease his own conscience.

    It would be interesting to get a response from the Aus and NZ Law Societies. There is a difference with these guys (both Pryde and Coughlan). They’re POLITICAL appointments, and political appointments made by an illegal regime as opposed to say representing a defendant, often persecuted by such a political and illegal regime (as in the case of Williams).
    As such they’re aligning themselves with all that goes with it – including the comprimising of the Judiciary that has occured.
    In a discussion I’ve been having (offline), there seems to be a willingness by some lawyers of dubious background to engage in becoming “Legal Missionaries” complete with their paternalistic attitude dressed up as concern, when in fact they’re simply setting up their retirement plans on some idyllic paradise. Given Coughlan’s disbarment, at the very least we can “reasonably suspect that he is not above opportunistic temptation”, and more than that, he’s probably realised the career might not go much further in NZ – what better opportunity that an unethical, illegal, opportunistic regime in Fiji to take advantage of.

    And as for the appointment on Fiji’s Electoral Cmmisison, “I’d have thought that one of the prerequisites for the position would have been to have lived in, and experienced Fiji and its uniqueness for a large part of one’s life” or be born there so that there is an emotional and spiritual understanding and affinity, not simply one based on legal and economic theory.
    We know the various churches in the past had a habit of shipping off their dross to “remote islands” to avoid scandals, charges of sex abuse and so on (seems some of them put down roots). Looks like the legal profession might be happy to try the same thing, except the world has changed and the chances of their being sprung are just as high as if they stayed at home.
    This junta also seems to think they need appointees well versed in international spin speak – hence the AG and most others. It’s pretty obvious, given the “progress” they’ve all made to date, that counts for SFA. Their bullshit trips them up everytime and the only people prepared to engage with them are those that don’t have the greatest records themselves, or who see opportunities for exploitation.

  11. John Veikoso Says:

    Who are the scums???? it is you people who are gainst the IG and FB. Qarase is now facing the music, guess you dont watch the news, see him being charged for the Fijian Holdings saga, that is just the tip of the ice-berg but then you people just dont wanna believe it so wait till he’s sentenced than you can visit him in Naboro. Things are moving along so believe in it, if you think you can get Chodo and his money, go for it!!! but stop moaning and whining on this site because you all sound like broken record players, as they’ve said they believe they have the support of the majority minus you sorry lot so make your minds up, join or f…off from this country, Ma afu was a warrior not a poofter who hides behind his name. Arrested development or mind???? you intrested in the man in green now??? knew you were gay. Anon or AH??, get a life man.

  12. aubatinuku-N Says:

    It’s “broken records” not “broken record players”.

    Jone Veikoso, it’s quite OK for you to play your violin and cry a river!
    You have every right to your house of cards & humpty dumpty!

  13. aubatinuku-N Says:

    Adi Finau criticizes Charter response
    20 APR 2008

    National Council for Building a Better Fiji member, Adi Finau Tabakaucoro has criticised the way the council has been received at the Naitasiri, Serua and Rewa provincial council meetings over the past two weeks.

    Adi Finau said people have failed to realize the importance of such an initiative as the country gears up for elections next year.

    “It is sad that some provinces have taken this as a political agenda to manipulate the interim Government.”

    “The charter we are trying to introduce is designed for the people and the people are the ones who are going to make decisions before it is implemented.

    “But a lot of people already think that we have a charter.”

    Adi Finau said many people are still trying to understand the finer details of the charter and for that reason they are not well informed about it.

    She also blames people with political agendas in trying to sway others into believing that the charter is the brainchild of the Fiji Labour Party.

    “It’s the people with political agendas who are trying to promote bad vibes in the villages and provinces.”

    “We are urging the people to come together to make this charter work as it would not only benefit all the races but also our children in future.”

    Surely they were not expecting the red carpet treatment and a bunch of “sir yes sir” lackeys!!
    The charter is good only for comic relief after they’re done presenting all over the bloody place. We are not into selling our souls to the devil!!

  14. Peace Pipe Says:

    These thieves are making the most of travelling free at the expense of the taxpayers whilst they can. I cannot see the use and benefit of jetting off to far away countries to make some deals for the benefit of Fiji. There’s more to do at home. And WTF is bubba iarse doing on this trip. Seems like the pig needs a mouthpiece along with him whenever he goes overseas since he cannot think and talk properly. The pig took up so many hats at home that its amazing that he still has time to waste jetting around. Perhaps this is their last chance of enjoying free trips. It shows they are here to enjoy themselves and not to work for the people.

    In todays FT was a letter to the editor from an Indarjeet which really raised a very pertinent point. The issue was the ownership of a country which is being questioned by greedy and power hungry people like the snake and his cohorts. There should be no doubt of who own the country which is the original settlers the indigenous Fijian. Just like there is no question on the ownership of other pacific islands like Samoa, Tonga and others where the indigenous own and rule their countries. But in Fiji the snake and his cohorts are trying erase that unwritten universal law of ownership and try to take over the country in every including its governance. So whilst the pig is being fooled by the snake’s real motive it will come to a head when the truth comes out and there will be a huge fall out. At the moment the pig’s mind is clouded by so many abstracts that he is unaware of mistakes he is making by associating himself and allowing himself to be dictated by the snake.

  15. Mark Manning Says:

    Good to see the youth taking a stand for their own future and interesting to see how Chaudhry is now and continues to blame the media for creating many of the problems facing the Fijian community these days !

  16. Arrested Development Says:

    JV – whether I’m gay, straight or bi is none of yr damn business, u lonely looney-poofy! Arrested development is the state of affairs your looney-heros in green (along with their prostitute lawyers & judges) leave this wonderful country in, each time they feel a wad of notes shoved down their pants. Disgusting!

  17. aubatinuku-N Says:

    VB & his entourage are probably going to get staterooms on board the QE2 which is soon to be a hotel in Dubai!

  18. bara Says:

    lets all blame the media eh! don’t blame choro – he’s just the finance, works, sugar minister eh. he took money away from the civil servants, starved the economy, saved money then spend a little a year later and inflation is near 8%

    Chaudhry blames media

    Sunday, April 20, 2008

    Update: 12:28PM INTERIM Finance minister Mahendra Chaudhry has defended the interim regime amid rising food prices.

    And he blamed the media for using the circumstances resulting in the rise in staple food prices as a means to distort the image of the interim administration.

    Speaking at the National Farmers Union General Body Meeting held at Korovuto Secondary School in Nadi on Saturday, Mr Chaudhry said the continuing rise in food prices was beyond our control.

  19. bara Says:


    Commission to review poll chief

    Sunday, April 20, 2008

    THE Constitutional Office Commission will schedule a meeting to review the appointment of a New Zealand lawyer as Fiji’s Supervisor of Election, saying it did not know that he had been disbarred form the NZ legal fraternity.

    Commission chairman Rishi Ram was quoted on television last night that he was not informed about Doctor Maurice Coughlan being disbarred from the NZ Bar in 1992.

    Mr Ram said they would have to schedule a meeting to review Dr Coughlan’s appointment that had already been finalised.

    Doctor Maurice Coughlan told The Fiji Times he was disbarred in relation to personal commercial transactions and was later reinstated to the NZ Bar in 2002.

    Mr Ram said in a statement that they sorted the approval of the Attorney-General, Aiyaz Sayed Khaiyum, before finalising Dr Coughlan’s appointment.

    Yesterday, he said the commission was of the view that Dr Couhlan was the man for the job after viewing his vast experience in the various fields.

    Mr Couglan said on Friday he was anxious of come to Fiji and was in the process of winding up his law practice in NZ.

    He said was expected in Fiji before by May 15.

  20. mr. big shot Says:

    O Chandra me vulica ga na independent mai vei sahu khan kei rau na mimisalulushameems.

    Were independent, Chandra says

    Sunday, April 20, 2008

    FIJI has been tolerant of an ethnically-based discriminatory provision in the Constitution since independence, said Constituency Boundaries Commission chairman Suresh Chandra.

    But, he said, the commission did not have its own view of the Constitution.

    At a presentation to the National Council for Building a Better Fiji meeting last week, Mr Chandra said the commission continued to work under the legislative framework and was independent from the reform process.

    “It cannot and would not involve in the reform of the electoral process,” he said.

    “These discriminatory racial provisions are legally in direct violations of the Article 2 and 7 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR).”

    “The general population ought to be aware of this.”

    He said the commission could not do anything about these violating provisions but it was for the people and those undertaking the reforms to sort out an acceptable arrangement complying with the UNDHR.

    He said the commission was aware and conscious of these violating provisions but it had a task to complete under the Constitution and the Electoral Act which was going to be completed in the time they had been allocated.

  21. Tim Says:

    @JV: Why do you bother making posts in this forum? Do you seriously expect you are going to impose your will on people contributing to this site – whether they winge and moan or not, they’ve been given the best of excuses.
    Your arguments and justifications are nebulous to say the least. E.G. “as they’ve said they believe they have the support of the majority” and
    “Things are moving along so believe in it”
    when all the evidence points otherwise.
    I took a look at “The Commanders’ Intent for 2008” (as one example). How many times was “good Governance” mentioned. It’d be funny if it wasn’t so bloody sad. He’s still clinging to the mistaken belief that if you spout the bullshit long enough, people might believe it – you obviously have despite the evidence.
    You’re entitled to your beliefs but don’t expect everyone else shouldn’t challenge them – that is one of the basic themes in a democracy – something Frank keeps telling us he’s a believer in (just as long as its his version and he can keep the trappings).
    If you’re a true believer in Frank and the discordant cat’s chorus and are so staunch, why do you feel threatened by alternative views?
    “Moving Forward” and “Good Governance” and any other buzz phrase that’s been learned parrot fashion doesn’t just occur unless you practice it.
    Some of those that contribute might be interested in a discussion on democracy in the Pacific on Radio NZ National (domestic) and possibly RNZI this morning, including a contribution from Reeves.
    Several things are clear
    communal seats were not intended forever and a day

    Frank will have a dilemma to face – who is actually leaving Fiji? – the ethnic/Indo Fijian balance has shifted in the indigenous’ favour, so he’s kind of F**ked up big time should a free and fair election occur UNDER WHATEVER SCHEMA he comes up with – but that’s politics for ya. He’d have been better off resigning from the Military and standing for Parliament and taking all the trappings that go with it

    The RFMF is unsustainable. It will be politically incorrect for the UN to keep utilising them for too much longer as enforcement whores and its an economic burden when not acting as a whore. Its sad but true. Well maybe its not so sad since they’ve managed to destroy their credibility, principles and reputation all on their own. The only way they can remain sustainable if they whore themselves as a colony of undemocratic regimes. But then surely we’d expect Shaista to object (NOT).

    mmmmmm. Sh*t, I forgot! I js dunn unna Stan.

    JV: you’re a TRUE BELIEVER. I bet you throw tantrums too

  22. Tim Says:

    RADIO NZ National
    11:05 Ideas : Democracy and the Pacific
    In Ideas this week we ask what is democracy, and where, and why, does it flourish?
    Presented by Chris Laidlaw
    Produced by Jeremy Rose.
    Ideas plays until midday and is repeated just after the 1am news on Friday morning.

    There’s bound to be a podcast available before too long.

    Hey, just another thought. How the hell is it that Shaista didn’t manage to swing a Dubai jaunt? Bubba must have let her down. Or is she going to take off at her own expense, to be reimbursed at a later date?.
    Hope she does and she forgets to leave the dak at home. She’d be a prime candidate to offend the sensibilities of the regime.
    I’m still waiting for some little academic diatribe from her on the difference between the Post-Colonial and condescending attitude of Australia and NZ, and the Colonialism by attaching and becoming dependent on China, or Fiji, or anybody else for that matter.

  23. Tim Says:

    @Chodo: So how is it that this basic contravention of UNDHR has NOT beenput forward in the past? He ( as a failed politician), i-Iarse (as a failed lawyer) and Shaista (as a failed champion of ‘youman rights’) could have built themsleves alternative careers and a cumfy living at taxpayer expense, fighting it. Funny thing is, this only just seems to have occured to them. Funnier still, the UN itself doesn’t seem to have come to this conclusion

  24. Adi Kaila Says:

    sa levu la na ‘entourage’

    io na entourage sa wawa tu mai Naboro, dou qai sota vatakei Ratu Borogaga

    They need new gym equipment at Naboro – especially punching bags.

    It’s coming George!

    chaudry, voreqe & most of the ig entourage are common thieves – as the Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase famously said:

    “Sa matata mai na matani meke”

  25. Adi Kaila Says:

  26. Adi Kaila Says:

    Hi – aubatinuku-N

    fi fie fo fum has contradicted herself completely,

    Sorry dear fi we the people do know what this charter is all about, we’ve read it, watched the debate and we don’t want it – SIMPLE! As the debate showed to the Nation your own members don’t UNDERSTAND your own charter. Go figure!

    Because we will not accept it doesn’t mean we don’t understand it and don’t know what’s good for us or the generations to come. This ncbbf is the politcal agenda for the ig – no one else – it only benefits the ig as is clear as the day follows night with this Dubai trip & then meeting up in Singapore, continual corruption & zilch transparency.

    It’s your own political agenda fi old girl you & your ig are the NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR BUILDING A BANKRUPT FIJI. By the time we and our children start having to bring Fiji back up to world standards (we will do it to) you and your ig cohorts will be long gone – Thank The Lord for that. But we will remember this time, all of you and your families, so you lot better start making provisions for your own families because they will be left out of the equation. Everyone single one of them. Achar!

    Levu la na via via jet setter – as Tui Savu said,
    “Mai Yaso, Mai vale e mino!”

  27. John Veikoso Says:

    Charter is coming whether you like it or not, Adi Kaila varau veisiko vei Qarase i Naboro, he is going to Speight and his group, soon my brothers and sisters. If you’re going to reveal Auditor’s report please show copies or the original if it’s possible dont pluck BS out of your dirty AH because you’re worse than the media!!! anyway back to the real subject, charter is coming, will be accepted, referendum will also be accepted by the people and you losers will always remain losers..pote…

  28. Mark Manning Says:

    It’s great , although sad at the same time , to hear that the Indian Traders situation has affected the Fijian traders and that the Electricity is off as well as problems with the water .
    I hope all these problems encourage the Non indigenous community to come to their senses and support a return to a Democratically Elected Government if not the return of the Qarase Government itself ! The stopping of people leaving the country and the pretentiousness of Telani saying he knows nothing about it , along with the 2nd. helicopter crashing from the same business , Island Hoppers , should both be indicators that there is much more to come from these scum-bags . God bless Fiji and all who sail in Her !

  29. Mark Manning Says:

    I still don’t know why , if Qarase did anything illegal and those behind and in the I G had evidence , why didn’t they just present the evidence to the then relevant authorities . Some supporting the I G , seem to have been easily brainwashed to believe that Frank and his buddies are honest people . Perhaps , if those supporters could take a step back and consider that perhaps Frank and Chaudhry might just be telling big fibbers !

  30. Adi Kaila Says:


    SDL leader stopped at airport
    20 APR 2008

    The national director of Fiji’s former ruling party Peceli Kinivuwai was stopped from leaving the country as he boarded a Sydney-bound flight at Nausori airport this morning.

    Kinivuwai confirmed with Fijilive that the ‘embarrassing’ situation occurred at around 9am.

    “First I was cleared by Immigration and then I was later told I was prohibited to leave by the Ministry of Home Affairs through the Commissioner of Police Esala Teleni.

    “When I called his cell he seemed to be very disinterested in my plight before switching it off,” a disappointed Kinivuwai said.

    He was scheduled to attend the annual two-day meeting of the Asia Pacific political union meeting for democratic parties.

    According to Kinivuwai, Teleni is now saying that the matter would be sorted by tomorrow after the incident was highlighted by the media.

    “Now he’s saying it was an unauthenticated letter with just his name on it and not his signature. What a big joke!

    “It’s a mockery of good governance and the rule of law and a gross violation of human rights.”

    Comments are being sought from Teleni.


  31. Tebara Says:

    Wait for the monkeys and or their bum sucking PR peepz 2 appear on TV and radio this week explaining away their action. Must ga evasive tiko vei ratou … directing question to other department and so on. they shud all be taken in line to Walu Bay .. at the wharf facing the Korean sailors and their $5 hookers and then SHOT … KAILA !! We are sick and tired of their unethical tirades and their blatant diregard of human and individual rights of Fijis citizens. Ratou yavu natikau, ulukau, bavulusese ..!

    Spoil my Sunday church … the blerry bastodos!

  32. natewaprince Says:

    Transparency International say the newly appointed Supervisor of Elections should be rejected for failing to reveal his disbarment.

    JV boci,bau lai lotu.Tonoka ga e dua na qara e na charter qori qai kabata.

  33. dredre tiko 2 Says:

    could someone please name all those in the photograph starting from sigege in the front, we know the two smiling fuglies next to him, & please name the ones behind

  34. kafir Says:

    who is Teleni to stop anybody from leaving our shores? disgusting and make us sick. will be really interesting to hear the excuse this week. thanks ppl for keeping on the good fight.

  35. Destiny Says:

    Good to see you are all enjoying the posts from JV

    @Dredre – you have obviously just woken up, thats FRANK in the picture honey. hahahahahhah

  36. natewaprince Says:

    And that’s Destiny in the red dress.

  37. Destiny Says:

    @natawaprince – your not real bright either, thats his wife…. sheesh talk about slow

  38. aubatinuku-N Says:

    Destiny! JV is the SV Blogsite jester!
    Why wouldn’t we enjoy his and/or your company on here?
    The more the merrier!

    Bula vinaka Adi K!! Very interesting switchback going on!
    O JV vatai Desti me rau lai pini mada ga!!

  39. Jose Says:

    Voreqe Bainimarama Fiji’s illegal pm, this is a message for you.
    Please do your wife a big favour and keep her at home. Don’t bring her to the public eye unless she is professionally dressed and look smart and dressed for the occassion. She doesn’t fit in the picture even sitting beside you. Look around and see why she’s the only woman sitting in the middle of many men. Very insensitive.

  40. dredre tiko 2 Says:

    destiny subu lili rairaica, luveni no qare o tamamu. kemaimi via kilai era na vo ni tamata ra taba tu.

    o iko maumau la nai taba, yalewa mata kaukaua vaka na kai aferika. Sa tukuni oti eke na kemui rairai sa o Danny Glover in drag – hahahahahaha

    i Jose – o destiny qori e via dabe tiko i basai voreqe – in your dreams saqamua – tukuni mada vei meri merau veicicivi lomai Suva.

  41. IslandBoy Says:

    Slight digression here folks. Assuming the IG will end up destroying itself sooner rather than later, based on deep internal divisions and sheer incompetence, if we think ahead to election time, I wanted to know who you all think would make EXCELLENT Ministers to get Fiji back on track. Sole qualification is EXCELLENCE.

    For what its worth, pulling from neither Labor nor SDL, this is my wishlist for rebuilding a better Fiji.

    PM – Suliana Siwatibau
    Finance – Wadan Narsey
    AG – Devenesh Sharma
    Agriculture inlcuding Sugar Industry – Adi Makelesi Tavaiqia
    Women/Culture & Social Welfare – Shamima Ali
    Fijian Affairs & related issues – Rt. Joni (Turaga RTB)
    Foreign Affairs – Satya Nandan (Law of the Sea)
    Tourism – Dan Costello Senior
    Education – Krishna Dutt
    Labour – Tevita Koroi (Fijian Teachers Assoc)
    Trade & Commerce – Adi Ema Tagicakibau (@PCRC she deals with all WTO related issues and knows her stuff)

    I know Rt. Joni is always mooted for the Presidency, but right after this fiasco we will need all our very best hands on deck, he can always be President when he gets older.

    Can’t think of anyone for Home Affairs (very important), Health, Works and Youth & Sports. Lets try to keep in under 15 cabinet members, fitting in extra responsibilities to your nominees, instead of extra people.

    Of course Mrs. Siwatibau could take on some specific portfolios, but not to the extent that FB has done, I think that is a dangerous overload.

    The other option is to nominate really EXCELLENT people with integrity and then assign them cabinet positions.

  42. Kai Veikau Says:

    Island Boy,
    Very good ideas but first your people must win seats in the next General Election..That means they must start positioning themselves into the various constituencies and aligning with the respective political parties!!.. Otherwise, I presume they are excellent line up for a real Interim Government to replace the current bullshit ones..Your people can then take us in returning to Parliamentary democracy. It is obvious from Bainimarama’s leadership & modus operandi that returning Fiji to Parliamentary democracy is least in his priorities. Sa rere tiko o Van Damne de qai kau i Naboro me laki sota kei Speight mai kea!!!..

  43. Mark Manning Says:

    Korean clock lady , can’t say the word clock , from a radio station in the usa .
    good for a laugh .

  44. John Veikoso Says:

    Good morning to you all, word from the grapewvine is that Kinivuwai was stopped because he didnt have a valid Australian visa so he tried to change it around and blame the IG the sorry wanker!!! Islandboy, your list minus these people, Siwatibau too old!! Narsey too much talk no action!! Davenesh is a closet gay and everyone knows it, ask Natewa Princess and Nawari!! Shamima Ali is question of intergrity and loyalty, going through third husband now, Joni M.. well everyone knows that he is gay aprt from you IB, Foreign Affairs agree with you, Costello is a castaway, use by date gone, Education and Labour are both useless, too much talk no action, so please put a better list my boy, in the picture behind the PM is the US defence attache, see he supports FB and the IG, ha!ha! suck on that one..

  45. Ali Says:

    Well John Veikoso, Teleni denied everything so I think you are the one with the problem.

    You seem to talk about gays alot. Is there an underlying feeling in you that brings out these hostile or otherwise, feelings toward gays. It is either you are one of them, you have been wronged by one of them or you have this discriminatory views towards them.

    The individuals you mentioned above are all intelligent people who would not even stoop to your level to debate thiese topics with you because, I mean, you are so insignificant with your views and it boarders on racism, hate and everything in between.

    Stop trying to insult our intelligence and get on with your life. First of all, GET A LIFE!!!!!!! The hate eminating from you really is giving us the impression that you have been badly wronged by somebody and the wound is still very fresh. We call that, “tamata mavoa” You are not here to defend anybody. You are just here to hit out at anything you don’t agree with. Well, that is indeed a sign from someone who is a “tamata mavoa”.

  46. natewaprince Says:

    Destiny,do you mean to say that you’re not Mary?? Damn !!!!

  47. natewaprince Says:

    Ali,you’re dead right.O JV e mavoa tiko,e va mavoa taki koya na maqe nei Vore,hahhahaha!!!!!!!!!!!

    Sa qai kilai o koya na ca ni vesu tagane ni Idia,hohohohohoho!!!!!!!!

  48. gemini Says:

    To jose: you’re a fuckin sexist pig. So fuckin what if she’s the only woman in the picture??? Are you so nako that you think women should not watch rugby matches?? Its because of narrow minded stupid fijians like you that greedy corrupt men like qarase and co manage to get themselves elected to parliment. Go fuck a sharp object you dumb fuck.

  49. Tim Says:

    Sideissue: Has the Fiji SUN gone and offended the Stazi again. As JUSTMAN noted above, Victor made a contribution.
    The problem is in Suva. Is their server down for “maintenance” or did Fintel have an accident?.

  50. Jose Says:

    gemini, as Jone Veikoso said in his view of Fijian women, meri is better of in the kitchen or in the bedroom. She certainly looks like someone who should do just that. No class.What are you, blood relation tiko vei iko. Well that’s just too bad. I do have an opinion.

  51. anon Says:

    JV,Gemini & Destiny dou kitaka mada na threesome, Gemini you sound horny.

    Maqe will be on the standby in case one requires Mouth to Mouth.

  52. Jose Says:

    Gemini still the typical pea brain no class like your ugly aunty meri

  53. loyal reader Says:

    @ Justman & Tim

    Fiji Sun now have Monday 21 April articles up. Maybe their IT people didnt work on the weekend to upload the Saturday article by Lal. Can someone scan and send to SV Team please.

    The article is not on Victor’s blog

  54. lauan boy Says:

    good morning ppl, the plot gets more interesting.

    the QEB walls are now talking….soldiers hav their ration allowance deducted but their ‘mess’ is closed. many are asking for this deduction be ceased & refunded….and this cannot be done becoz their is no $$.

    soldiers @ops centers are on lovley diet of water, sardines, tin fish & noodles. how lovely….these areseholes will pay for this mess they created.

    its no clear as daylight that we may looking @the bloodiest mutiny the military has ever seen in its sick life. the lies r catching up with the senior officers….only time will tell.

    to the soldiers…u will pay!! keimami sa sega ni taleitaki kemuni na sotia…ni tamata lasulasu, butabutako, liumuri.

    sa voleka mai.

    JV…u can harp until the cows come home….lai veka mada…totolo

  55. utiko Says:

    @ LB

    wow… sa dina! is the rfmf now following their commanders intent not to bust their budget?

    so much for the ika valolo, dalo, duruka, roast chicken era a kania tiko ena yabaki sa oti! hahaha

  56. Tim Says:

    @ loyal reader: Indeed. Let’s not be total conspiracy theorists. Might be their server was down and only got rebooted this morning or they took it down for fear of impending power cuts or something. That being said, it is slightly strange the abscence of comment, letters and the currency of content available.

  57. loyal reader Says:

    Well the sun now has articles from Saturday 19 April in their archives. Just not Victor’s article – Ive noticed sometimes they put up his stuff and sometimes they don’t.

    But heres an interesting one quoting Constituency Boundaries Chairman giving a presentation to the NCBBF last Tuesday. When on Thursday, he claimed he DID NOT make a presentation to the ncbbf. go figure!

    Constitution hinders progress NCBBF told
    Last updated 4/19/2008 9:48:56 AM
    The major obstacles to Fiji’s return to parliamentary democracy are constitutionally recognised systems that are themselves not democratic.
    Constituency Boundaries Commission and Electoral Commission chairman Suresh Chandra in his presentation to the National Council for Building a Better Fiji raised a number of issues and observations that would be a major obstacle to the return of democracy.
    “A major impediment to Fiji’s return to parliamentary democracy is the current electoral and voting system itself which is undemocratic,” said Mr Chandra.
    He said the current electoral system was undemocratic because it did not enable government of the people, by the people, for the people.
    “The voting and electoral system currently in use is not free and fair. It does not enable the will of the people to be adequately reflected. It violates the Universal Declaration of Human Rights by not providing for one vote to have one value,” Mr Chandra said.
    He said it also disadvantaged and reduced the number of women and minorities who go into politics.
    Further presentations by the Electoral Commission and the CBC stated that the voting and electoral system was also undemocratic in the sense that it produced outcomes in a number of parliamentary seats won that did not reflect people’s voting intentions.
    “The current voting and electoral system is also undemocratic because it is not based on one vote one value having regard to the way the electoral boundaries are required to be drawn for indigenous Fijian communal voting,” it was said in the presentation.
    An example that was given was that in 2006, about 62 per cent of indigenous voters living in rural areas voted for 17 members of Parliament while the other 30 per cent living in urban areas were represented by only six members of Parliament.

  58. Tim Says:

    @ Loyal Reader: It’s a pointless exercise trying to “figure” out liars. We just have to accept that they either have a hidden agenda or they’re attempting self preservation. It’s a damn sight easier to just be straight up.

  59. ex Fiji Tourist Says:

    The F$125 million [out of a budgeted F$80 million] spent by the green goons could have fed a lot of students i.e. the ones sent home from boarding school because there is no money to feed them.

    chaudhry’s military junta is wasting money and the children’s future.

  60. aubatinuku-N Says:

    gemini is a relation of Mrs.V.B!
    Checkout idiots 😀 (42) Where she takes these guns to sch & ???

  61. Ma'afu Says:

    Frank really ought to shut that trap he calls a mouth, we don’t want to see his yellow and crooked teeth.

    But check him and his President out. hahahaha

  62. jagran Says:

    har har har

    how stupid are vocekes gurls

    heres anotha wan:

  63. jagran Says:

    and wea is frankie getting his sote froms??

  64. Peace Pipe Says:

    All these statements about voting systems being undemocratic and not representative coming from these loyalists are crap and make me wanna puke. They are still trying to muddy the waters and hide the real motive of their intentions and conjure up a system which will ensure victory for the snake and the pig if the pig decides to stand. If proportionate representation is to be implemented then surely the indigenous Fijians will have the majority of votes and therefore the ruling power. Let the people decide on what they want and have the changes done properly and legally. That is why they want to do away with racial division in Fiji and how they are going to do that remains a mystery and a very contentious issue. To me all these are distractions and strategies to divert our attention from the real heart of the matter of why and who are behind the coup and what should be done to them for their crimes. So these are smoke screens erected to steer our attention away from their real and evil motives. Everything was okay until they came on the scene and lied that there are problems which need to be fixed. They are the problems themselves – which have to be eradicated.

  65. aubatinuku-N Says:

    This is Bernie bitch**es lover heart.

  66. Nimcy Says:

    heres the liddel sarisari

  67. aubatinuku-N Says:

    So this must be standard issue weapons for all Yat Sen School Students or is it special privileges only for special olympics students like Bernie Bainimarama?

    I wonder what kind of school rules Yat Sen Sch has!
    Are parents of the other kids at this school encouraging the coup culture?
    Is daddy’s little girl Bernie Bainimarama actually allowed to bring to school guns for herself and her little friends everyday.

    Should all schools in Fiji follow the same path as Sun Yat Sen School of Suva?

    Are there no anti-gun laws for schools in place in Fiji?
    How is this in anyway at all positively contributing to a healthy education for the future leaders of Fiji??

    Sa dri yani!!


    well said Peace Pipe!

  69. hopefiji Says:

    common guys ..its actually not on attacking a kid like this..just becos her father is a moron, is no excuse to slag her off!!. Yeah she is immature taking guns to school, but what can you expect from role models like her father.

    And by the way…are you guys a bit too old for bebo!!

  70. aubatinuku-N Says:

    @ hopefiji.

    Old is a relative term dear friend.
    Don’t be too quick to assume that all bloggers on the planet are over 21.

    Bebo has no age limit and is on the WorldWideWeb which means anyone with a computer can access it.

  71. aubatinuku-N Says:

    Beware the sound of one hand clapping.

  72. hopefiji Says:

    OK AN i rest my case on Bebo, but I still think it is not good to slag off these kids of moronic parents…actually I forget to mention that that the educational ministry and teachers associations should be looking very closely at Yet Sen and their standards!!. Cant saw much when Teleni’s wife is the the princpal there now…..this is what you get with morons like her in responsible positions….

  73. aubatinuku-N Says:

    Don’t get me wrong hopefiji, no offence intended at all! And none taken!
    On the same token, I appreciate your perspective.

    This whole Yet Sen gun issue wouldn’t have anything to do with Voreqe Bainimaramas support of China’s oppression of Tibet now would it?

    Apples do not fall far from the tree!

  74. groggy Says:

    Hey its come up again order of uniforms and paying for them in advance? Same shit was happening at the camp check the auditors report. Sa tekivu ga mera ceburaki ira ga mai o ira qo.

    JV lai tavi mana mada rau sebera ni dua e tavia nomu mai muri.

  75. groggy Says:

    Jone Kaikoso one thing you should now is that if someones visa was expired he wouldn’t even go past the check in counters you nit wit. Nomu lasu na kilai mai.

    Tobo tale tu o ululala

  76. aubatinuku-N Says:

    Vinaka for mentioning that groggy!
    One would think it should go without mentioning, it’s obvious that this Jone Veikoso has never traveled in a plane before.

    Sa levu la nodratou B.S!!

  77. firewalker Says:

    go for bebo. it has more information then u can imagine

  78. Demokarasi Says:

    Vinaka peace pipe. If not for the charter, which is to replace the not happening corruption kangaroo trials, what else would the people of Fiji focus on? the fact that the economy continues to nosedive? that people are going hungry? that children are not going to school for lack of busfare? that children are getting to school without lunches?

    Surely the charter is eating up more than the stated $2.4m budgeted with teams from ALL other government ministries raising awareness about the charter hand in hand with their health/social welfare/agricultural assistance/development assistance/infrastructure assistance/ and government service delivery. When the IG should only be happening with elections, their awareness teams are telling the people that they should accept the charter because its bringing them nurses, water, roads, development etc etc. Rather, that is what government provides anyway to the people! the IG should be focusing on elections that will bring confidence back, that will restart the economy and bring even more development and more jobs. As stated before, another piece of paper will not bring stability, confidence and improve the economy.

  79. Knicherbokkers-for-Voreqe Says:

    Peace Pipe is correct. Why wouldn’t the inherently dishonest try and keep the gravy train going for as long as possible when they are the the only beneficiaries of it? Some have obviously decided that the easy option is to climb on board. It’s easy to dream up as many excuses and reasons not to return to democracy when you have guns, a lot to hide and a record that isn’t that flash. It’s really short term thinking though and not that smart. The good thing is, they’ll all be remebered.

  80. Knicherbokkers-for-Voreqe Says:

    And while its not fair to blame the looks or other attributes that are the fruits of Franks loins, or the poor bitch he married, its sure as hell fair game to criticise those that have put themselves out there and are pimping his ride. They’re ugly people, and that has nothing to do with aesthetics. Ugly in spirit, ugly in compassion, ugly in greed, ugly in ego, ugly in honesty, ugly in life.

  81. maleka sara Says:

    ooh bit touchy this morning gemini –

    @ Jose & Anon

    these 2 gemini & jv are bro & sis or some very close relationship with meri & voreqe bainimarama – kua mada na threesome vatakei destiny de lucky o mu qase. Kua tale la na incest ratou se limited intelligence tu mada hence the venom.

  82. kaiwai Says:

    Could we please leave the innocent alone, just go for her dad and his masi polo gang

  83. kaiwai Says:

    sorry innocent kid

  84. kaiwai Says:

    Could we please leave the innocent kid alone, just go for her dad and his masi polo gang

  85. john samy Says:

    Across Globe, Empty Bellies Bring Rising Anger
    Tyler Hicks/The New York Times
    In a garbage dump in Port-au-Prince, people recently scavenged for food.
    Published: April 18, 2008

    PORT-AU-PRINCE, Haiti — Hunger bashed in the front gate of Haiti’s presidential palace. Hunger poured onto the streets, burning tires and taking on soldiers and the police. Hunger sent the country’s prime minister packing.

    Skip to next paragraph
    Haiti’s Hunger Pains
    Slide Show
    Poverty in Haiti
    Times Topics: Food Prices and Supply
    Enlarge This Image

    Kirshnendu Halder/Reuters
    HUNGER IN INDIA Villagers near the city of Hyderabad recently jostled for rice that was being sold by government officials. More Photos »

    Enlarge This Image

    Tyler Hicks/The New York Times
    World food prices have risen as much as 45 percent since 2006, causing suffering in Haiti. More Photos >

    Enlarge This Image

    Bazuki Muhammad/Reuters
    INFLATION IN MALAYSIA Cooking oil in a shop in Kuala Lumpur. Malaysians are angry at the rising cost of food and fuel. More Photos >
    Haiti’s hunger, that burn in the belly that so many here feel, has become fiercer than ever in recent days as global food prices spiral out of reach, spiking as much as 45 percent since the end of 2006 and turning Haitian staples like beans, corn and rice into closely guarded treasures.

    Saint Louis Meriska’s children ate two spoonfuls of rice apiece as their only meal recently and then went without any food the following day. His eyes downcast, his own stomach empty, the unemployed father said forlornly, “They look at me and say, ‘Papa, I’m hungry,’ and I have to look away. It’s humiliating and it makes you angry.”

    That anger is palpable across the globe. The food crisis is not only being felt among the poor but is also eroding the gains of the working and middle classes, sowing volatile levels of discontent and putting new pressures on fragile governments.

    In Cairo, the military is being put to work baking bread as rising food prices threaten to become the spark that ignites wider anger at a repressive government. In Burkina Faso and other parts of sub-Saharan Africa, food riots are breaking out as never before. In reasonably prosperous Malaysia, the ruling coalition was nearly ousted by voters who cited food and fuel price increases as their main concerns.

    “It’s the worst crisis of its kind in more than 30 years,” said Jeffrey D. Sachs, the economist and special adviser to the United Nations secretary general, Ban Ki-moon. “It’s a big deal and it’s obviously threatening a lot of governments. There are a number of governments on the ropes, and I think there’s more political fallout to come.”

    Indeed, as it roils developing nations, the spike in commodity prices — the biggest since the Nixon administration — has pitted the globe’s poorer south against the relatively wealthy north, adding to demands for reform of rich nations’ farm and environmental policies. But experts say there are few quick fixes to a crisis tied to so many factors, from strong demand for food from emerging economies like China’s to rising oil prices to the diversion of food resources to make biofuels.

    There are no scripts on how to handle the crisis, either. In Asia, governments are putting in place measures to limit hoarding of rice after some shoppers panicked at price increases and bought up everything they could.

    Even in Thailand, which produces 10 million more tons of rice than it consumes and is the world’s largest rice exporter, supermarkets have placed signs limiting the amount of rice shoppers are allowed to purchase.

    But there is also plenty of nervousness and confusion about how best to proceed and just how bad the impact may ultimately be, particularly as already strapped governments struggle to keep up their food subsidies.

    ‘Scandalous Storm’

    “This is a perfect storm,” President Elías Antonio Saca of El Salvador said Wednesday at the World Economic Forum on Latin America in Cancún, Mexico. “How long can we withstand the situation? We have to feed our people, and commodities are becoming scarce. This scandalous storm might become a hurricane that could upset not only our economies but also the stability of our countries.”

    In Asia, if Prime Minister Abdullah Ahmad Badawi of Malaysia steps down, which is looking increasingly likely amid postelection turmoil within his party, he may be that region’s first high- profile political casualty of fuel and food price inflation.

    In Indonesia, fearing protests, the government recently revised its 2008 budget, increasing the amount it will spend on food subsidies by about $280 million.

    “The biggest concern is food riots,” said H.S. Dillon, a former adviser to Indonesia’s Ministry of Agriculture. Referring to small but widespread protests touched off by a rise in soybean prices in January, he said, “It has happened in the past and can happen again.”

    Last month in Senegal, one of Africa’s oldest and most stable democracies, police in riot gear beat and used tear gas against people protesting high food prices and later raided a television station that broadcast images of the event. Many Senegalese have expressed anger at President Abdoulaye Wade for spending lavishly on roads and five-star hotels for an Islamic summit meeting last month while many people are unable to afford rice or fish.

    “Why are these riots happening?” asked Arif Husain, senior food security analyst at the World Food Program, which has issued urgent appeals for donations. “The human instinct is to survive, and people are going to do no matter what to survive. And if you’re hungry you get angry quicker.”

    Leaders who ignore the rage do so at their own risk. President René Préval of Haiti appeared to taunt the populace as the chorus of complaints about la vie chère — the expensive life — grew. He said if Haitians could afford cellphones, which many do carry, they should be able to feed their families. “If there is a protest against the rising prices,” he said, “come get me at the palace and I will demonstrate with you.”

    When they came, filled with rage and by the thousands, he huddled inside and his presidential guards, with United Nations peacekeeping troops, rebuffed them. Within days, opposition lawmakers had voted out Mr. Préval’s prime minister, Jacques-Édouard Alexis, forcing him to reconstitute his government. Fragile in even the best of times, Haiti’s population and politics are now both simmering.

    “Why were we surprised?” asked Patrick Élie, a Haitian political activist who followed the food riots in Africa earlier in the year and feared they might come to Haiti. “When something is coming your way all the way from Burkina Faso you should see it coming. What we had was like a can of gasoline that the government left for someone to light a match to it.”

    Dwindling Menus

    The rising prices are altering menus, and not for the better. In India, people are scrimping on milk for their children. Daily bowls of dal are getting thinner, as a bag of lentils is stretched across a few more meals.

    Maninder Chand, an auto-rickshaw driver in New Delhi, said his family had given up eating meat altogether for the last several weeks.

    Another rickshaw driver, Ravinder Kumar Gupta, said his wife had stopped seasoning their daily lentils, their chief source of protein, with the usual onion and spices because the price of cooking oil was now out of reach. These days, they eat bowls of watery, tasteless dal, seasoned only with salt.

    Down Cairo’s Hafziyah Street, peddlers selling food from behind wood carts bark out their prices. But few customers can afford their fish or chicken, which bake in the hot sun. Food prices have doubled in two months.

    Ahmed Abul Gheit, 25, sat on a cheap, stained wooden chair by his own pile of rotting tomatoes. “We can’t even find food,” he said, looking over at his friend Sobhy Abdullah, 50. Then raising his hands toward the sky, as if in prayer, he said, “May God take the guy I have in mind.”

    Mr. Abdullah nodded, knowing full well that the “guy” was President Hosni Mubarak.

    The government’s ability to address the crisis is limited, however. It already spends more on subsidies, including gasoline and bread, than on education and health combined.

    “If all the people rise, then the government will resolve this,” said Raisa Fikry, 50, whose husband receives a pension equal to about $83 a month, as she shopped for vegetables. “But everyone has to rise together. People get scared. But we will all have to rise together.”

    It is the kind of talk that has prompted the government to treat its economic woes as a security threat, dispatching riot forces with a strict warning that anyone who takes to the streets will be dealt with harshly.

    Niger does not need to be reminded that hungry citizens overthrow governments. The country’s first postcolonial president, Hamani Diori, was toppled amid allegations of rampant corruption in 1974 as millions starved during a drought.

    More recently, in 2005, it was mass protests in Niamey, the Nigerien capital, that made the government sit up and take notice of that year’s food crisis, which was caused by a complex mix of poor rains, locust infestation and market manipulation by traders.

    “As a result of that experience the government created a cabinet-level ministry to deal with the high cost of living,” said Moustapha Kadi, an activist who helped organize marches in 2005. “So when prices went up this year the government acted quickly to remove tariffs on rice, which everyone eats. That quick action has kept people from taking to the streets.”

    The Poor Eat Mud

    In Haiti, where three-quarters of the population earns less than $2 a day and one in five children is chronically malnourished, the one business booming amid all the gloom is the selling of patties made of mud, oil and sugar, typically consumed only by the most destitute.

    “It’s salty and it has butter and you don’t know you’re eating dirt,” said Olwich Louis Jeune, 24, who has taken to eating them more often in recent months. “It makes your stomach quiet down.”

    But the grumbling in Haiti these days is no longer confined to the stomach. It is now spray-painted on walls of the capital and shouted by demonstrators.

    In recent days, Mr. Préval has patched together a response, using international aid money and price reductions by importers to cut the price of a sack of rice by about 15 percent. He has also trimmed the salaries of some top officials. But those are considered temporary measures.

    Real solutions will take years. Haiti, its agriculture industry in shambles, needs to better feed itself. Outside investment is the key, although that requires stability, not the sort of widespread looting and violence that the Haitian food riots have fostered.

    Meanwhile, most of the poorest of the poor suffer silently, too weak for activism or too busy raising the next generation of hungry. In the sprawling slum of Haiti’s Cité Soleil, Placide Simone, 29, offered one of her five offspring to a stranger. “Take one,” she said, cradling a listless baby and motioning toward four rail-thin toddlers, none of whom had eaten that day. “You pick. Just feed them.”

    Reporting was contributed by Lydia Polgreen from Niamey, Niger, Michael Slackman from Cairo, Somini Sengupta from New Delhi, Thomas Fuller from Bangkok and Peter Gelling from Jakarta, Indonesia.


    Growth of world trade drops sharply
    By Frances Williams in Geneva

    Published: April 17 2008 23:34 | Last updated: April 17 2008 23:34

    World trade growth declined sharply in 2007 and is expected to slow further this year as financial turmoil and rising commodity prices further depress global economic activity, the World Trade Organisation said on Thursday.

    Preliminary estimates suggest the volume of world trade rose 5.5 per cent in 2007, down from a robust 8.5 per cent in 2006.

    In depth: Commodities boom – Feb-10Hunger for rice gives sellers the upper hand – Apr-10Banks take blame for credit crisis – Apr-10Food inflation threatens progress on poverty – Apr-09IMF offers a pessimistic view – Apr-09IMF calls for global action on turmoil – Apr-06Based on the latest gloomy global output forecasts by the International Monetary Fund, the WTO says trade growth this year could slip to 4.5 per cent, the lowest since 2002.

    But its economists say this forecast may prove optimistic, depending on the extent to which turbulence in financial markets, and action by governments to curb rising food and fuel prices, may damp world demand.

    “As world trade responds strongly to variations in global economic activity, a stronger than projected deceleration in world economic growth could cut trade growth much more sharply, to … less than 4.5 per cent,” the WTO said. “The turmoil in financial markets hasn’t as yet really fed through as much as it might into the real economy,” said Patrick Low, WTO chief economist.

    “The impact has been quite limited so far.”

    Mr Low cited figures for the first two months of the year showing dynamic import and export growth in the world’s three biggest traders: Germany, China and the US.

    China overtook the US to become the world’s second largest goods exporter last year, with a jump in exports in dollar terms of more than a quarter. Germany kept top place.

    The WTO said developing countries had markedly reduced their reliance on rich-country markets for exports in recent years. At 34 per cent, the share of poor countries in world trade reached a new peak in 2007, and they accounted for half total world trade growth.

    Current forecasts suggested this trend, alongside high commodity prices, should enable the developing world to maintain faster output and trade growth than developed countries again this year, with imports rising more than 10 per cent.

    But the WTO warned the sharp rise in food prices, and social unrest, could cloud that optimistic picture, even for countries that were net food exporters and in principle beneficiaries of those high prices.

    Some trade figures were inflated by the steep fall in the dollar’s value.
    Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008

  86. BebeniBogi Says:

    Freedom fighters. Please leave the family alone. We must not stoop that low. It’s not their fault.They are probably hurting as much as we are although from different ends. BUT we will triumph in the end as the TRUTH will always prevail, and should FORGIVE them on a personal level (of course the “just” law must take it’s course). Frank’s unfortunately gone too far into his bluff now (banded together a bunch of loser opportunists) and it is difficult to ressurect the mess and imposible to pull out. Yes we have and continue to suffer as a people while the opportunists have a field day. Remember in the end we WILL TRIUMPH, that’s a CERTAINTY. (If it is indeed family/friends blogging on this site than be prepared to take the heat – it’s an oven in here – and you can run but can’t hide). Gees I must be softening a little (NEVER!) from the sermon yesterday in Church. GOD BLESS YOU ALL AND OUR BELOVED COUNTRY – IT SHOULD NEVER CRY AGAIN. NEVER!!!! DEMOCRACY NOW!!!

  87. aubatinuku-N Says:

    The bandwagon of guilt is a heavy load to bear, to be guilty by association is one thing is one thing.
    The test lies in guilt by choice.

    It is not family friends, it is family blogging and it is family that is taking the heat already!!

  88. Fiji Democracy Now Says:

    The denial of one week’s education for more than 200 student boarders at Labasa College is not only a blow to them and their families, but a shameful indictment of the spectacular ineptness of Fiji’s military-backed regime.

    If the regime, which is supposedly committed to better governance, cannot manage such a relatively straight-forward issue as the food budget of a provincial boarding school, how can it be expected to effectively govern an entire nation?

    Where is there evidence that anyone in the illegal regime has their eye on the ball? On the same day that the media reports the sending home of the Labasa students, interim education minister, Filipe Bole, is blowing his trumpet about higher education in Fiji gaining international recognition.

    He could do well to pause and reflect on the fact that the only international recognition being accorded Fiji at the present time is near universal disgust with its current lack of democracy, abuse of human rights and inability to observe the rule of law.

    And it’s ironic, to say the least, that when water and electricity shortages are nearing crisis point, and kids are being denied their education through gross maladministration, the self-appointed leader of the country, plus his entourage, is visiting Dubai on the dubious grounds of advancing Fiji’s tourist industry.

    It’s interesting to note that, according to freely available information, the budgeted cost of feeding the the Labasa College students for one term ($10,000) could buy you a business class Suva/Dubai return ticket.

  89. konor Says:

    If it cost $10,000 to feed Labasa college boarders for a term, thats $833 for this last week of school – add the electricity, water bills and its still just a fraction of the total 14 days per diem (@ $200 USD per day) for just one of the 3 members of the illegal cabinet who flew to dubai and their entourage!

    115 students of Nawaicoba Public school can’t get to school because theres no busfare or lunch money. And what does bole do? he says the public should help. The public are ALWAYS generous. can he start with the illegal cabinet and their wives? put one fakawela pot in the middle of the cabinet table and give generously eh. Can the military council put one pot in the middle of their meeting table and SOLI too?? or are they all still at the bank and money lenders counters pleading for their atm cards to be returned?

    AND, rbf says economic growth for 2008 is now revised down to 1.8% compared to 2.2% forecast last year.

    Bole pleads for assistance
    Monday, April 21, 2008
    Update: 1:09PM Interim Education Minister Filipe Bole is appealing to people to assist students whose education has been affected either by the rising cost of items or disasters. In a press statement issued this morning, Mr Bole said he was concerned with the plight of students at Nawaicoba Public School. The impact of the rising cost of living spares no one and children being dependent suffer the most, he said.


    Economic growth projected now at 1.7 pc
    Monday, April 21, 2008

    Update: 4:08PM FIJI’S economic growth for 2008 is now projected at 1.7 per cent, compared to the 2.2 per cent announced in October last year, says Reserve Bank Governor Savenaca Narube.

    The downward revision is mainly due to lower projections for the community, social and personal services sector.

    Lower forecasts of crop, cane and sugar output, partly due to the effects of Cyclone Gene, also led to lower revisions for the manufacturing and agriculture, forestry, fishing and subsistence sectors, said Mr Narube.

  90. Destiny Says:

    Well this site has stooped as far as it can go. All of you gutless pricks who feel the need to badmouth family members and children should be ashamed of yourself. What kind of people are you and what kind of country do you want??? Stop and listen to yourselves… its pathetic and disgusting.

    I don’t want a fucking democracy if I have to share it with narrow minded, self serving racists, bigots and children hating people like you. If you want to take a shot at Frank and the boys, fine, but DON’T target his family and DON’T make it personal. Have the courage and literacy to write a blog that articulates your anger without so much personal hatred.

    It really is a sad day for Fiji when children are ridiculed, its an even sadder day watching grown men get off on doing it… take a long hard look at yourselves, you talk about god and peace and freedom and democracy…….. Do any of you know what that means? Do any of you understand how you live your lives if you get it????

    Let me tell you, under a true democracy most of you would spend more time in Jail that your beloved Idiot sorry, Idol Qarase.

  91. aubatinuku-N Says:


    The issue is Yat Sen School allowing guns to be brought onto school property, whatever the purpose may have been.
    The Fiji public has a right to safety in schools regarding guns.

    You are the one who has flown off the handle here!

    What business does a child have brandishing guns in school? NONE!
    Are their parents supplying the weapons?…………………………
    If so, then for what purpose?…………………………………………

    I don’t know about you but as far as I am concerned and I am a parent who has children in both primary & high school, there is no excuse whatsoever to bring guns to school. Whether they be toy guns or real guns, the fact of the matter is there should be a line you draw.

    And you can go ahead and do what we predicted you and the likes of you would do, which is use this excuse to MOCK DEMOCRACY!!
    What is the decency in that?

    You talk about not targeting his family and NOT making it personal!!
    Have you forgotten?
    You have basically chosen to be so TRANSPARENT in every sense of the word and you have no say in it!!

    Welcome to life as we know it!!

  92. aubatinuku-N Says:


    And one more thing DESTINY aka DESTINED for DESTRUCTION!!!!!

    Do yourself and THE KID a big favor, since you support this ILLEGAL JUNTA!!
    Tell the mother of the “CHILD” concerned to teach her children about decorum since their family is now illegally representing the whole of Fiji.

    We are not all SDL supporters, some of us couldn’t care less what party is government of the day, so long as it is democratically elected and we don’t have to worry about whether or not we should maybe invest in bullet proof vests for our children.

    Let me tell YOU!! You ridicule your own children and compromise your family members when you go out there and illegally BRING A COUNTRY to ruin at gunpoint and sheer GREED AND STUPIDITY!!



    nicely put aubatinuku-N!

    They’re all destined for DESTRUCTION!

    However, do remember that ELECTIONS ARE VERY COSTLY,

    and that SDL would get in IF we have elections again! In fact, under current circumstances, they would get MORE VOTES than they did in 2006!

    The best thing for the country right now is to REINSTATE QARASE/SDL and then have elections after they have served their full term.

  94. aubatinuku-N Says:

    Aye, aye @ PANTIES-FOR-PEACE.

    A dirty thing indeed it is, POLITICS! Don’t you agree! 😉

  95. maleka sara Says:

    @ aubatinuku-N

    Maleka sara – destiny could learn a thing or two from what you’ve told her. na gstring rokaca me sava mada.

    destiny mada ga is not a good role model for any child, let alone her own. what kind of mother goes around showing her ugly crotch to all and sundry and sleeping around yeah? vacava na otimu? na kenai talanoa na loser o destiny ceburaki tumaina Dragon, Traps kei O’Reilys.

    Don’t come here and preach and sound offended destiny, your self rightiousness is a farce, we all know you’re a kaba waqa from your younger days and still going strong @ 55. BTW insulting the Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase who wouldn’t give you the time of day is just as low

    quote from your post

    “Do any of you understand how you live your lives if you get it????” Look at your own parents and remember too that the Prime Minister LQ has his own family and he is not an idiot like your own father who changed his name to try to gain hold of a title. Yeah? glass houses etc…..swallow that with your cheap champagne.

  96. Destiny Says:

    @maleka sara
    ARe you saying that my father changed his name to get hold of a title? My fathers title is his birth right… so swallow that with you poison.

  97. aubatinuku-N Says:

    DESTINY aka DESTINED FOR DESTRUCTION diarrhea of the mouth is fast running out of FRESH……………>>>>>>”Tis better to be thought a fool and be silent than to speak and remove all doubt”!!

  98. maleka sara Says:

    yes that birthright does not appear in the Vola ni Kawa Bula re, pond life la o kemudou, go all your might destiny, keimami kilai iko vinaka, lailai beka na waqavuka e vuka mai Serene?

    did you ever wonder why people from the Noble families in Fiji ignore you? You’re a disgraceful wannabee.

  99. aubatinuku-N Says:

    Destiny, you blogging from what pub again?

    Like that Budhau fellow, live in Sydney, blog from pub.

  100. aubatinuku-N Says:

    I just received a tip off from santa’s helpers that Bernie Bainimarama’s profile is now blocked but only too late because those GUN Shots, excuse the pun have been saved for posterity.

    We might be able to view them again soon via Yat Sen Sec Sch website is what I hear because they will be emailed to the appropriate authorities at the sch.

    Out of the mouth of babes!

  101. kafir Says:

    oso popi, drau bare rawa na duana! muria nomu i yatu Destiny, qai ma moce.

  102. Jose Says:

    Na leqa tiko vei Destiny ni levu tiko nona pride. Vaka Viti- Dokadoka. Touch anything close by there and sh’es a live wire spitting poison. The bigger her inflated ego is the harder she takes it when we dish it to her. Mai aso.

  103. natewaprince Says:

    Hahaha, sa rogo vinaka dina na nodra vei vala na yalewa.Destiny’s reply confirms she really is Ellen Whippy.

    Kichim popi.

  104. Puf-Military Says:

    @ Jose – vinaka vaka levu na vei vakadodonu taki, kei na vei vakatavulici. Destined for destruction/ detritus humble urself – kua mada ni via Turaga becos u certainly are not, and not even Fijian at that.

    We refer to LQ as the real Prime Minister, becos we the real people of Fiji chose him and the SDL party. U don’t like that’s ur problem along with the other losers who come here bragging but leave with their tails between their legs.

    Go and reflect on urself and learn some manners, Fijian etiquette, respect etc. Being Fijian is so much more than “force-lining” urself into the Vola ni Kawa Bula.

  105. terminate frank now Says:
    Eda sa sinai saraga vi ratou na mataivalu dau laba qo, kei nodratou IG matanitu daulaba qo. Eda sarava nikua na ivua ni vuaviri ni 5/12 Sa lolovira dina na veimoku a caka vei Malasebe. Vinaka Voreqe, Vinaka Teleni, Vinaka Iloilo, Vinaka Ganilau, Vinaka Nailatikau, Vinaka Khaiyum, Vinaka Chaudhry, Vinaka Vayeshnoi, Vinaka Driti, Vinaka Naupoto, Vinaka Qiliho, Vinaka Shaista, Vinaka Nazhaat, Vinaka Gates, Vinaka Byrne, Vinaka Pathik, Vinaka Scutt, Vinaka Goundar, Vinaka Alofa, Vinaka Tikoitoga, Vinaka Saumatua, Vinaka Jokapeci Koroi, Vinaka Kamlesh Arya, Vinaka John Samy, Vinaka Mataca, Vinaka Josefa Seruilagilagi, Vinaka sara vakalevu!!!!! Vinaka vei kemuni kece na vakavuna na vuaviri, sa ia tikoga na tatamusuki ni ca ko ni tea. IN THE HIGH COURT OF FIJI AT SUVA CRIMINAL JURISDICTION Criminal Case No: HAC 120 of 2007 STATE v. LOLE VULACA WAISALE BOLETAWA MAIKA RAUQERA RUSIATE KOROVUSERE JONE CAMA ERONIMO SUSUNIKORO EREMASI NARAGA PITA MATAI Hearing: 25th March – 22nd April 2008 Summing Up: 22nd April 2008 Counsel: Mr. W. Kuruisaqila & Ms L. Lagilevu for State Mr. J. Semisi for Accused 1, 2, 3, 4, 6-8 Mr. S. Karavaki for Accused 5 SUMMING UP Madam Assessor and Gentlemen Assessors. It is now my duty to sum up to you. In summing up, I will direct you on matters of law which you must accept and act upon. You must apply the law as I tell you the law is, in this case. As far as the facts of this case are concerned, what evidence to accept, what weight to put on certain evidence, which witnesses are reliable, these are matters entirely for you to decide for yourselves. So if I express any opinion on the facts, or if I appear to do so, it is entirely a matter for you whether you accept what I say, or form your own opinions. In other words, you are the masters and the judges of fact. Counsel for the prosecution and the defence have made submissions to you about how you should find the facts of the case. They have the right to make such comments, in accordance with their duties as counsel. However, you are not bound by what counsel on either side have told you about the facts of the case. If you think that those comments appeal to your common sense and judgment, you may use them as you see fit. You are the representatives of the community in this trial and it is for you to decide which version of the evidence to accept or reject. Mr. Semisi in his closing address suggested that if you find the accused guilty they would lose their lives. This is not correct in law. In any event the penalty in this case, if the accused are found guilty is not your concern. Disregard what counsel said about penalty. You will not be asked to give reasons for your opinions, but merely your opinions themselves, and you need not be unanimous although it would be desirable if you could agree on them. Your opinions are not binding on me but I can assure you that I will give them great weight when I deliver my judgment. On the issue of proof, I must direct you as a matter of law that the onus or burden of proof lies upon the prosecution to prove the case against each accused person. The burden remains throughout the trial upon the prosecution and never shifts. There is no obligation upon the accused to prove their innocence. Under our system of criminal justice, an accused person is presumed to be innocent until he or she is proved guilty. The standard of proof is one of proof beyond reasonable doubt. This means that before you can find the accused guilty of the offence charged, you must be satisfied so that you are sure of his guilt. If you have a reasonable doubt about the guilt of the accused then it is your duty to express an opinion that the accused is not guilty. It is only if you are satisfied so that you feel sure of the guilt of the accused that you can express an opinion that he is guilty. Your opinions must be based only on the evidence you have heard in this courtroom and upon nothing else. Whatever you have read about this case in the media or elsewhere, you must totally disregard. Your duty is to apply the law to the evidence you have heard. There are 8 Accused persons in this case. The first 7 are charged with murder. The 8th Accused is charged with being an accessory after the fact to murder. As a matter of law, you must consider the evidence against each accused person separately. You must not assume that because you find there is enough evidence to convict one, that the others must also be guilty. Consider the case against each accused separately. Murder is an offence defined by the Penal Code. The 7 Accused persons are charged with the murder of Tevita Malasebe on the 4th and 5th of June 2007 at Valelevu in the Central Division. Murder is committed when a person causes the death of another person by an unlawful act with malice aforethought. Murder has three essential elements which the prosecution must prove: 1. The Accused caused the death of the deceased. 2. By an unlawful act. 3. With malice aforethought. In this case all three elements of the offence of murder are disputed by the defence, so you must carefully consider the evidence for each element. The first element is that of “causing death” or causation. Did the Accused cause the death of Tevita Malasebe? The prosecution has not led direct evidence that each individual accused person assaulted the deceased at all. The prosecution relies on circumstantial evidence to show that it was the accused who were responsible for the death of the deceased. In law, the term “caused death” means simply that the act or acts of the accused were the substantial or operating cause of death. If for instance, the deceased’s life might have been saved if he had been taken to hospital earlier, that is irrelevant provided you are satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that it was the act or acts of the accused which were the substantial cause of death. And that Tevita Malasebe died as a result of assaults on him. There is no direct evidence that any of the accused laid a hand on the deceased. Indeed for some of the accused persons there is no evidence that these Accused even entered the Crime Office on the night of the 4th of June. Instead the prosecution relies on circumstantial evidence and the doctrine of joint enterprise to prove its case. In law, the person who actually delivers the fatal blow in a murder case, is not the only person who is guilty of the murder. Anyone who aids or abets the principal offender, anyone who counsels or procures or advises the principal offender is also guilty of murder. Furthermore, when two or more persons get together and form a common intention to do something unlawful together and in the course of doing that unlawful act, another offence is committed which is a probable consequence of the planned offence, then each of those who are part of the plan is also guilty of the resulting offence, even if he or she did not do the act which actually constitutes the offence. Let me give you an example. If a group of men plan to commit a robbery carrying firearms, and in the course of the robbery the security guard guarding the premises gets shot by one robber, all the robbers are guilty of his murder even if they did nothing to actively contribute to the murder. So the robber standing guard outside and who never enters the premises is guilty of murder as well as the robber who actually fired the shot. This is because when you commit an armed robbery, it is a probable consequence of that common intention that someone will get shot and be seriously injured or killed. This is the doctrine of joint enterprise. In this case the prosecution says that all accused persons were part of a common intention to bring Tevita Malasebe to the Valelevu Police Station to assault him prior to his interrogation. The prosecution’s case is that all the accused either actively assisted in this plan or did nothing to stop the assault which, as police officers, they had a duty to do in law, and that the death of the deceased as a result of the assault was a probable consequence of that planned assault for which each Accused 1 to 7 must be responsible for. In considering whether or not there was a joint enterprise involving each accused in this case, ask yourselves: 1) Was there a joint common intention to bring Malasebe to the station to assault him? 2) Was each of the accused in the dock party to that common intention? 3) Was the death of Malasebe as a result of the assault, a probable consequence of the assault? In considering these questions, you may look at all the circumstances of the case as led in the evidence. That brings me to the law on circumstantial evidence. There is no direct evidence of a joint enterprise, or of a common intention to assault Tevita Malasebe in police custody. No one saw the alleged assault and gave evidence about it. Instead the prosecution relies on all the circumstances of the case to try to prove that the only reasonable inference available to you is that these Accused were part of that joint unlawful enterprise and that they caused the death of the deceased. A case of circumstantial evidence relies on a variety of sources of evidence. One example of how it works is this. One day you find your house broken into. The items stolen are clearly identifiable by you because you have put your initial on your DVD and TV screen. The day after the burglary, your DVD and TV screen with your initials are found inside your neighbour’s house. His son is seen to be spending a lot of money at Traps Bar. His fingerprints are found on your kitchen door. On the basis of all this evidence, you are entitled to draw a reasonable inference that your neighbour’s son committed the burglary in your house, because there is no other reasonable inference that you can draw from the evidence which is consistent with the son’s innocence. However, if for instance you did not initial the stolen items and cannot be sure that these items in your neighbour’s house is yours, and if there are no fingerprints found then the evidence of the neighbour’s son’s spending would not be sufficient for you to draw an inference of his guilt. This is because there are other possible reasonable hypotheses for his sudden wealth. Therefore, with circumstantial evidence you must look at all the evidence together and ask yourselves whether the only reasonable inference you can draw from the evidence is the guilt of the accused. You must ask yourselves whether there can be any other explanation for the evidence which is also consistent with the accused’s innocence. That is the law on circumstantial evidence. The second element of the offence is that the acts of the accused was unlawful. As a matter of law, I must direct you that if you are satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the accused in a joint enterprise were responsible for assaults on the deceased, then in law there is no excuse for such an assault. The police have no powers to assault suspects in their custody unless of course the suspects are resisting arrest. That is not the case here. The evidence is that the deceased never resisted arrest and if the accused assaulted him, or were party to an assault on him it was unlawful and not justified in law. The fact that the deceased might have been a known criminal, or that he was suspected of a robbery makes no difference to this rule. No matter who the suspect is, he or she has a right not to be assaulted by the police, a right not to be subjected to torture or degrading treatment. These are rights guaranteed by our Constitution. Furthermore police officers have a special role given to them by the law. Section 17(3) of the Police Act says that “It shall be the duty of every police officer …… to prevent the commission of offences, and public nuisances, to detect and bring offenders to justice ……” So police officers cannot stand by and allow offences to be committed in front of them. They must prevent the commission of those offences, and bring the offenders to justice. They have the same duty even when their fellow police officers are committing criminal offences. If therefore you accept that Tevita Malasebe died as a result of multiple assaults on him while in police custody then you may accept that such assaults were unlawful, thus satisfying this element of the offence. The third element of the offence of murder is malice aforethought. The term is misleading because it suggests premeditation. That is not what malice aforethought means. The term is defined by our Penal Code to mean either – 1) an intention to cause death or grievous harm to another person; or 2) knowing that the act done by the accused will probably cause death or grievous harm, even if the accused is indifferent or doesn’t care whether death or grievous harm will be caused or not. Of course no one can really say what is in a person’s mind. Only that person can know for sure. However, we all know that a person’s conduct or behavior can be evidence of a person’s intention. For this reason, it is open to you to deduce or infer what was in the accuseds’ minds in the circumstances, from the conduct of each. In this case you must ask yourselves whether, the injuries on Malasebe were inflicted either with intention to cause death or serious harm, or with indifference or recklessness as to the serious harm caused. Those are the elements of the offence of murder. In relation to the 8th Accused, Pita Matai, the prosecution does not allege that he was a party to murder. The 8th Accused is charged under section 388 of the Penal Code. That section says that a person who assists another, who is to his knowledge, guilty of an offence, in order to enable him to escape punishment, is an accessory after the fact to the offence. The elements of the offence are: 1. The Accused 2. Assisted another 3. Who to his knowledge had committed an offence 4. In order to assist him/her to escape punishment. In this case the defence disputes all of these elements. The defence says that Pita Matai did not assist anyone to escape punishment, nor did he know that an offence had been committed. So you must consider the evidence in relation to each element of offence carefully. What I have said about circumstantial evidence applies also to the prosecution case against the 8th Accused. However, for the purpose of this offence, you must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the 8th Accused gave active assistance to those whom he knew had committed an offence before you can find him guilty on Count 2. A further legal direction I must give you is that what one accused says about another in his caution statement to the police, is not evidence against the others. A police statement is only evidence against the maker of it. So if the 8th Accused for instance named other accused persons in his statement, you cannot take that into account against those other accused. The evidence The prosecution evidence is that the deceased Tevita Malasebe, a 30 year old man was taken from his home by police officers on the 4th of June 2007 at about 12 midnight. His mother, Anisa Solivolili said that Lole Vulaca (the 1st Accused) came into the house and did not tell her why he was taking the deceased, but promised to bring him back. The deceased was handcuffed at his home and the 1st Accused told her that he was following the others to make sure they did not assault her son. She then also went to the Valelevu Police Station with her other two sons and arrived there about an hour later. There, the police officers in the charge room denied that her son was at the station. While there she and her son saw the vehicles which had taken the deceased, parked at the station. She heard noises from the Crime Office, noises she described as rumbling, and shuffling. She went towards the noise from the outside of the station, calling out her son’s name. She believed that he was being assaulted in the Crime Office. Outside the Crime Office, she saw 3 people sitting on the bench. One of them she identified as the 4th Accused. One of the men chased her away from there. She re-entered the charge room, then sat in a chair just outside the charge room. While waiting there she again saw the 4th Accused, coming out of the Crime Office entrance. He was wearing a black jacket and black ¾ pants and he whispered to a police officer in the charge room. He looked at the deceased’s mother and son, then went slowly out. She saw the 4th Accused again the next day at the hospital, and she and her son accused him of being one of the men who had taken her son. When she saw her son the next morning, it was at the CWM Hospital. He was dead, with visible bruises all over his body. She was vigorously cross-examined by both defence counsel. She said under cross-examination that she had heard the noises from the Crime Office and that she had told the police this when she made her statement but did not know why this was not written down. She also maintained that the 1st Accused had told her that he had to go to the station to ensure that they did not beat up her son. It was suggested to her that her son was not at the Valelevu Police Station that night, but she said that she believed that he was there because she saw the two vehicles which had escorted her son away, were parked at the station. The evidence of DC Amani Bosenawai of the Strike Back team was that at 4am on the 4th of June 2007, he was instructed to assist the Valelevu Police in a robbery investigation. He arrived at Valelevu Police Station after 11am. He was briefed with others by the 8th Accused Sgt. Pita Matai. The crime men present at the briefing were the 1st Accused, the 2nd Accused, the 3rd Accused and other crime officers. They were called back to Valelevu Police Station at 6pm for another briefing by Sgt. Pita (the 8th Accused). They went out to look for suspects and returned again at 9pm and 11.30pm. At the 11.30pm briefing the 8th Accused asked for assistance to arrest Tevita Malasebe. At this briefing, the 1st Accused, 2nd Accused, the 6th Accused, the 7th Accused, the 3rd Accused and 5th Accused were all present. These officers with DC Amani, left in 3 vehicles to arrest the deceased. One was driven by the 1st Accused, one by DC Matai and the third by Sgt. Epeli Vamosi. DC Amani was in the same vehicle as the 2nd Accused, and Sgt. Vamosi. At the deceased’s house, the 1st, 2nd and 3rd Accused spoke to the deceased’s mother. The deceased was then put into GN503 (the planning vehicle) driven by Constable Matai. The vehicles then went back to Valelevu Police Station. Sgt. Epeli Vamosi then asked the 8th Accused if the Strike Back team from Nabua could be released. DC Amani was then released and he went off duty. That was also the evidence of Cpl. Simione Rarasea from the Nabua Strike Back team. He identified the 1st Accused but said he could not recall who the other officers were who went to arrest the deceased. He said that the 5th Accused Jone Cama was not in the vehicles going to arrest the deceased. WPC Saleshni Devi who was in the charge room from 12 midnight on the 4th of June saw the 1st Accused sitting in the vehicle outside. She also heard someone crying. WPC Kharti was on duty from 11pm in the charge room. No one was brought into the charge room that night for her to register and lock in the cell. She said that after midnight she heard voices and the sound of crying coming from the Crime Office. She said she heard this between 1am and 2am. At 5am, Cpl. Eremasi of CID came into the charge room and went to the cells. He took out a blue mattress and went out of the charge room through the back door. Under cross-examination, she said that she heard the sound of crying between 1am and 2am, and that the noise came from the direction of the Crime Office. She said she did nothing about it and carried on with her work. She said that when Cpl. Eremasi took the mattress, he did so openly. In cross-examination by Mr. Karavaki, she agreed that CID officers sometimes got tired and that perhaps Cpl. Eremasi wanted the mattress to rest on it for a while. She was not asked to identify Cpl. Eremasi in the dock as the 7th Accused. WPC Sesenieli Cagi was on duty from 10.45pm, as the station orderly. At 1.10am the deceased’s brother Samu came in looking for his brother. At 2am she heard a man yelling, while she was in the charge room. She then saw a bald-headed policeman in civilians carrying a blue mattress. In cross-examination she said the sound of yelling came from the direction of the Crime Office, that she had never heard such a thing before and she did not want to go to that side. She was not asked to identify the bald-headed policeman. The deceased was next seen by Cpl. Mosese Kalidole. He was at the station washing his hands behind the Crime Office at around midnight on the 4th of June. He saw the 5th Accused Jone Cama, and the 8th Accused Pita Matai talking beside the sink. He saw two vehicles parked outside the station and he saw the 1st Accused and a Fijian man whom he later came to know was the deceased, come out of the vehicle and go straight into the Crime Office. Corporal Kalidole left the station after he was told by the 8th Accused to interview the deceased the next morning. The next morning he was picked up by the 8th Accused and the 7th Accused. He went into the Crime Office at 6.30am and saw the deceased lying down facing up. He had breathing difficulties and was touching his stomach. Cpl. Kalidole went and told the 8th Accused what he had seen. The evidence of SC Ritesh Lal was that he was on duty at Valelevu Police Station from 11pm to 7am on the 4th of June 2007. He heard a cry from the Crime Office saying ‘wailei’ at about 3am. At 4.30am he walked behind the Crime Office and a police officer who he knew as “Jone” came out of the Crime Office. He was not able to recognize him now. He told SC Ritesh Lal to go away to the other side of the station. The evidence of Sgt. Vereniki Seru was that suspects brought to the station come into the charge room so that the station orderly can enter his or her name in the station diary. If in remand, the suspect must be kept in the cell, and when taken out of the cell for interrogation, this is also noted in the station diary. PC Pita Qiolevu gave evidence that on the 4th of June 2007 he was on duty from 11pm to 7am. Passing the Crime Office between 4am and 4.30am he heard the sound of loud crying. The voice was saying “Officer please have mercy on me.” It then said several times “Officer please let me live.” PC Qiolevu told DC Jone (the 5th Accused) this. The 5th Accused was standing just outside the Crime Office. There was no response. At 6.45am PC Samuela Vinakayawa (PW11) went into the Crime Office, and saw the deceased lying on the floor. He was wearing a t-shirt and asked for a drink of water. WPC Taraivini came to the Valelevu Police Station before 8am. She saw the 2nd and 4th Accused sitting outside the Crime Office. They looked tired and worried. Inside the Crime Office she saw a Fijian male on the floor, lying on a blue tarpaulin or mattress. He was not moving. She made a phone call and went back to her barracks. On her way to attend a police tribunal at 8am, she saw that the same man with the blue tarpaulin or mattress was being loaded into the back of GN174. The 1st Accused was driving and the 2nd Accused and the 6th Accused were sitting at the back. WPC Maca Baleinimoto also said that she saw the 2nd and 6th Accused loading a body into the police van. She also saw DC Rusiate (the 4th Accused) standing outside the Crime Office. Several extra-mural prisoners gave evidence. PW14 Koresi Wainiqolo said that he came to work at the station at 7am. He saw four CID men carrying a bag from the Crime Office, loading it into the twin cab and drive away. They were the 1st Accused, the 2nd Accused, the 4th Accused and the 6th Accused. He shouted to his friends outside the bure “someone is dead and is being loaded into the lorry.” He said that he thought the man was dead from the way he was thrown into the vehicle. Another extra-mural prisoner Zarif Ali said that he was at the station from 6.55am on the 5th of June. He cleaned parts of the station. He was then told to clean the Crime Office by the 2nd Accused. He was told three times. When he went to the Crime Office, he saw human faeces and urine on the floor. The room smelt bad and he left. The 2nd Accused asked him again to clean the Crime Office. Later he saw the 4th Accused wearing hand gloves, cleaning the mess on the floor of the Crime Office. He then saw a police twin cab parked towards the bure. He saw two legs with blood clot marks on his feet on the open tray of the vehicle. Then he saw the 6th Accused push that person’s legs in, close the tray of the vehicle and jump in. Then the witness was told by the Sergeant to clean the mattress lying next to the sink. He cleaned it and put it back into the cell. Another extra-mural prisoner Jimi Qailau arrived at Valelevu Police Station at 7am. He saw the 1st Accused lying down in the police bure. He saw a police officer “Jo” take a blanket and throw it onto a rubbish heap. The witness went to take rubbish from outside the Crime Office, and found a white bucket with wet underwear in it. He threw it onto the rubbish heap. He also saw the vehicle leave with the 1st, 2nd and 6th Accused in it. He did not identify the officer “Jo” as any one of the Accused. Under cross-examination all the eye-witnesses who saw the loading of the deceased into the van, agreed that they could not say for sure whether he was alive or dead. Koresi Wainiqolo said that he believed the man to be dead because of the way he was thrown into the van, and because the officers had not opened the boot of the tray to put him in. Under cross-examination Jimi Qailau said that when he made his police statement, he had told the police that Wainiqolo had told him that the deceased was “loaded” into the van. This was contrary to his court evidence during which he said he had been told by Wainiqolo that he had been “thrown” into the van. The State called medical evidence from Dr. Balbinder Kuar, Elia Batibasaga and Emi Raceba. Dr. Kuar was on duty at the CWM Hospital from 8am on the 5th of June. At 8.30am the deceased was brought in on a trolley. She said that the patient had no life sounds, no breath and no heart sounds. The two men who brought him in were police officers who told her that the patient had been lying somewhere on the streets. She tried to resuscitate the patient but with no success. She declared him dead. The Staff Nurse Raceba saw the deceased wheeled in by two men. One of them was the 1st Accused. The other was identified by a colleague as the 4th Accused. Another nurse Elia Batibasaga saw the deceased at CWM Hospital when he was brought in on a trolley. He connected the deceased to an ECG monitor and saw that the tracing was a flat line. This meant that the deceased was dead. He saw no other sign of life and he told Dr. Kuar that the patient was dead on arrival. They tried to resuscitate him but with no success. He signed the Notification of Death form and noted that the deceased was “dead before arrival.” In his opinion, the deceased had been dead for “quite a while” because he was cold and clammy all over the body. He said perhaps for two hours or more. It was suggested in cross-examination that he lacked the qualification to make that assessment. He accepted this as fair comment. Evidence was given by scene of crime investigators that when they arrived at the scene at Valelevu Police Station, the Crime Office had not been cordoned off. It had been cleaned but there were pieces of broken timber inside and outside the Crime Office. ASP Tokowara Parker is ASP Crime Nasinu and is and was in June 2007, overall responsible for crime investigations in the Nasinu and Valelevu areas. At 7am, IP Ramasibana briefed him that the deceased had been arrested early in the morning. At 10am, IP Ramasibana informed him that the deceased had been taken to hospital. Later he was told that the deceased was dead. They went together to the CWM hospital with the 4th Accused who was driving. At the hospital, he saw black spots on the deceased’s stomach, back and legs. The deceased’s mother accused the 4th Accused as being one of the officers who had come to her home early in the morning and taken her son away. The 4th Accused denied this. IP Ramasibana was in June 2007 the Crime Officer Valelevu. On the 5th of June 2007, he arrived at the Valelevu Police Station at 7am. After 8am, the 8th Accused Sgt. Pita Matai told him that they had brought the deceased, and that he had breathing difficulties and had to be taken to the hospital. Later he was informed by an officer at the Central Police Station that he should come to view a body. He went with ASP Parker and the 4th Accused. The pathologist Dr. Prashant Samberkar gave evidence of the post-mortem. The deceased died of shock and internal hemorrhage, due to multiple bruises as a complication of multiple blunt impacts. There were 38 external injuries of bruises, abrasions and handcuff abrasions. There were two imprint abrasions on the back. He listed 16 internal injuries of extensive hematoma, fractured ribs (the 6th, 7th, 8th and 9th) and large areas of hematoma over the abdominal wall, and over the right and left feet. A histopathology report showed systemic shock and blunt trauma of the brain, lungs, heart, liver, spleen and kidneys. The sections showed diffuse congestion. He found the bruises on the deceased to be recent in origin. He found that the deceased died within 8 hours of examination. He described “blunt trauma” as the cause of most of the injuries which means a body striking a flat surface or irregular surface or an object, instrument or weapon striking the body. He described the handcuff abrasions as being caused by a tight ligature around the wrists. In describing the kind of force necessary to cause the injuries he found, he said that in his opinion there were multiple blunt impacts using an object, instrument or weapon such as a rod, flat wooden plank or multiple kicks to that area. In relation to some injuries such as injury 17, he said a fall could also have caused them. He was of the opinion that a flat wooden plank such as Ex. 13 could have caused the imprint abrasions. He described the injuries on the soles of the feet as “falanga” or repetitive blunt trauma to the soles of the feet. He said that this was found in police custody deaths, and was evidence of a torture technique. Dr. Prashant was vigorously cross-examined by both defence counsel. He was asked how he could rule out that the deceased’s injuries could be caused by a motor vehicle accident. He said that in his opinion the injuries were caused by kicking, punching and falling, and were not consistent with motor vehicle injury. He also ruled out rugby as a cause of the injuries. In relation to the “falanga” injuries on the soles of the deceased’s feet, Dr. Prashant said that these injuries could not have been caused by running barefoot on a rough surface. He was cross-examined about his visit to the scene with crime investigation. It was suggested that this visit deprived his findings of the necessary independence. He said that visiting the crime scene was one of the primary duties of the pathologists, and that pathologists all over the world visited crime scenes to help them in their findings on a post-mortem. He agreed that if Tevita Malasebe had died at the crime scene, police procedure was that he should have been left there and the scene cordoned off. From the information that this had not happened in this case, he assumed that death must have occurred on the way to hospital. However, he said that this was still a case of “death in police custody” because the police took the deceased to hospital. He said he did not direct the seizing of the wooden pieces of wood which in his opinion was consistent with the imprint abrasions, but he might have advised the police to uplift them. In response to questions asked by me (the court) he explained rigor mortis, saying that it would normally set in (in Fiji) between 3-6 hours after death. In the case of the deceased there was no sign of rigor mortis. Describing the changes in the body after death, he said that for the first two hours after death, the muscles of the body relax. This is called suspended animation. In relation to the age of injuries, he said that bruises remained bluish or crimson for the first 12 hours after the injuries were inflicted. Thereafter they turned violet, green, dark yellow then after 3-4 weeks, light yellow. In his examination-in-chief the doctor had said that the external injuries found on the deceased were bluish or crimson, which meant that they were recent in origin. In further questioning by counsel, the doctor said that the expulsion of faeces from a person’s body would occur within the first 2 hours after death that is, during the period of suspended animation. He confirmed that when he conducted the post mortem, rigor mortis was present. Cpl. Jioji Ravaqa gave evidence that he seized exhibits on the 5th of June 2007, including handcuffs (Ex. 14), 2 pieces of broken timber found in the Crime Office (Ex. 13) and outside the Crime Office window, and a blanket from the rubbish heap outside the police compound (Ex. 17). The prosecution tendered caution statements of some of the accused. The 1st Accused said that on the night of the 4th of June 2007 he had been instructed by D/Sgt. Matai (the 8th Accused) to conduct a raid on the deceased’s house in Newtown. The raid involved three police vehicles. At the deceased’s house, he spoke to his mother. The deceased was handcuffed and taken to the police station. At the police station the 1st Accused arrived at the Crime Office. The deceased was already inside with the crime men who had escorted him. He said he then left believing that the proper procedures would be followed. He refueled the vehicle, came back to the station and slept inside the vehicle. He then gave the key to the vehicle to the 4th Accused who was outside in the verandah and went home. He came back to the station at 5.30am when the 2nd Accused woke him up. He lay down under the mango tree on a wooden platform. He was then instructed by the 8th Accused to go to the Criminal Records Office. On his way he was called back by the 8th Accused who told him to take the deceased to hospital. The 2nd, 4th and 6th Accused carried the deceased into the vehicle on the blue cell mattress. He drove to the hospital and dropped the deceased, the 4th and 6th Accused there. He then went to the Crime Records Office and went back to the station. He denied any knowledge of assault on the deceased. There was no interview tendered for the 2nd Accused and you must not speculate about the reason for that. The 3rd Accused said he did not know anything about the interrogation of the deceased. However he admitted accompanying the other crime men and Strike Back team on the “raid” on the deceased’s house, saying he had gone voluntarily although he was not part of the team. He said that after escorting the deceased to the Valelevu Police Station, he went home in his car as he was very tired and sleepy. He came back to the Station after 8am. The 4th Accused said that he was part of the “raid” on the deceased’s house and he was in the vehicle driven by the 1st Accused GN184. He said he did not go inside the deceased’s house guarding the informer. He said that the vehicle conveying the deceased arrived first at the Valelevu Police Station and he could not recall if the deceased’s name was entered in the cell book. He said that when he saw the deceased in the Crime Office, he was fully clothed wearing a white t-shirt with ¾ pants. He said he had not kept a record of the raid or of any interrogation of the deceased. He said he did not see anyone punching or kicking the deceased. He agreed that he had been in the Crime Office after the deceased was brought in, for about 30 minutes. He said that all the crime men who were involved in the raid were in the Crime Office, with some other police officers. They were laughing. After he reported off duty he went to sleep. Finally he said he saw no one kick or punch the deceased, that the deceased was involved in a robbery at the Valelevu Industrial and that the deceased had been in the getaway vehicle which had crashed into the sidewalk when a ten wheeler truck had reversed into it. The 5th Accused denied that he had been the Recorder during the operations that night, and said he had no idea who had gone to raid the house of the deceased. He said he had not accompanied the raid team and did not know what time they had left. He said he did not know the deceased and he was not present when the 8th Accused briefed DCO Southern at 7pm about two suspects of the robbery including the deceased. He said that during the night he had prepared the docket on the case in the Computer Room and the Crime Officer’s office. The latter is on the top floor of the station. The Computer Room is next to the Crime Office on the ground floor. He agreed that he was on duty on the 4th of June and he later agreed that he had been at the briefing at 7pm with DCO (Southern). He said he had been instructed to prepare the docket for Jone Savui another suspect in the same robbery. At the same briefing, the 5th Accused came to know that the deceased was also a suspect. The 6th Accused said in his statement that he was on duty on the 4th of June 2007 during the day. He said that he was at home during the night and in the morning he was detailed to take the deceased to hospital because he was sick. There was no interview tendered for the 7th Accused and again you must not speculate about why this is the case. The 8th Accused told the police that he formed a team to investigate the robbery at Golden Manufacturers in Valelevu. The offence had been committed on 31st May 2007 at 10am. On 3rd June, Jone Savui was interviewed. He implicated the deceased. On 4th June 2007, a team from Strike Back was sent to Valelevu Police Station. They looked for the suspects and returned at 11pm. He told them to stand down but they asked to make another attempt to locate the suspects. While the 8th Accused was still at the station, the vehicle with the deceased in it, arrived. The vehicle was driven by Constable Matai. Escorting him were the 2nd Accused, 3rd Accused and Constable Setoki. He instructed them to lock the deceased in the cell and he would be interviewed by Constable Kalidole the next morning. He and Constable Kalidole left the station at 1.17am. At 5am, the 7th Accused came to his house and asked him to bring Constable Kalidole to the station. They went together to Waila at 6am. They brought Constable Kalidole back to the station and the 8th Accused instructed him to interview the deceased. After 7am, Constable Kalidole came to his home and told him the deceased was having breathing difficulties. The 8th Accused instructed the 1st Accused to return to the station to convey the deceased to the hospital. The 8th Accused saw the deceased lying on the floor of the Crime Office. He was carried into the vehicle and the 1st Accused drove him to the CWM Hospital. The 8th Accused briefed Crime Officer Ramasibana. After lunch he was told by Crime Officer that the deceased was dead. In the same interview he said he saw the deceased arrive in a vehicle. He was handcuffed and looked well with no sign of weakness. He was escorted by the 2nd and 3rd Accused and Constable Setoki, into the Crime Office. He said that when he saw the deceased lying on the floor the next morning, the deceased was finding it difficult to breath. That was the case for the prosecution. The defence case At the end of the prosecution case, you heard me explain several options to the accused. They could have given sworn evidence, unsworn evidence or remained silent. They chose to remain silent as was their right. They had a right to remain silent because the burden to prove their guilt remains on the prosecution at all times. The accused do not have to prove anything. You must therefore, not draw any adverse inferences from the fact that the accused have chosen to remain silent. From the cross-examination of the prosecution witnesses and from the submissions of defence, it is quite clear what the defence position is. In relation to the 1st to the 7th Accused it is that the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 6th and 7th Accused were all part of a lawful arrest of the deceased. The defence position is that Tevita Malasebe was wanted by the police for questioning in relation to a robbery at the Golden Manufacturing Company on the 31st of May 2007. His name had been revealed by another suspect Jone Sovui. Malasebe was taken to the Crime Office at Valelevu Police Station, in handcuffs. He entered the Crime Office after midnight on the 4th of June. Thereafter the defence position is that there is no evidence that any of the accused assaulted him, or caused his death or were part of a joint plan to assault him. In relation to the 1st Accused, he did not enter the Crime Office, slept in his vehicle and later went home. The next morning he was instructed to convey the deceased to the hospital. The 3rd Accused said he was at home after the raid of the deceased’s house. The 4th Accused said he only entered the Crime Office for 30 minutes and that he never assaulted the deceased nor saw anyone else do it. The 5th Accused’s position was that he was the recorder that night and never entered the Crime Office. The 6th Accused’s position was that he was at home and was only instructed to take the deceased to hospital. The 8th Accused’s position is that he saw the deceased arrive at the station and gave instructions that he be locked in the cell. He went home after arranging for his interview to be recorded the next day. When he saw the deceased the next day, he thought he had breathing problems and ordered that he be sent to hospital because he was still alive. So the defence case is very clear. It is that there is doubt about Dr. Prashant’s independence from the police force, that Malasebe did not die in police custody as a result of police assault, and that even if he did so die, the Accused are not responsible, and for the 8th Accused, he did nothing to assist anyone who was responsible because he did not know that an offence had been committed. Analysis As I have said before, this is not a case of direct evidence. No one is able to give evidence about what occurred in the Crime Office at Valelevu Police Station from midnight to about 6.45am to Tevita Malasebe. You must look at all the circumstantial evidence and ask yourselves what inferences you can draw from the evidence. The prosecution position is that this was a joint enterprise to assault Tevita Malasebe at the police station, and that whether or not any of the Accused actually hit Malasebe they were all part of the unlawful plan to assault him. In law, a police officer is expected to prevent offences committed. Unlike the rest of us who have no such duty, a police officer cannot stand by and watch an offence being committed. If he watches it being committed, and it is within his power to stop it, and he does nothing to stop it, he is aiding and abetting a criminal offence and is as guilty of the offence as the perpetrator. But of course you must first be satisfied so that you are sure, that the officer was present when the offence was committed, and could have stopped it but did not, or alternatively that the officer was part of a joint plan to commit the offence. In the case of a joint plan, you must be satisfied so that you are sure that each accused had a common plan to assault. The prosecution relies on the following pieces of evidence to prove the joint enterprise and the guilt of each accused: 1. The briefing at Valelevu Police Station at 11.30pm at which all the accused were present and were part of the investigation team. 2. The use of 3 vehicles to effect the arrest. 3. The statement of the 1st Accused to the deceased’s mother that he had to get back to the station to ensure that Tevita Malasebe was not assaulted by the police officers escorting him. 4. The failure of the escorting team to take the deceased into the charge room which would have been normal police procedure. 5. The fact that none of the police officers in the charge room knew that Malasebe was in the police station. 6. The fact that Malasebe was not locked in the cell to await interview. 7. The sounds of crying heard by several police officers, emanating from the direction of the Crime Office from between 1am to 4.30am. 8. The evidence of PC Qiolevu who heard a loud crying voice between 4 to 4.30am in the Crime Office saying “Officer please have mercy on me” and “Officer please let me live” which suggested police assault. 9. The evidence of the extra-mural prisoners and women police officers who saw the loading of the deceased into the police vehicle after 7am on the 5th of June, who saw injuries on the deceased’s legs, and some of whom said that in their opinion the deceased was dead. 10. The evidence from Dr. Kuar that one of the police officers escorting the deceased’s body said that the deceased had been found “lying somewhere in town.” 11. The cleaning of the Crime Office when it must have been obvious to the police officers that there would be a police investigation. 12. The throwing away of a blanket which smelt of faeces on a rubbish heap, the discovery of a wet pair of underpants in a bucket outside the Crime Office, and the presence of pieces of wooden plank inside and outside the Crime Office. 13. The presence of each of the Accused at the briefing at 11.30pm, and their presence at the station during the night, as well as the presence of four when Malasebe was conveyed to hospital. 14. The evidence of Dr. Prashant which is that the injuries on the deceased were consistent with multiple blunt trauma, consistent with handcuffs or wire restraining the wrists, consistent with beating with wooden planks causing imprint abrasions, and consistent with repeated injury on the soles of the feet causing “falanga” which he identified as a known police interrogation torture technique. The prosecution says that all this evidence compels you to conclude beyond any reasonable doubt that the deceased Tevita Malasebe was brought to the station to be assaulted, that he was severely assaulted by police officers over a period of almost 4 hours with the use of wooden planks, kicks and punches while the deceased was handcuffed, that each of the 7 Accused 1-7, were part of that joint enterprise and did nothing to stop it and indeed tried to evade discovery of what had occurred by cleaning the crime scene and throwing away evidence, and that each is guilty of the murder of Tevita Malasebe. In relation to the 8th Accused, the prosecution says that the 8th Accused knew that Malasebe had been at the police station all night, and must have seen the injuries on Malasebe which other witnesses have described as black marks on the legs and bruises all over the abdomen. Knowing what had occurred, he instructed the removal of Malasebe from the Crime Office thus assisting in preventing the offenders from being discovered. He also told IP Ramasibana, his superior that Malasebe had contracted breathing difficulties and had been taken to hospital, which the prosecution says, was untrue. The defence position is, as I have described it, that the Accused were not at the scene, were not part of any joint enterprise and that all the evidence relied upon by the prosecution was done openly and not with any intent to hide evidence. It is for you to decide whether you can draw inferences from the evidence and whether you are satisfied of the guilt of each Accused separately beyond reasonable doubt. In relation to some Accused, the prosecution led evidence which might indicate that they lied about details about that night. One example is the evidence of Dr. Balbinder that she was told by the two officers escorting the deceased that they had found him lying somewhere in town. The evidence of Staff Nurse Emi Raceba is that the two officers were the 1st Accused and an officer called Rusiate. As a matter of law I must direct you that lies by the accused person can be considered by you to decide on the evidence in this case. However before you can do this, you must consider the following. Firstly you must be sure that what the accused said is a deliberate lie. Secondly you should remember that people lie for different reasons, sometimes out of nervousness for instance or to protect other people. It is only if he lied because of a consciousness of guilt that you may rely on the lie as evidence which strengthens the prosecution case. Thirdly you must be sure that the lie was about a material fact in the case. I now turn to the case against each Accused. The 1st Accused The 1st Accused on his own statement to the police was the person conducting the “raid” on the deceased’s house. It was he who spoke to the deceased’s mother. The deceased’s mother said that he did not tell her the reason for the raid but said that he had to get back to the station to make sure the deceased was not assaulted. He was seen by Constable Mosese Kalidole, going into the Crime Office with the deceased. He was seen by WPC Saleshni Devi sitting in his vehicle outside the station. He was seen by Jimi Qailau an extra mural prisoner lying down in the police bure at 7am. He looked as if he had been up all night. Shortly after that the 1st Accused was instructed to take the deceased to hospital. According to the nurse, Emi Raceba, he was of the two who wheeled the deceased in and one of the two who spoke to her saying that they had been directed to bring the man in to hospital on the way to court. She had to ring Valelevu Police Station to find out his name because he was identified as “Mr. X.” Does this evidence prove beyond reasonable doubt that the 1st Accused was part of a joint unlawful enterprise, to assault Malasebe? If so, was the death of Malasebe a probable consequence of the assault? And whoever assaulted Malasebe causing the injuries described by Dr. Prashant, did he do so with malice aforethought? That is with at least a knowledge that death or serious injury could be caused? These are the matters for you to consider. The 2nd Accused The 2nd Accused was identified by DC Amani as part of the arresting team. At the deceased’s house, the 2nd Accused also spoke to the deceased’s mother and the deceased was brought to the station with the 2nd Accused. Thereafter no one said that the 2nd Accused was seen at the station until after 7am when WPC Taraivini saw him sitting outside the Crime Office looking tired and worried. The deceased was lying on the floor in the Crime Office motionless. He was then seen loading the deceased into the police van. The evidence of Jimi Qailau and Koresi Wainiqolo was that the 2nd Accused was also in the van as it drove away. At 6.55am Zarif Ali was cleaning the station. According to him during the morning the 2nd Accused asked him three times to clean the Crime Office but it smelt badly of faeces and urine and he did not do it. The questions for you are these: Was the 2nd Accused part of a joint unlawful enterprise to bring the deceased to the station to beat him? Was the deceased’s death as a result of the beating, a probable consequence of that joint enterprise? Did the Accused either take part in the beating or allow it to happen without stopping it? Could he have stopped it? Did those who beat him do so with knowledge that death or serious harm would probably be caused? The 3rd Accused The evidence is that the 3rd Accused was present at the 11.30pm briefing, and during the arrest of Malasebe. According to DC Amani, the 3rd Accused was one of the 3 officers speaking to the deceased’s mother. Thereafter, no one identified him as being at the station. Nor was he identified as being present when the deceased was taken to hospital. In his caution statement, he said he had escorted the deceased back to the station but went home thereafter. Was he part of a joint enterprise to bring the deceased back to the station to beat him? Even if he did not beat him himself, did he know that the deceased was being beaten and did nothing to stop it? Was the death of Malasebe a probable consequence of a plan to beat him? Was the assault on him done with malice aforethought? The 4th Accused The prosecution evidence is that the 4th Accused was also in the briefing meeting at 11.30pm and the arresting party which escorted the deceased to the hospital. Thereafter the mother of the deceased said that she saw him sitting outside the Crime Office when she was chased away from that part of the station at about 1am. She also said she saw him in the charge room whispering to a police officer and looking at her. Then she saw him again later the next day at the hospital. In relation to this evidence, although the defence does not dispute that the 4th Accused was in the arresting party or at the hospital, it is disputed that he was seen by the deceased’s mother at the station at about 1am. So you have to consider the nature of this identification before you can accept it. In considering the evidence of identification, ask yourselves for how long she saw him, in what light, whether she had seen him before, and how accurately she described him. She was never asked to identify him in an identification parade, so she saw him she says, 4 times, once at her house, twice at the station and once at the hospital. Consider this evidence carefully because she identified him in court as the 4th Accused. If you accept her evidence of identification of the 4th Accused to be reliable, and if you accept it, then the 4th Accused was seen at the station outside the Crime Office and in the charge room between 1am and 2am. He was seen by WPC Taraivini after 7am sitting outside the Crime Office with the 2nd Accused, looking tired and worried and with a Fijian man lying on the floor of the Crime Office, not moving. He was seen by extra-mural prisoners loading the deceased into the van, and after Zarif Ali failed to clean the Crime Office, he was seen by him to be cleaning the Crime Office of the faeces and urine on the floor, wearing hand gloves. This part of his evidence was not disputed by the defence. According to Staff Nurse Emi Raceba, the name of Rusiate was given by one of her colleagues as one of the two officers who brought the deceased to the hospital. These were the two officers who told the doctor the deceased had been lying somewhere, that they did not know his name and they had been asked to drop him at the hospital on the way to court. And of course it is not disputed by the defence that the 4th Accused did go to the hospital with the deceased. He was seen again at the hospital with ASP Parker and IP Ramasibana and when the deceased’s mother accused the 4th Accused as being one of the officers who had come to her home and taken her son away in the presence of these senior officers, the 4th Accused denied this. In his caution statement however, he said he had taken part in the arrest of the deceased, that he saw the deceased inside the Crime Office fully clothed, and that he had been in the Crime Office for 30 minutes. He said he then reported off duty and went home. Did the 4th Accused lie in the hospital about going to the deceased’s house? If so, why did he lie? Was he lying because of a consciousness of his own guilt, or for some other reason? Remember what I told you about lies. Before you can rely on it as a piece of evidence showing the Accused’s guilty knowledge, you must be satisfied so that you are sure that the Accused did deliberately lie, and that he did so out of guilt and not for any other reason and the lie was about a material fact in the case. Taking the evidence into account together, is the guilt of the Accused the only reasonable inference you can draw? Was he part of a joint unlawful enterprise to bring the deceased to the station to beat him? And if so, was the death of Malasebe a probable consequence of that joint enterprise? Did the 4th Accused know the deceased was being beaten in the Crime Office, and did he encourage it by not stopping it? Could he have stopped it? Was Malasebe assaulted with malice aforethought? The 5th Accused The 5th Accused was, according to DC Amani, part of the briefing meeting at 11.30pm at which Sgt. Pita discussed the proposed arrest of Tevita Malasebe. The 5th Accused in his caution interview appears to have denied this at first, but later admitted it. Defence counsel in his closing submissions explained that he was only denying that he was told about the name “Tevita Malasebe.” DC Amani said that all the officers at the briefing went to the deceased’s house, but this was contradicted by Cpl. Simione Rarasea who said that the 5th Accused did not go with the arresting party. In his caution statement he said he did not go but spent time in the Crime Officer’s Office upstairs or in the Computer Room which is next to the Crime Office, working on Jone Sovui’s docket. He was on duty on the 4th of June according to his statement. The prosecution evidence is that Cpl. Mosese Kalidole saw him talking to Sgt. Pita Matai (the 8th Accused) behind the Crime Office at about midnight before the deceased arrived. SC Ritesh Lal saw an officer whom he knew as “Jone” come out of the Crime Office at 4.30am an hour and a half after he heard a cry “wailei” in the Crime Office. This officer who told SC Lal to go to the other side of the station was not identified in court as the 5th Accused. PC Pita Qiolevu spoke to the 5th Accused at about the same time however, between 4 to 4.30am when sounds of loud crying could be heard from the Crime Office saying “Officer let me live.” He said he told the 5th Accused about this but he did not respond. There is no further evidence of the 5th Accused at the station that night. However, if you accept the evidence of PC Qiolevu and the evidence of DC Amani, and Cpl. Kalidole, then you should ask yourselves whether the 5th Accused was part of an unlawful joint enterprise to assault the deceased. Did the 5th Accused know what was happening in the Crime Office? Did he stand by and let it happen when he should have stopped it? Was the death of Malasebe a probable consequence of a joint enterprise to beat him? Was Malasebe beaten with malice aforethought? Is the 5th Accused’s guilt the only reasonable inference you can draw from this evidence? The 6th Accused DC Amani said that the 6th Accused was present at the briefing and present at the arrest. There is no evidence that he was at the station thereafter, but he was identified by the WPC’s and the extra-mural prisoners as being one of the police officers who took the deceased to hospital. WPC Maca said it was the 2nd and 6th Accused who loaded the deceased and Zarif Ali said that the 6th Accused pushed the deceased’s legs into the vehicle after Ali saw the legs with black blood clots on them. In his caution statement he said he was at home at night on the 4th of June and came in to work in the morning. Was the 6th Accused part of an unlawful joint enterprise to bring the deceased to the Valelevu Police Station to beat him? Is this the only reasonable inference you can draw from this evidence? Was the death of Malasebe the probable consequence of the joint enterprise? Was he beaten with malice aforethought? The 7th Accused DC Amani said that the 7th Accused was present at the briefing and present during the arrest. WPC Karti saw a CID officer she called Corporal Eremasi come into the charge room at 5am to bring a mattress out of the cell and into the charge room. She did not identify the 7th Accused in court. WPC Sesenieli Cagi saw a bald-head policeman in civilian clothes carrying a mattress between 2am and 3am. She did not identify any of the Accused as being this person. However you can see that the 7th Accused is not bald-headed at all. That is the evidence in respect of the 7th Accused. Again on this evidence, is the only reasonable inference you can draw that the 7th Accused was a party to this joint enterprise? Was it he who brought the mattress into the Crime Office? Did he know therefore that Malasebe was being beaten in the Crime Office? Was he a party to it because he didn’t do anything to stop it? Was Malasebe beaten with malice aforethought? These are the questions for you to consider. The 8th Accused There is inconsistent evidence about the condition of the deceased at 7am on the 5th of June. DC Kalidole, DC Samuela and the 8th Accused in his interview all said that the deceased was alive and was taken to hospital. The evidence of the extra-mural prisoner and the WPC’s was that he looked dead. Elia Batibasaga said that when he saw the deceased at the hospital he was “cold and clammy.” His notes say that his body was stiff. Dr. Prashant said that the expulsion of faeces normally occurred in the first two hours after death. Zarif Ali said that there was faeces and urine on the floor. The seized blanket smelt badly of faeces. Which version of the evidence you accept is a matter for you. However, if you accept that Malasebe was removed from the Crime Office on the 8th Accused’s orders when he was dead, then you must ask yourselves whether in giving this order the 8th Accused was knowingly assisting those who had committed an offence on Malasebe to help them to escape detection. IP Ramasibana’s evidence was that the 8th Accused told him the deceased had “breathing difficulties.” Was this a deliberate lie? Was it told to protect those who assaulted and killed Malasebe? In his interview he said he did not see any injuries on Malasebe. Defence counsel say that he did not know any crime had been committed so he was not assisting anyone. In asking yourselves whether the 8th Accused did knowingly assist the perpetrators of an assault on the deceased, you must ask yourselves what the 8th Accused knew on the morning of the 5th, whether he had seen the injuries on Malasebe described by ASP Parker, by the extra-mural prisoners, by the doctors and nurses at the hospital and by the deceased’s mother. If he had known that an unlawful act had occurred in the Crime Office, then should he have preserved the crime scene for investigations? If the deceased was dead, should he have ordered his removal? And in not preserving the scene, was the 8th Accused knowingly assisting his men to evade detection? Are you satisfied of that beyond reasonable doubt? These are the questions for you to consider. Conclusion Remember that in considering circumstantial evidence you must be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the only reasonable inference available to you is the guilt of the Accused before you can find them guilty. If you find that there are other reasonable inferences you can draw which are consistent with the Accused’s innocence or if you have a reasonable doubt about it, then you should find each not guilty. Remember also to consider the case against each Accused separately. Your possible opinions on each count are either Guilty or Not Guilty. At Suva 22nd April 2008
  106. terminate frank now Says:

    Criminal Case No: HAC 120 of 2007




    Hearing: 25th March – 22nd April 2008
    Sentence: 23rd April 2008

    Counsel: Mr. W. Kuruisaqila & Ms L. Lagilevu for State
    Mr. J. Semisi for all Accused


    Lole Vulaca and Rusiate Korovusere, you are both convicted of the murder of Tevita Malasebe, on the 4th and 5th of June 2007. The Penal Code provides for only one sentence for murder and that is life imprisonment. However I have a discretion to fix a minimum term which you must serve before you are entitled to parole.

    The murder of Tevita Malasebe was a most reprehensible event for Fiji’s Police Force. He was assaulted repeatedly in the Valelevu Crime Office from 1am to about 4.30am on the 5th of June 2007. The pathologist found evidence of assault with wooden planks, and torture marks on the soles of the feet. He said that Malasebe must have died a most painful death. The tragedy was that he was killed by those who are entrusted by us all, to preserve the law.

    I would accede to the prosecution’s request for a minimum term except for one factor. The evidence against you was that of secondary offenders, that is, that you were part of a joint enterprise to assault Malasebe. There was no evidence that either of you inflicted any of the assaults yourselves. It is impossible in these circumstances to apportion responsibility to either offender.

    For that reason I will not set a minimum term for either of you. You are each sentenced to life imprisonment.

    Pita Matai, you have been convicted after the unanimous decisions of the assessors of being an accessory after the fact to an offence. You saw the deceased Malasebe lying on the Crime Office floor. You saw him shortly after WPC Taraivini saw him. He was motionless. He had black marks of injuries over his body, and you knew he was dead. You also knew he had died as a result of police assault while he was in custody. You then did everything you had been trained as an investigator not to do. The body was removed, and you participated in a fiction that the deceased had “breathing difficulties.”

    I accept that as a police sergeant you had a special relationship with your men. In disciplined forces, a sergeant’s first duty is to his men, and vice versa. But this loyalty, commendable though it is, must give way to a duty to the law. And when you saw what your men had done, your duty as a police officer should have prevailed.
    This is a terrible tragedy for you because I accept that you had told your men to lock Malasebe up in the cell. They did not listen.

    I accept that you are a well-respected member of the Police Force with an excellent record. I also accept that this conviction on its own, is punishment because you will not be able to re-enter the Police Force. I accept the evidence of Director CID SP Lesu, who was visibly moved when he gave evidence on your behalf, that you have been an exemplary and respected police officer with no disciplinary record. I accept also the evidence of Father Sulio Turagakabici who said that you were a dedicated church goer and a loving and supportive husband and father. I also accept that the effect of this conviction is devastating for you, for your career and your family. However I cannot overlook the fact that because of your actions, the investigations into Malasebe’s death were obstructed and frustrated. Perhaps we will never know who inflicted the terrible injuries on Malasebe in the Crime Office, because of your act of assisting your men to cover the incident up. There is a blanket of silence over what occurred in the Crime Office that night. Your conduct contributed to that silence.

    In these circumstances I cannot order a non-custodial sentence for you. The maximum by statute is 3 years imprisonment. Although Mr. Semisi suggests that the maximum sentence is 7 years imprisonment, I note that this is the maximum sentence under section 216 of the Penal Code. You were charged under section 388 for which the maximum sentence is only 3 years imprisonment. The State may have intended to charge you under section 216, but that is not reflected in the Information. The fact however that the offence for which you were accessory after the fact, was murder, affects the picking of my starting point. You are a first offender and a senior police officer. I pick 2½ years as my starting point. After taking into account all the mitigating and aggravating factors, I sentence you to 2 years imprisonment.

    At Suva
    23rd April 2008

  107. aubatinuku-N Says:

    I can only imagine the ripped heart-strings of Malasebe’s family, to bring a child into this world, love & nurture him, watch him grow into a young man only to one day have this extension of yourself taken away from you forever by cold blooded murdering thoughtless, heartless, foolish Valelevu policemen.

    What has become of us? What will tomorrow bring??
    God help us all!!

  108. Jose Says:

    Indeginous Fijians need to rise up and take control of our country. We need a clean up campaign of our own government and our own land to rid this government of every alien so that we control what is our God given right looking to God alone as our guide living by God’s Law and throw out human rights which was made to make null and void the law of God. All you preachers, men and women of God rise up and do what you are annointed and called to do in your own land for God and His people. The aliens can go back to where they come from if they don’t like it here. We don’t need to be like the rest of the world we just need to be what God wants us to be and how he wants us to live. Rise up people, rise up. All you preachers rise up and gather up all your flocks. rally together in masses and pray. The Victory is ours the battle is the Lord’s” 11 Chronicles 7:14 If my people, which are called by my name, shall humble themselves and pray, and seek my face, and turn from their wicked ways; then will I hear from Heaven, and will forgive their sin and will heal their land”. This is His promise. I’s Aye and Amen. This is a war between good and evil, the abominations are rampant in our country. We need God to intervene.

  109. freefijian Says:

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: