Piggy Bhainimaramas boy Aiarse Khaiyum is digging them deeper and deeper into the abyss. Neither of them will ever have the chance to redeem themselves, they’re finished, kaput forever as this nursery rhyme so clearly outlines:

For want of a nail the shoe was lost.
For want of a shoe the horse was lost.
For want of a horse the rider was lost.
For want of a rider the battle was lost.
For want of a battle the kingdom was lost.
And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.

One wonders what they hope to achieve by abrogating the constitution and using the pathetic excuse of election reform to uphold their crimes.

One also wonders whether the military is part of the big picture that Bhainimarama, Khaiyum and the shadow puppeteers are creating solely for their own unachievable ends or are they being used to safeguard them while  the high treason continues unabated.

 The military is being manipulated and coerced into guarding these heathens otherwise they would not be able to carry out this most terrible crime.

What is most frustrating is why the military cannot see and comprehend Bhainimarama, Khaiyum and the shadow puppeteers evil, why have they allowed these evil people and the high positioned ex navy take them over?

Why is the military so weak?

 Have all the men with BALLS left the military?

Why are they so complacent when most of them have been to war zones in the middle east & should be aware of the dangers of loss of freedom and the ultimate problems it causes.

Has the military dumbed down so much they can only take orders whether it is right or not? The complete obeiance to the ig is unbelievable.



Abrogation made way for poll reforms: AG

Changes to Fiji’s electoral system could not have begun under the conditions that existed prior to the abrogation of the 1997 Constitution, says Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum.“Any elections that are going to be held will obviously be held under electoral reforms,” said Sayed-Khaiyum.

“Well there were different circumstances that existed pre-10th April 2009. The circumstances are now different now compared to what they were and electoral reforms can now happen,” he told Fijilive.

“To hold elections, parliamentary elections, with the abrogation of the 1997 Constitution, you obviously need to have a constitutional framework in place which will include the electoral reforms,” he said.

Prime Minister Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama has said Fiji must have a non racially-based electoral system in place before elections are held in 2014.

Sayed-Khaiyum said the Prime Minister’s Office would study how the constitution-making process would work and would then determine a time frame and the cost of the exercise.




14 Responses to “DOWN DOWN, DEEPER AND DOWN”

  1. Budhau Says:

    The author of the above piece asks, “Why is the military so weak? Have all the men with BALLS left the military?”

    I think you got this all wrong – the men with BALLS are kicking ass in Fiji. Those that don’t have BALLS – they are the ones frequenting the various blog sites. for Aiyaaz, he is a hired gun – like most lawyers are. He is just doing a job. What he said is also true, that it is easier to make the required changes with the constitution abrogated, than to go the Charter route with the old constitution still intact.
    If they continued that route – Qarase would be out there suing again.

  2. Makare59 Says:

    DD D&D, Double Dealing Deceit & Diabolical, Thats the basis of Politics…Look at the diplomatic toning down of the Aussies against the IG…The NZ affront is a slack…disappointing?? I think so. Franko has an ace up his sleeve, have you guessed; of course its China!!! The basics of soldiering is Obey without question. Don’t be surprised if you see your so-called no BALL soldiers driving around in Chinese made Tanks on the back roads merely doing a military exercise. (thats what they’ll say)…Soldiers know where their source of Madrai (bread)is coming from.The intregity of a soldier is in his oath of Allegiance and Obediance no questions asked. Maybe Franko has secretly castrated the members of the military,they could be all praticing Celibacy. Must be a lot of Simede at QEB…Cheers Guys!! nothing personal.

  3. Relax Man Says:

    Well people first of all can you compose a better ryhme!! it is so pathetic, there is no logic no theme in it, it is as flat and dull as a ruler. Secondly hasnt it rung a bell in your pea brains that maybe not only the military but the majority of us here in Fiji agree with the dismisal of the SDL racist Govt and the abrogation of this bad constitution?? come on wake up or you’ll miss the bus!!!

  4. relaxOman Says:

    levu tiko nomu vosa ululala levu Relax Man blerry no sukulu, nursery rhyme e mino.

    Raica gonei keimami sa been there vei tamamu, solia sara mai
    na qase na malafani me cegu na yalona, vuli kina vakavo o iko.

    Nomu story ya, kila sara tiko.

  5. Relax Man Says:

    Hey bro, first of all you steal my name then speak out something undistinguishable, you must be a reject from St Jiles or a by product of the yellow ribbon project!!! keep your underwear on bro, no need for your foul lingo cause its shows you’re losing your head and the war, ha!ha! sa dri yani..moce Jo..

  6. relaxOman Says:

    hehe kila tiko na malafani nei tamamu sa soli mai vei keimami na Lewas shori

  7. senijiale Says:

    Bud, u funny… ‘coz it’s obvious to the whole world that poodle Aiyass is way over his head on this one. Who is trying to kid? Even the shoe-shine boys understand that he & cohorts advised the abrogation of the Constitution to escape prosecution. And then stack the judiciary with their toads to ensure there is no challenge at all to the abrogation.

    There’s no way out for them except to keep at what they’ve started even if it means taking the country down with them. That much is crystal clear to everyone.

  8. Budhau Says:

    senijiale – you brought up two issues – one that the reason for the abrogation was an attempt by the coup perpetrators to avoid prosecution, and secondly that the regime was stacking the judiciary to make sure that there is no challenges to the abrogation.

    First, the Dec. 2006 coup and the recent abrogation are both presumed to be unconstitutional. From a legal point of view, the coup perpetrators are in no better position after the abrogation than they were in prior to the abrogation. Thus, the motive for the abrogation must be something other than their attempt to avoid prosecution.
    The bigger question is who is going to prosecute these guys. If someone is able to prosecute them, than the fact that the constitution remained intact in 2006 and was later abrogated does not make any difference.

    Your second remark about stacking the judiciary – the regime has already stated that abrogation related suits may not be filed. Since the regime has taken this matter out of the court’s jurisdiction, why would they then want to stack the judiciary to get a favorable decision on the constitutionally of the abrogation or the 2006 coup – when the court’s are not even going to hear this case.

    To get past the political impasse that we have, we will have to give Frank and boys immunity at some stage before they let a democratically elected government take over. So why don’t we also move beyond this prosecution talk of Frank going to Naboro and all that, and try and discuss what the real options are.
    What needs to be done is to figure out how we can move the election date up from 2014 to about 2012 or earlier. What goes in the new constitution – and the new constitution would not be perfect and would probably need to be fine tuned over the next five to ten years and maybe give Frank a good retirement package, including the Prime Minister’s pension.

    As for those Balls of Steel that JB has, I think that explains why he had sparks coming out of his arse just before he left Fiji – those balls banging together.

  9. senijiale Says:

    Yadra Bud. You say :

    “First, the Dec. 2006 coup and the recent abrogation are both presumed to be unconstitutional. From a legal point of view, the coup perpetrators are in no better position after the abrogation than they were in prior to the abrogation. Thus, the motive for the abrogation must be something other than their attempt to avoid prosecution. The bigger question is who is going to prosecute these guys. If someone is able to prosecute them, than the fact that the constitution remained intact in 2006 and was later abrogated does not make any difference”.

    That was hilarious Bud. Well… dark or light-hearted, twisted is still twisted, lol… Ok let’s cut to the chase, here we go….

    Post 5Dec06, they all hid behind purported presidential prerogative powers – refer 9Oct08 decision by Gates J.

    Post 9April09, FCA blew their cover open! Short of an effective immunity, they had no choice but to try and abrogate and stifle any challenge in court – refer my earlier post.

    Prosecution is a non-issue. Remove the guns and threats of violence and they’re slam-dunk for the rookie prosecutor.

    Until then, all we have are brave judicial officers making declarations that cannot be enforced under the current climate of intimidation and violence – refer to media reports for examples (Richard Naidu, Akuila Naco, Tevita Fa, Dorsami Naidu, Netani Rika, pro-democracy activists and many, many more… and that’s not including the death count)

    Then you add:

    “Your second remark about stacking the judiciary – the regime has already stated that abrogation related suits may not be filed. Since the regime has taken this matter out of the court’s jurisdiction, why would they then want to stack the judiciary to get a favorable decision on the constitutionally of the abrogation or the 2006 coup – when the court’s are not even going to hear this case”.

    U mean an unfavourable decision? U’re twisting there buddy. That notice displayed by that equally culpable idiot Ana Bananarama was a reminder for lawyers and a warning to their toads on the bench to steer clear… in case they still hadn’t properly read their made-up Administration of Justice ‘act’. The paranoid were just making sure.

    Please No Immunity – so don’t go spoiling appetite for tea. We’ve come far enough to show the world that if this coup culture must end here, then immunity must not be entertained. If we have go down with them in order to ditch them these expendable bastards for good, then so be it. But NO IMMUNITY.

    BE A MAN, isn’t that their favorite slogan? LOL..

  10. senijiale Says:

    Bud, what hve u been doing all day? Response pls.

  11. Budhau Says:

    Senijiale – at the risk of over simplifying the legal issues, this is how I see it.

    The 2006 coup and the 2009 abrogation are both presumed unconstitutional. So what what the regime might say is that “yes, on its face, both these acts are unconstitutional, however, our actions were justified – and that is where they would use the doctrine of necessity.
    I don’t think that defense would fly because the necessity was created by the military.

    Here is a simple example: if you punch me in the face, that is a crime, however you can claim self-defense and than it is not a crime.
    However, if you started the fight, and later were caught beating the crap out me because I had also thrown a punch – you do not have the self-defense excuse. You created this situation.

    So if Qarase and company had brought their original case along those lines, the Doctrine of necessity would have been argues, and even Gates woul dhave had to rule in favour of Qarase.

    I am sure, that way we would have had the constitution abrogated earlier, right after the Gates judgement.

    You are correct, that prosecution is a non-issue – as I have said above. The issue is the guns – and as long as they have those guns, this is not a problem that the courts can resolve – it is a political problem, not a legal problem. So it was silly of Qarase to pursue this line.

    My other remark related to the stacking of the judiciary. Since the regime has taken all coup related matter away from the courts – that the court no longer have any jurisdiction in this matter, and the new judges have agreed to work under this new legal order – they have to abide by this decree. Thus, there is not reason to stack the judiciary.

    If the old constitution was still intact – that courts could still say that it is they who will decide what comes under their jurisdiction and what does not – but the constitution is gone and the new judiciary is coming in under the new legal order – this then is not a problem.

    Under the old constitution, there was a need to stack the judiciary for the regime to get favourable decisions. Now, the law is such that their actions cannot be questions, so there is not need to be concerned about the courts decision as it relates to the coup. Thus, there is no need to stack the judiciary.

    That notice regarding the decree posted at the court – that was just a notification. The lady had notified all the parties involved, and posted a notice to those who were not parties and who were thinking about filing a law suit – she could have easily have told some clerk in the filing office not to accept any such filing – but a public notice just saves that hassle.

    If you don’t want to give an immunity, which I am OK with – you have to come up with a plan as to how you are going to take out Frank. If you cannot take out Frank, by violence and if you are hoping for a negotiated settlement and an election that follows, than you will have to grant immunity. Granting of immunity has more to do with what we will gain by settling with Frank and moving the country forward.

    I know that many feel that Frank should be punished for his “crimes”, and many others who believed that Rbauka should have been punished for his “crimes” – but what would that cost us.

    BTW – on immunity you may want to read the case of Sammy “the Bull” Gravano, a gangster who had committed 19 cold-blooded murders and admitted to that and the FBI still gave him a complete immunity – that he would never be prosecuted for those 19 murders. This happened in 1995.

    So you see why immunity is sometimes the best option, when you look at how bad the alternative is. BTW – why do we have such a problem with immunity this time around, when on one gave it a second thought about it in 2000 and 1987. Oh I get it, we have to put a stop to coups and by not not giving immunity, this will send a message to the future coupsters.
    I think the only message we will send to future coup perpetrators would “make sure you pull a better coup and make sure you have the staying power to make Fiji into a police state for you lifetime.”

    You maybe willing to go down with these guys – but I feel that the Fiji people are much more responsible.

  12. senijiale Says:

    G’morning Bud – u so funny… why do you feel the need for these pointless, marathon regurgitation of arguments just to show yr legal savviness? Unlike u I don’t hve the luxury of time to return the favour, but if u were here with me hving coffee, I’d tell you in less than 2mins! Now who was that that famously said ‘Brevity is the art of wit’? chuckle…

    OK so here we go –

    1. So Qarase & Co could hve strategised their case this way or that way so we could hve arrived here sooner… yeah whatever, Adam shuldn’t hve tempted Eve with the poisonous fruit in the 1st place… but here we are, where we are…compredre monsieur?

    2. Their illegal Administration of Justice ‘act’ ensured they’d only STACK the judiciary with their TOADS. How? Go read the AoJ provisions again : composition of the JSC/oath/other draconian provisions prohibiting any challenge to their illegal rule – that’s how you ensure that you only attract TOADS, hand-picked by your hand-licking JSC… following me now sweetie?

    3. You brought up the subject of prosecution as a moot point in the current circumstances – but I said that prosecution of yr mongrel heros would be a NON-ISSUE in the ABSENCE of criminal intimidation/bully/ interference by yr interested pals via shredding?/violence and threats thereof, as these prosecutions would be a SLAM DUNK for any rookie prosecutor… still up for it, old pal?

    4. That unnecessary ‘public notice’ by your ‘lady’ – refer to my earlier post – I said that “the paranoid were just making sure”. You said that ‘it only saves the hassle’. You mean like one of your earlier arguments that this coup just hastened the pace and hassle of time-tested evolutionary processes … u still with me buddy?

    5. On coup perpetrators like Rabuka and Immunity – our recent history demonstrates that we hve learnt and are still learning from history. George Speight is paying his dues for his bad deeds to society and for that, he holds my respect. Rabuka subjected himself to Constitutional due process and was accordingly acquitted. Sa qai vo jiko na Vore… compredre comrade?

    And pls don’t waste my time re serial homicides in other jurisdictions – it’s all about context, ain’t it?

    I like you still 🙂

  13. Budhau Says:

    1. On Qarase & Company seeking to resolve a political problem through the courts is wrong in itself and you combine that with the strategy and that got us in this mess. So it is not as simple as “we are here now”. Qarase screwed up and because of that screw up, the regime was forced to take certain action such as the abrogation, that was expected. If it wasn’t for that court decision, we may still have the constitution and the regime might still be trying to work around it.

    2. You talk about the “illegal” administration of justice act – we have had such acts/decrees before. After you abrogate the constitution, you have to put a new legal order in place. We can argue all we want about why the constitution should not have been abrogated, however, once the constitution has been abrogated, and if we are to keep the courts going, it has to be by decree followed by new appointments, even if that means reappointing the same judges. Where those judges are not willing to work under the new order, new judges are than appointed. That is just part of the process.

    3. No, I did not say that prosecution would be moot in the current circumstances. What I said was that because the regime has limited the jurisdiction of the courts in relation to coup related matters, anyone who wants to bring such a case will not be able to overcome the procedural obstacles. So there will be NO cases, moot or otherwise. Thus, there is no reason to stack the courts, because the courts will not hear these matters. Unless the regime want to stack up the judiciary regarding matter not related to the coup.

    4. The posting of the notice just fulfills the notification requirement – no big deal. No one is paranoid about it. The officers of the court could have easily advised the clerical staff not to accept any case filings that had to do with the coup. The lady went one step further and posted that on the notice board.

    5. That learning from history argument regarding immunity is a lame one – we gave immunity to Rabuka and Speight, because the majority Fijian people wanted to protect these guys because the coups were pulled in the name of the “indigenous cause”. This time we hate Frank, so we would like to put him away in some jail for the rest of his life. Speight is in jail because he violated the terms of his immunity agreement, and left himself open to prosecution. If he had fulfilled his part of the deal, he would also be a free man. As for Rabuka, what constitutional due process are you talking about when you mentioned Rabuka? Rabuka insisted on immunity before he gave up power, and so would Frank – I like that “constitutional due process” remark – I am impressed. So was it Procedural Due Process or Substantive Due Process – that he had a fundamental right to have a trial.

    The Rabuka acquittal that you are talking about has nothing to do with immunity (or this discussion) – I think you are confused about some things here. When Rabuka pulled the coup in 1987, he got immunity for that “crime” andhe could no longer be prosecuted for that. The acquittal that you are talking about was for a subsequent crime that he was charged with – that had to do with his involvement in the 2000 mutiny – for that he was investigated, charged, tried and acquitted. Nothing to do with his immunity or his due process rights.

    That serial homicide and the immunity related to that was to point out that even in some extreme cases, the prosecution is willing to offer immunity if doing so would be beneficial to society overall. That is why I mentioned that – it was relevant to this discussion.

    As for the case that I mentioned being from another jurisdiction, why don’t you go read the Qarase Court of Appeal judgment and see how many cases were mentioned that came from this “other” jurisdiction. Here again, the issue is relevancy, thus, I don’t think I was wasting anyone’s time by bringing up that issue.

  14. vai Says:

    Budhau, I have to disagree with what you said about JB. I quote “having sparks coming out of his arse and balls banging together” when leaving Fiji unquote. Why would someone like JB released from the RFMF after charges of insubordination dropped and acquitted from the courts for the assination plot be anything that you so boldly state. A man and his family need to survive, the illiegal government shut down everything for this man, he was unemployed from 13th Jan, 06, what do you expect come on be reasonable! he has a family to feed! ANU offered him an opportunity for his writing, be realistic!!!

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: