#header-inner img {margin: 0 auto !important; #header-inner {text-align: Center ;} Fiji Coupfourpointfive: Fiji coup rats caught fabricating 'analyst' to support smear campaign

Wednesday, March 7, 2012

Fiji coup rats caught fabricating 'analyst' to support smear campaign

The so-called 'analyst' the regime cited in its statement last night denouncing what it claims is the 'dishonest' report of Nigel Dodds who has 'publicly spread false, outrageous and inflammatory allegations against the Fijian judicial system' is no other than a writer by the name of Sudden Shelley.
Yet searches of the unknown 'expert' (who seems to have so much inside information of key players in the Fiji judiciary) throws up no Google footprints.
So who really has written the piece used by Christopher Pryde and co to try to discredit the work of Dodds? The popular theory is that it's the penmanship of well-paid regime spin doctors, Qorvis.
Incredibly, the 'analysis', which ends with the admonishment 'there is little of professionalism here' has been used by Pryde to defend himself and the DPP in the eyes of a discerning international community.

We have published the so-called 'critique' in the interest of exposing the unprincipled and hypocritical behaviour of the regime and its supporters but we do not endorse the inaccurate and inflammatory information it contains.
 
Critique: The Rule of Law Report by 
the UK Law Society Charity

By Sudden Shelley

 
The independence of the judiciary cannot be compromised by activist elitist groups who espouse political causes. In good times and in bad the judiciary’s role is not to take on governments, whether lawful or unlawful, but to rule on cases brought before the courts. This is a more pedestrian role. But as usual, activists and partisans wish to use the judiciary as a weapon of combat for their political ends.

Fiji Law Society claims not supported by UK and other regulation systems

The Fiji Law Society cannot claim that it is the rightful body for discipline or licensing of lawyers. Other jurisdictions including that of England and Wales have moved away from self-regulation to statutory regulation, which has included the creation of the position of Legal Complaints Ombudsman. This is similarly the case in Australia, New Zealand and other Commonwealth jurisdictions with minor variations.

Self-regulation has been rejected by a wide body of consumer associations, including the Consumer Council of Fiji. The public has demanded greater accountability from the legal profession, long held in low esteem in Fiji. The last Transparency International Global Perception Index on corruption in Fiji found that the majority of the public thought that the legal profession and the judiciary were corrupt [2005 Index]. Clearly there was an imperative need for change.



When the Independent Legal Services Commission was set up in 2009, it was discovered that over 400 complaints which had been filed with the Fiji Law Society lay unattended. Many such complaints had been brought against the current and four previous Presidents of the Law Society and Council members. When the Commission commenced sittings, many of the prosecutions were brought in relation to former Presidents. Thus the delay of the Society’s authorities in prosecuting these complaints went beyond the mere systemic. The public saw that the police, as it were, were unable to police themselves.


Hand over Complaints files, and the Dorsami Naidu case

The attitude of the Law Society will explain why the Chief Registrar had to insist on the handover of the Complaint files and why it was necessary for her to refer to her authority and powers under the Decree. The then President of the Fiji Law Society Mr. Dorsami Naidu has since been disciplined. This was not for any political offence, but for drawing up conveyancing documents in relation to the purchase of land without disclosing that the land was not owned by the vendor alone, but was owned jointly with another, and hence that under the transaction, the purchaser was only buying a half interest.

By the same reasoning UK judges support Government

The critics of the Independent Legal Services Commissioner assume support for the Government by virtue of taking up office. By this reasoning, every High Court Judge in England is to be taken to support the Government of the day, by virtue of the agreement to take up office. The critics do not condescend to any details nor do they refer to a specific judgment which they regard as defective. There is nothing of substance in this vague allegation, which appears to be a political rather than a law and justice comment.
The control of the professional prosecution unit for legal practitioners in the Chief Registrar’s Office is given to a civil servant and not to a politician. Previously, lawyers controlled lawyers at times when many of the previous presidents were politicians and members of Parliament. No complaints of this so-called independent procedure were then heard from these same international bodies of a lack of demonstrable political neutrality.

Josaia Naigulevu 'long-standing and respected'?

The Report refers to Josaia Naigulevu as “long-standing and respected”. This was the same person who used to hold prayer sessions within the confines of the DPP’s Office. Some of these were held to pray for success in appeals, and many members of the Office felt it prudent to be seen to attend if they wished to advance in the Office. As Acting DPP, Naigulevu swore an affidavit in the Chandrika Prasad case in which the courts eventually upheld the Constitution. Naigulevu chose to depose to active support for the illegal Qarase SDL regime, which had obtained power through the usurping civilian coup masters. Strangely, or perhaps not, the Acting DPP was made substantive DPP shortly thereafter. And this was the same Naigulevu who had concealed the fact that he had sworn such an affidavit in favour of the Respondent regime when answering questions from the International Criminal Court to which he had applied for the job of Deputy Prosecutor.

2000 coup files locked away

Many of the files dealing with crimes, including treason, committed at the time of the 2000 coup were locked away by Naigulevu for some years to gather dust. These were discovered by his successor who found that many of the prosecutions were by then time-barred. The alleged perpetrators thus did not have their day in court.

Favours exchanged?

This was the same Naigulevu who had a noisy and violent altercation with his then wife who lodged a formal complaint with the police that he had tried to strangle her. The medical evidence in the case confirmed injuries consistent with her complaint. However the Police Commissioner Mr. Andrew Hughes delayed the decision to lay charges. Meanwhile, the Director was requested to consider whether there was sufficient evidence to arrest Bainimarama in New Zealand on charges of sedition. The DPP did agree that there was sufficient evidence against Bainimarama, and the charges against the DPP were never laid.

Sri Lankans and racist overtones?

Whoever was the author of this Report is undoubtedly a racist. To say that the prosecution offices “became populated with Sri Lankans” follows the Nazi gripe that there were too many Jews populating Germany. These are the kind of comments we might expect from those hiding within the reeds of the internet, hoping to remain concealed whilst they spew out shameful pieces of racism. The racism is to be seen also in the derogatory comments on members of the judiciary who happen to be Sri Lankans. The issue for proper consideration is whether the judges sitting on the courts of Fiji are intellectually honest. A good idea as to whether that is so can be derived from a trawl through the judgments on the judicial website www.judiciary.gov.fj  or PACLII.

Go tell it to the Americans

The Commonwealth Law Conference sub-committee has no business poking its nose into the judicial appointment system of another jurisdiction, whether friendly or a member of the Commonwealth. Fiji might have been thought to have been both. Perhaps the Committee could give some soothing advice to the Americans, an ancient jurisdiction, on how they could de-politicise the US system of appointments to their Benches. But in reality it is none of their business. It is for the Americans to seek reform and to fix.

Incidentally what is wrong with the Chief Justice using a personal connection with a friendly Commonwealth country in order to provide necessary numbers for the Fiji Bench? The Fiji Bench has had connections with the Sri Lankan Bench since the early 1980’s. And was it out of order for the Fiji Bench to secure the services of expatriate English judges since before Cession in the 1870’s?


The recommendations in the Report appear to conflict with the rights of free expression, privacy, and free choice. The authors could benefit from a summer course on the decisions of the US Supreme Court on these matters over the last 50 years.


Graeme Leung's choice

Graeme Leung tells us he is not practising in Fiji at the moment. That was his decision alone. He was not joined by any other member of the Bar in that decision. All other members of the Bar applied for and received the issuance of their practicing certificates. No one has prevented Mr. Leung from obtaining a practicing certificate. The new procedures for scrutinizing the applications for practicing certificates have been instituted as a matter of consumer protection. Mr Leung’s decision can only be characterized as his own individual political statement.

It is clear the main informant (author?) of the Report is Graeme Leung, who was not noticeable for an interest in matters of professional ethics and practice when he was President of the Fiji Law Society. His history in the civil service did not shine forth with an interest in democratic values either. Forced to leave the DPP’s Office in 1985 over a financial impropriety, he became the Fiji Police Advisor, a position he held during the 1987 coup. He did not then think it right to leave Government service because of the nationalist and military coup, an occurrence of obvious unlawfulness. Instead he continued to work for the Attorney General’s Office until he was transferred to Fiji’s U.N. Embassy in New York as First Secretary. Eventually he fell out with the Ambassador and was recalled to the Attorney General’s Office, leaving behind a number of personal bills unpaid. They did not appear to be connected with official matters. Much mirth was created over two of the purchases – one was a “love seat” and the other, bills for telephone calls to a telephone sex service.



Leung: Conflict of interest?

At the time of the 2006 elections Leung was the Chairman of the Electoral Commission. At the same time he was President of the Fiji Law Society. Apart from the apparent conflict of roles, he did not earn a reputation as Chairman for looking into complaints about registration irregularities or other procedures leading up to the elections. It was said that he had tried to persuade Ratu Tevita Mara to stand in the elections for the SDL party. These improprieties colored his independence and explain his anger at the removal of the Qarase government in late 2006. He was very close to Ratu Joni Madraiwiwi the Vice President and thought from his daily visits to Government House, to be a close advisor.

Permits required since 1969

As a former prosecutor Leung would have known that the requirement for a permit for the assembly of persons numbering three or more came not from the Public Emergency Regulations 2009, but from section 8 of the Public Order Act 1969, a piece of legislation thought fitting for Fiji by the British colonial government. There was nothing remarkable about the Public Order Act which the British legislated for in many of their overseas possessions. The need to have a permit for a meeting long pre-dated the 2006 coup. This was known to Leung.

The Report demonstrates ..

This Report demonstrates how a flawed methodology and lack of objectivity at the outset leads to a skewed outcome. This was a Report written during a private visit by the (unrevealed) Chairman who met no one other than Leung’s close friends and associates. He has not revealed his sources, or whether he made any attempt to speak with sitting judges or members of the magistracy. He did not speak with the Chief Registrar or the Independent Legal Services Commissioner, to discuss the workings of the Legal Practitioners Decree.

PACLII not consulted

But as has been said before, the workings of the complaints procedure and of the judiciary can only properly be tested by examining closely the reasoning of the decisions of the Commissioner and of the judiciary. No such analysis has been done. It is noticeable that the regional website (PACLII) which carries the judgments of the judiciary has already had intimations that Australian government support may be withdrawn. Is it that our regional neighbors who maintain a hostile blockade do not wish to have evidence of a viable working and intellectually honest judiciary shown on the internet?

Professionalism lacking

The authors of the Report purport to propagate the ethos and work of a charity. One wonders what the Charity Commissioner would make of this Report. Is this genuine charitable work? Or sub-contracted political advocacy? There is little of professionalism here.
TheK 'Rule of Law Lost' Report and a Retort to the Report

20 comments:

Socrates said...

"Sudden Shelley" - Qorvis or Sharon Smith???

The manipulation was obvious from the beginning .. Pryde quoting an "analyst" without referring to other "blogger analysts" who also made comments.
Pryde's use of the word "covert" is typical of the interim regime -- they've become so tied up in their military armour that every social media posting, even if constructive in nature, is "covert". The reason people resort to "covert" inquiries is because the regime cannot be relied on to provide the truth. Because foreign journalists (e.g. Sean Dorney, Michael Field) are prevented from coming to Fiji to interview Bainimarama, other foreign journalists have to enter Fiji on "visitors visas" and resort to "covert" coverage. If they enter Fiji to undertake working assignments, they would need prior approval from the Ministry of Information even before they can board a Fiji-bound aircraft. The regime opens itself, on the other hand to sympathisers, like Graham Davis, whose recent interview was so amateurish one wonders what journalism award he won. He was putting words in Bainimarama's mouth and the whole interview was clearly designed to paint Bainimarama in a good light. For Pryde's enlightenment, the murders were committed after the "heat of battle" and because of the manner in which the men were rounded up, his choice word "covert" as in "covert operation" is more applicable there. Davis, of course, conveniently refrained from pointing out the "after the heat of battle - equates to murder" issue to Bainimarama!!! The more appropriate question by a professional journalist would have been: "Did you know about the beatings that led to the deaths of CRW members days after the November 2 uprising?" "What did you do to prevent the beatings?" "If you knew about the beatings but didn't take appropriate action, would you accept that would make you an accessory to the murders through your inaction?".

Anonymous said...

So why have they removed Justice Gounder's cases from the Paclii website ?

The ones where Justice Gounders' own maternal Uncle Padayachi was appearing as Counsel for appeallant and/or Counsel for the Respondent/Accussed/ in cases before Justice Gounder ?

Anonymous said...

As I've said before, the name 'Pryde' is a misnomer.

The law societies of other Commonwealth countries should consider disbarring members who take up appointments in Fiji, and in any regime suspended from the Commonwealth, if they adjudge those members' actions prejudicial to the independent functioning of that nation's judiciary.

Pryde should be investigated and disbarred. Not that anyone outside of Fiji would hire him anyway.

s/ Dakuwaqa

Anonymous said...

Sudden Shelley?Is this person a he or she or in between??

Woosie Susie said...

You'd think they would've picked a different name. Pretty. amateur

Anonymous said...

Well, you really have to be a bit impressed of the IG for trying to
bring in PR corporation like Qorvi from the USA-Washington no-less,to
conduct their PR job? They also hire a Canadian Corporation based in Ottawa to run the election registration for 2014? I won't be surprise if the West Minister model
which Fijian Electors were used to,will not be use in 2014? I will be looking forward to any electoral models and can't wait to cast my free vote????

Radiolucas said...

The so-called 'critique' by Suddenly Sherry (maybe Frank wrote it after a long night?) seems to say little about the content of the UKLSC's report, but rather attacks the informers, witnesses and writers.

Like any brawling courtroom advocate would say, "when you cannot attack their case, attack their man".

The regime is still at it's hypocritical best - claiming the 'illegal' SDL government is somehow involved - but making no such reference to the illegal dictatorship now in power. Ironic.

It is interesting however to see just how angry and worked up the regime gets when someone tells the truth about what is going on.

Sharon Suaniu said...

Sudden Shelley has no credibility. Put your real name so international community can take you seriously. Her analyst is just as dodgy as her name.

Anonymous said...

Am tired of all these crap spewing from lawyers and runaway military people. Nothing better to do but to re-wind the clock with useless non-operationalised reports. Get a life and help your neighbours you embittered morons!

Laura Khaiyum said...

CAN THE OFFICE OF THE DPP EXPLAIN WHAT IS HAPPENING TO Y.P.REDDY'S CRIMINAL CASE: i can provide u with the file ref; if you have any difficulty.

Anonymous said...

I don't believe Graeme Leung bought a love seat, made calls to a sex line or left behind unpaid bills - why is C4C publishing this?

Anonymous said...

Anon @ 6pm, we're all sinners and have skeletons hidden away in our cupboards.

Anonymous said...

this piece was written by nazhat shameem and she was paid $44,867.00 for it. dont believe it ask nur bano. cheque no. 31224 for westpac banking corporation.

Anonymous said...

The charade won't stop until they are either in prison or dead . . get it into your heads . . . . they won't stop making fools of themselves with all the excuses under the sun while they think they have at least the same chance as a snowball in hell. To them that is a chance worth hanging onto . . that's how desperate they are.
They have applied self hypnosis to such a degree that they believe their own lies, and think everyone else does also.
-Sydney Tourist

Sodden Jelly said...

What part of "you work for a military junta" does this dickwit not understand? And start to lose some lard and tighten that flab a bit. The boys want to dress you up nicely for their evening festivities when you are mincing around Naboro.

Anonymous said...

The question that needs to be asked of Sudden Shelley aka Nazhat Shameem is why perceived or real opponents of the illegal regime are still waiting for trials proper for years now - from Laisenia Qarase downwards!

Anonymous said...

Nazhat Shameem as the author! Yes, that rings true.

She supposedly repudiated Bainimarama's regime but only very quietly. Yet here she is again. I guess the money was too good for her to pass up.

What a disappointment she has become!

Anonymous said...

wow great calibre of leaders in fiji stooping low with personal attacks and unable to stick to issues.....just like a bunch of kids ,,,,,,i pity the nation of Fiji being lead by such low downs

Anonymous said...

I am yet to meet one person that likes the regime. In public they don't say much but in private everyone is happy to bag the regime.

Why all this fear in public? Frank rest assure that people of Fiji will kick you out the moment we get over this fear factor.

Anonymous said...

Anon on 8/3 @ 8.43am - oilei, don't you know that it is cultural? People will tell you want u want to hear. They are not stupid and very discerning.