Pacific radio defends ban over 'unbalanced' Fiji interview

Pacific Media Centre

A New Zealand-based Pacific radio network has moved to defuse a controversy over a Fijian-language interview critical of the Methodist Church and alleged involvement of some leading clergy in past coups.

Pacific Media Network acting chief executive Tom Etuata told Pacific Media Centre reporter Pippa Brown today that the ban on experienced broadcaster Bulou Amalaini Ligalevu-Legge had been lifted after she had been suspended off air following last month’s wide-ranging interview with Citizens’ Constitutional Forum executive director Rev Akuila Yabaki.

Yabaki also spoke about the abrogation of the Fiji constitution, censorship of the media and freedom of expression in the June 6 broadcast, but the programme's criticism of the Methodist Church in the wake of the regime’s cancellation of the annual conference drew three written complaints to Radio NiuFM/531pi.

The controversy was picked up by the independent media watchdog blog Café Pacific.

Etuata said the radio tried to achieve balance in its programmes.

“She was suspended only from one programme, not from work,” he said. “She is still being employed as an announcer while we investigate and get an independent translation because we did get a number of complaints.

“Our community radio aims to provide both views of the topic and provide balance as a responsible broadcaster on air.”

Bulou Amalaini said the off air suspension was “very unfair”.

She denied claims by complainants that she was a supporter of regime leader Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama, saying little information was coming out of Fiji and she had been trying to provide more insight and research into political developments.

'Too scared'
Formerly of Radio Fiji and with 25 years’ broadcasting experience,” Bulou Amalaini said: “People are too scared to talk, but Rev Yabaki was not too scared to be interviewed.”

Rev Yabaki, who is an outspoken champion of human and constitutional rights in Fiji, spoke about the Methodist Church after the banning of the conference, saying Fiji’s largest and most influential religious institution was “in disarray”.

“If you look at the history of the stand that the Methodist Church has taken in the past 20 years, you will note that it supported the first coup of 1987 and also George Speight’s coup in the year 2000,” he said.

“But it opposed the coup of 2006 because it believes that Fiji should be governed by Fijians, who are their members, as if it were their divine right.

“This was the case when Dr Timoci Bavadra and Mahendra Chaudhry’s Labour Party won the general elections of 1987 and 1999.”

One complainant to 531pi/Niu FM said: “It would have been fair ... if Ligalevu [had interviewed] a member of the church in New Zealand or an official of the church in Fiji on matters concerning the church.

“But to do exactly the opposite does not only degrade the biggest domination in Fiji but also angers the members of the church who are in New Zealand.”

Bulou Amalaini said she had been told by the station management that "the interview was good but it was not balanced - that I should have interviewed somebody from the Methodist Church as well".

She said Fijian programme producer Nemai Vucago had asked the head of the Fiji Methodist congregration in New Zealand, Rev Peni Tikoinaka, to speak on the programme but he had declined because he said he was not "fully versed" over the issue.

Another Methodist clergyman was also asked but declined.

Rev Yabaki told the PMC that Bulou Analaini had been dealt a "raw deal" by the radio station "in a manner that lacks transparency".

He said she had been denied a hearing involving the three complaints.

Pictured: Broadcaster Bulou Amalaini Ligalevu-Legge (top) and the CCF's Rev Akuila Yabaki.

Niu FM - Pacific Media Network
Full text of Rev Akuila Yabaki interview
Veteran Fiji broadcaster gagged on Pacific radio

Fiji regime tightens grip, plans own media

By Pippa Brown: Pacific Media Centre

Fiji continues to head into a political and economic hole as Fiji’s military regime tightens its grip and communications in the country are heavily censored.

The regime now plans to begin broadcasting its own television programme in a deal with Fiji TV, and to publish a newspaper insert in the Fiji Sun, the second-largest daily.

The unanimous decision to suspend Fiji from the Pacific Islands Forum earlier this month further compounded Fiji’s woes.

The PIF responded to Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama’s failure to return Fiji to democratic governance by May 1 and name a date for elections this year.

“A regime which displays such a total disregard for basic human rights, democracy and freedom has no place in the Pacific Islands forum,” said the Forum chairman, Niue Premier Toke Talagi.

The forum will ensure that Fiji does not benefit directly from any regional cooperation initiatives, new financial or technical assistance until it returns to democratic rule.

Amnesty International is extremely concerned about the volatility of the situation. It says the human rights situation is getting worse by the day and the civilian population is living in fear as a result of draconian measures implemented by the military regime.

“What is developing is a nature of extreme fear and intimidation.

“As well as the media clampdown, the regime is now believed to be monitoring email traffic, blogs and telephone conversations,” says Pacific researcher Apolosi Bose after a trip to Fiji last month.

‘Chilling effect’
The censorship has affected the way people work and has had a “major chilling effect” on the operations of a non-government organisation whose work is critical for standing up to human rights abuses, says Bose.

Oxfam New Zealand executive director Barry Coates thinks communications have not entirely shut down.

“Technology and communications are still available through the internet. Ten percent of citizens have internet access; mainly in urban areas as a lot of rural areas still have traditional lifestyles,” says Coates.

China has an influence on Fiji and other Pacific nations.

“The influence of New Zealand and Australia is disappearing and there is a real problem with foreign policy,” he says.

China is not condemning Fijian policies and now gaining influence in the region.

The Chinese government has been accused of propping up the military regime by supplying hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, according to a Lowry Institute analyst, Fergus Hanson.

The Australian reported that although China maintains a strong relationship with Fiji and other Pacific nations, it does not want to be seen as the new international protector filling Fiji’s international relations vacuum, or writing cheques to underpin the country’s collapsing revenues.

Foreign exchange
Foreign exchange remittances sent home by Fijian peacekeepers are said to be worth millions of dollars a year to the Fijian economy.

The Chinese news agency Xinhua reported that the UN will continue to use Fiji police and soldiers in its current peacekeeping missions but will not increase the numbers in future deployments.

There are more Fijian police working under its peacekeeping mandate than soldiers, said the UN Under-Secretary-General for Political Affairs, Ly Pascoe, during a conference in New York recently.

Bruce McConchie has extensive global experience within the development area through both government aid projects and NGOs over a period of 35 years.

He says that NGOs hold a distinct advantage in aid projects.

“They are better at reaching the poorest as they operate at grassroots level and are more effective at managing micro-finance initiatives. They commit to the lengthy time frame required to make a difference,” he says.

“They are used to times of strife and operating in an environment of poor communication,” he says.

Providing the resources are still available, the lack of communication isn’t a problem. NGOs operate best on mobilising and encouraging other people.

They are not solely dependent on outside resources and work effectively with what is available in their immediate environment. Change is often not obvious for another 10 to 15 years, he says.

Squatter settlements
Oxfam’s Barry Coates says there has been an increase in squatter settlements around Suva.

Relations between New Zealand and Australia toward Fiji have cooled further after both countries snubbed an attempt by Commodore Bainimarama for a summit with Prime Ministers New Zealand John Key and Australian Kevin Rudd.

Bainimarama expressed frustration with both prime ministers and their attitude at his attempts to rid Fiji of racism and undertake electoral reform before elections in 2014.

An election this year would restore the “racist” government of former Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase, whom he disposed at gunpoint in 2006, according to The Australian.

Can Fiji sustain itself operating alone in this environment?

“The problems are enormously complex,” says Coates. It is partly due to the coup and partly due to a decline in Fiji’s economy. The textile industry is breaking down as more manufacturing is going to China.

There have been major disruptions in the sugar and tourism industries. The impact on tourism is due to the coup.

Tourists nervous
“It made people nervous about going there with the military running the country,” he says.
The sugar industry and international trade issues are due to European Union policies.

“They are protecting their own distributors.” The EU suspended its $170 million aid package to Fiji’s sugar industry, the second- largest after tourism, following the coup and says future help depends on democracy being restored.

Coates says it is difficult to see how this situation is going to play out in the long term.

“Without the restoration of democracy, the rights of minorities like the Indo-Fijians will suffer,” he says. He believes tension is building and the Fijians are suffering economically.

Pippa Brown is a Graduate Diploma in Journalism student who is on the AUT Asia-Pacific Journalism course. Photo: Pacific Media Centre.

Commentators condemn NZ's policies on Fiji

A neglect of perspective and lack of historical perspective in reporting Fiji’s “coup culture” means New Zealand media coverage of the Pacific country lacks insight and balance, say critics.

By Kacey Maher: Pacific Media Centre

Two New Zealand academics have called for a more critical review of the country’s policies towards Fiji. And they are not alone with this suggestion.

Prominent journalists and community people join both AUT University’s Pacific Media Centre director Dr David Robie and University of Waikato political economist Dr David Neilson in criticising media coverage of the Fiji coups and calling for changes in policy.

Associate professor Robie told Radio New Zealand’s Mediawatch programme it was vital for journalists to challenge the censorship by reporting all the “twists and turns and nuances” of the Fiji political upheaval to gain a more complete and accurate understanding of events.

“Fiji is one of our important friendly nations in the region,” he said. “Even though we pride ourselves on being part of the Pacific, in many ways the Australian media…do a far better job of covering the region.”

Dr Robie also said little attention was paid to Fiji news, especially in print, unless it had some context within New Zealand.

“If it doesn’t make the general news then it doesn’t make anything, because it doesn’t get a space in the world pages,” he told interviewer Jeremy Rose.

The following day, the New Zealand Herald reported in a front page story that Māori party co-leader Tariana Turia wanted to send a delegation to Fiji.

The article, in addition to being New Zealand-related, also featured no Fijian sources.

Underground Fijian blogs such as Intelligentsiya condemned the idea, saying such a delegation would be of little to no help.

Editorial view
As Dr Robie predicted, there were no Fiji-related articles in the world section. However, an editorial column seemed to be filling some of the reportage gaps.

“I like the op-ed article in the Herald from Tapu Misa - with thoughtful quotes from a University of the South Pacific professor,” said Maire Leadbeater, a long-time peace activist and spokesperson for the Coalition for Democracy, who also thinks New Zealand coverage of Fiji has been lacking.

The professor, Wadan Narsey, is a Fiji citizen and a frequent contributor to the Fiji Times - a key example of the types of sources Dr Robie hoped the media would seek out.

With the Auckland-based Pacific Media Center, associate professor Robie tries to right the regional wrongs as he sees them in mainstream New Zealand media.

Along with patchy Pacific coverage, Dr Robie says that too often experts from far afield in New Zealand and Australia saturate analysis and commentary.

Instead, he told Radio New Zealand, sources from USP, such as Narsey, ought to give an analysis that is closer-to-home.

Taualeo’o Stephen Stehlin, executive producer of TVNZ’s Tagata Pasifika, agreed with this assessment.

“I think the reporting of the regional voices has been sporadic with an emphasis on New Zealand and Australia,” he said. However, he says, it is a difficult situation, especially for local journalists on the ground within Fiji.

“It would be good to hear more from professor Narsey and his colleagues - but do they take a risk if they speak critically about the coup?” said Leadbeater, echoing Taualeo’o’s views.

Foreign news sources have been gagged in Fiji since April 10, leaving blogs as essentially the only uncensored media from within.

Journalists hoping to enter from the outside must first agree to a background check and sign a visa application stating that they will cover the news “fairly”.

Moral ambiguity
This has many journalists up in arms about the moral ambiguity of having to get permission from the government to cover political stories.

However, interim regime leader Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama told SkyNews: “It’s not only insightful messages that we are worried about, it’s irresponsible reporting that’s done by the media.

“That’s something we really don’t need done right now.”

Dr Robie told Radio New Zealand, there was a long history of mistrust within Fiji about foreign journalism, especially the foreign journalism that existed within its own borders.

World-wide conglomerate, Murdoch’s News Corp, owns the Fiji Times, the country’s largest newspaper.

He said there had been “major questions about the role of media, particularly print media, not being fair and balanced” in Fiji’s past.

“Over the last couple of years certainly the regime has felt that its side of the story and also the plans and objections - the People’s Charter for example - has never really been covered properly,” said Dr Robie.

“I think that’s very arguable and debatable, but this is a very widespread view.”

It was also reflected in Bainimarama’s actions towards the press.

According to Rebecca Moala, a New Zealand mother Fijian by descent, said: “I know more about how the press has been affected by the whole thing than how the people of Fiji have been affected.”

Radio New Zealand’s Jeremy Rose professed his own dissatisfaction on air: “I’ve got no feel really for how many support this coup, how many are against it.”

However, a lack of resources during this world-wide financial crisis, is a also a problem, says Scoop Media NZ co-editor Selwyn Manning.

“We at Scoop were on a roll from 2003 through to 2007 in positioning strong reportage and analysis on Pacific regional politics and geopolitics in general,” he said.

“But I cannot claim we are doing anything meaningful now, except possibly being a facilitator, or providing the means, for those journalists that have been driven underground in Fiji.”

Lifting the lid
But this could help “lift the lid on the real Fiji,” said Manning.

He explained that it was the covert journalism within Fiji and the news organisations which worked with underground media sources that would find the real stories.

“The mainstream media in New Zealand is devoid of specialist journalists who can work real contacts, real people to ascertain what is the real situation for Fijians in this most murky affair,” he said.

“There's an over reliance on official sources and neglect of attention given to those facing the consequence of the regime's actions.”

It is this neglect of attention to perspective that has Dr Neilson most disappointed with the media. Dr Neilson, a senior lecturer in labour studies, said New Zealand media fell down most in providing issues within an historical context.

He said that the situation could not be understood without at least the background of the coups that came before.

“From Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara onwards, there has been this idea of a middle way between contending power bases, that link to the two major ethnic groups of Fiji,” he said.

The late Ratu Sir Kamisese served as President of the Pacific Islands and was one of the most influential figures of the Pacific Islands Forum.

This “middle way” is the ideal balance of power between indigenous Fijians and the Indo-Fijians, explained Dr Neilson.

Lieutenant-Colonel Sitiveni Rabuka’s first two coups in 1987 were an attempt to keep the indigenous Fijians in power over the Indo-Fijian-dominated Labour Party.

The subsequent 1997 constitution – abrogated by the current President - was designed to ensure that that the indigenous would retain supreme power while also protecting the interests of the Indo-Fijians.

However, Dr Neilson said he felt increasingly pessimistic about Fiji’s future.

Maika Tabukova of the Canterbury Fiji Community is also frustrated over media coverage.

“What the media in New Zealand is doing is making the situation worse,” she said. “Only a Fijian can explain to you what is going on in Fiji.”

Photo: Pacific Media Centre.

Katherine Maher is an American student journalist on the Asia-Pacific Journalism course as part of her Study Abroad programme at AUT University.

RNZ's Mediawatch on Fiji – May 3, 2009
Intelligentsiya – 'The Hand in the President’s Glove'
Fiji's hope lies in peaceful resistance

'Courage under fire' - the Fiji Times experience

The speech by the Fiji Times editor-in-chief, Netani Rika, at the Article 19 conference in Apia, Samoa, 6-8 May 2009.

It is difficult to put thoughts into words when you know that everything you say has the potential to be a threat to the very existence of 180 people with whom you work and close to 1000 who depend on them for a living.

Last month, the Appeals Court in Fiji ruled that the removal of Laisenia Qarase’s government by the army and its shadowy group of supporters was illegal.

The three judges declared not only that the takeover was illegal but that the President appoint a caretaker prime minister to lead Fiji to democratic elections within a suitable time frame.

Hours after the judgment was handed down, the interim Prime Minister, Commodore Frank Bainimarama, agreed on national television to abide by the ruling and uphold the law.

The next day he was reappointed by the President – this time to head an interim government of the same people who had lead Fiji prior to the declarations of the court.

Immediately, a Public Emergency Regulation (PER) was put in place to ensure that there would be no opposition to Bainimarama’s regime.

In a nutshell the regulation prohibits public gatherings for the purpose of political meetings and – under Section 16 – stops the media from broadcasting or printing material which may incite the people.

This rule gives the Permanent Secretary wide-ranging and arbitrary powers to decide what may cause incitement. There is no requirement for this public servant to declare why the decision has been made to prevent a particular news item from being made public.

Censor 'protection'
On the afternoon of Bainimarama’s return to power, the Permanent Secretary for Information told news editors that as part of the regulation, each media organization would be allocated a censor and that each censor would be accompanied by a police officer in plain clothes.

The police officer – we were told – was to protect the censor.

We were not told from whom the censor would need protection.

In Fiji it is often the case that rules can change from day to day without warning or explanation.

As days and weeks have passed, the number of censors has increased, as has the number of police officers.

These enforcers of the law are no longer in plain clothes and sometimes take on the duty of the censors, deciding what we are permitted to print.

What, you may ask, are we permitted to print?

Basically any story on government must put the interim regime in a positive light or it will not be permitted.

No views contrary to those of the interim government are permitted – even if balance is provided in the form of a comment from a minister of state or a senior public servant.

Censors did not allow the publication of the reactions of the Commonwealth and the United Nations to the reappointment of Bainimarama as interim prime minister by our president.

Thailand gagging
We were not allowed to publish news of street protests in Thailand or the assassination attempt on US President Barak Obama.

Censors entered our newsroom on the evening of the day that the President ordered Bainimarama’s reinstatement.

Of course we had dozens of stories from all across the political spectrum showing reactions to this event.

We were not allowed to publish any of these stories.

The next day our Sunday paper – which is now a collectors’ item – was published with white space in place of the stories which the censors – both trained journalists and one of whom had worked in the mainstream media - had culled.

We carried bold notices in those spaces declaring that the newspaper had been prevented from publishing the stories under the Public Emergency Regulation.

It was a sensation and drove home to the people of Fiji the point that we were powerless to tell the truth, powerless to tell the country what it needed to know, powerless to carry out our duty to the nation and provide free speech.

And it brought home to them the fact that media freedom is intrinsically linked to their right to know and their freedom of expression.

Unfortunately the interim government was not amused and the Fiji Times management was summoned before the Permanent Secretary for Information to be told that white space was not allowed under the Public Emergency Regulation.

What, then, do we do next?

'Normal' coverage
We have decided to go about our daily assignments in the normal manner.

Our journalists and photographers cover every possible assignment attempting to get as many sides of the story as possible.

Yes, we continue to cover stories which do not portray the interim government in a good light.

Those stories are assigned to pages and go to the censors each day. More often than not these stories are declared unfit for consumption by the people and are knocked back by the censors.

The next day we cover every assignment again – including the stories which the interim government does not want – and inundate the censors with copy.

Sometimes the stories get through, at other times they are spiked.

It is an extremely frustrating exercise.

Last week a domestic airline was forced to close because of financial difficulties which are not linked to the current regime.

Our business writer prepared comprehensive coverage, covering all angles of the story, providing fact files, historical background – a masterpiece from a young journalist.

The censor on duty did not allow our reports to run unless we carried a quote from a specific minister.

Story pulled
We refused and pulled the story.

The following day we placed the same stories in front of a different censor – No worries, the issue was covered, albeit a day late.

It is safe to say that the greatest challenge we face with censorship is inconsistency.

What we may or may not cover is at the discretion or more often the whim of the censor on duty.

Last week the Public Emergency Regulation was extended for a further 30 days.

The Permanent Secretary for Information declared this week that the media was now reporting responsibly.

In my view, Fiji’s media has always tried to report responsibly.

Unfortunately, all of our country’s rulers since independence in 1970 believe that responsibility means no anti-government stories.

The people know of our inability to provide a truly independent view of what is happening in our home.

Those who can use shortwave radio to find a link to the outside world and news broadcast on Radio Australia or Radio New Zealand International.

Blog sites
A plethora of blog sites has sprung up spewing Fiji stories, rumour, gossip and speculation into cyber-space.

Most of this news is accessible only to the small portion of the community which has access to the internet.

Unable to halt the onward march of the bloggers, Fiji’s rulers have resorted to ordering the closure of Internet cafes from 6pm each evening in an attempt to stem the tide.

But how does it stop the coconut wireless which for generations has provided steady – if not entirely factual – news in countries around the region?

But we gather this week to discuss courage under fire.

To say that Fiji’s media has been under fire since December 2006 is no exaggeration.

We have been threatened, bullied and intimidated. Our cars have been smashed, our homes firebombed.

Despite this, our staff have remained committed to the ideals of a free media, telling the stories that must be told, exposing the weaknesses in State policies and also covering human interest assignments.

It is because of their commitment and refusal to detract from the cause that the interim government has been forced to gag the media.

It is important in these trying circumstances for senior journalists and managers to maintain a brave face and communicate constantly with their staff, offering support and protection.

Training, mentoring
It is also imperative that we offer guidance and direction and stress the importance of the role of a vibrant, free press in a democracy.

Training, upskilling and mentoring are also important.

At the Fiji Times we have found that our people – and many of them are young – understand the complexities of the situation we face.

How do we build their courage?

Simply, by not backing down.

We continue to cover the issues which are important to people – water, roads, food prices, housing, superannuation, health services, governance, accountability, transparency.

Every story is covered in detail as if we were working in a truly democratic country without the current restrictions.

Each day we challenge the censors by putting every possible news item before them.

Sometimes we are lucky and the occasional story slips through the net.

On those days we celebrate quietly.

The danger is that under the current circumstances, journalists may start to censor their own stories.

We must not allow that to happen.

Pushing boundaries
It is vital – indeed it is our duty – to ensure that journalists continue to make every attempt to cover the issues that matter to the people, even if the stories we write do not portray our rulers in a good light.

Our leaders must learn to deal with criticism form the electorate.

For journalists it is frustrating to spend the day covering issues and then writing reports which cannot be printed.

To their credit, however, our team at the Fiji Times continues to cover the issues, continues to test the censors, continues to push the boundaries of the regime’s regulations.

That takes true immense courage.

In our a situation it would be easy to roll over and practice self-censorship or get out of journalism because it’s just too hard.

To their credit, however, our journalists have risen to the challenge, continued to report without fear or favors and remained objective.

They have bravely stood up to intimidation, rejected censorship and recognized that when a nation is controlled by usurpers it is imperative that the public’s right to know is protected at all costs.

And they are determined to break the culture of silence which so often surrounds our leaders – elected or otherwise.

I am proud of the journalists with whom I work and their colleagues in Fiji’s media industry. They are a tribute to the profession we all love so much.

Pictures of Fiji Times editor-in-chief Netani Rika and the "blank space" newspaper by David Robie.

Veteran media freedom champions speak out

Veteran media freedom champions speak out for uncompromised Pacific news

By David Robie in Apia: Pacific Media Centre

Veteran champions of a free Pacific media spoke out strongly in defence of an uncompromising public watchdog role for the region's news organisations at an Article 19 seminar in Samoa this week.

Savea Sano Malifa, editor-in-chief of the Samoa Observer, spoke of his lifelong pursuit of the “hidden stories” at the UNESCO-sponsored seminar, which had a “courage under fire” theme.

“When I started out as a journalist, I realised that I didn’t care much about the everyday, obvious news,” he said.

“Especially the ones that were being deliberately hidden in order that they remained so for a very long time.

“That was the stuff that kept up the pressure to dig deeper.”

Netani Rika, editor-in-chief of the Fiji Times, whose newspaper led the challenge against unprecedented draconian censorship by the military regime after the abrogation of the 1997 constitution at Easter by publishing blank spaces in retaliation against the gag, called for more training of media workers “under fire”.

“How do we build their courage? Simply, by not backing down,” he said.

“It is vital indeed it’s our duty – to ensure that journalists continue to make every attempt to cover the issues that matter to the people, even if the stories we write do not portray our rulers in a good light.”

Move Pacnews
Kalafi Moala, publisher of both the Taimi ‘o Tonga and Tonga Chronicle and who was unconstitutionally jailed for contempt of Parliament in 1996, called on the Pacific Islands News Association (PINA) to move out of Fiji and shift its regional news service Pacnews in protest.

“They should get out of Fiji so that they can function independently,” he said.

“We don’t believe they should remain silent. In terms of media freedom, journalists in the Pacific are looking for fresh leadership.”

Russell Hunter, expelled by the Fiji regime while he was publisher of the Fiji Sun in February 2008, also called for Pacnews to move out of Fiji.

“It is appalling that a body that has consistently stood up for media freedom for a quarter of a century or more should have maintained its operations in a censure environment one minute longer than it needed to,” said Hunter, who is now development editor of the Samoa Observer.

Savea Malifa also warned young journalists to defend their independence and not fall foul to the Pacific free “beer and food” culture.

In our small societies, the urge for compromise is compelling. Many journalists succumb to it. They are invited to their governments’ cocktail parties, they accept free beer and food, and they lose sight of the ethics.”

Marc Neil-Jones, publisher of the Vanuatu Daily Post, said his paper constantly challenged assaults, intimidation and bullying by authorities by publicly exposing such behaviour.

The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) Asia-Pacific bureau’s Deborah Muir and Kalafi Moala were lead trainers for the seminar, organised by the recently formed Pacific Freedom Forum (PFF).

PINA failure
The forum’s facilitator, Lisa Williams-Lahari, a longtime Pacific women’s advocate now based at Otago University, steered the programme – a regional response to the failure of PINA in recent months to respond with timely campaigns to defend the region from assaults on media freedom.

The seminar conducted two days of freedom of speech and expression mobilisation and practical training exercises under the Article 19 umbrella – from the United Nations Declaration of Human Rights. The programme was designed to monitor the region’s media more stringently.

A final day of strategic mapping for the forum’s future, leading to the two-yearly PINA convention in Vanuatu in mid-July followed.

The forum issued a final communiqué today outlining its action plan and declaration, including working towards becoming registered as a non-government organisation.

The network also plans to work with other regional organisations with similar objectives such as the IFJ, Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) Regional Media Centre, AUT University Pacific Media Centre and its Pacific Media Watch project, University of the South Pacific regional journalism programme and the National University of Samoa journalism programme.

The forum explored a regional strategy to have a strong presence at the University of Queensland-hosted World Media Freedom Day event in Brisbane, Australia, next May 1-4.

Picture: Taimi Media Network publisher (left), Fiji Times editor-in-chief Netani Rika and Vanuatu Daily Post publisher Marc Neil-Jones. Photo: David Robie.

• Dr David Robie is director of the Pacific Media Centre. He was present at the “Courage under fire” media seminar with the assistance of the NZ National Commission for UNESCO.

Samoa 'Courage under fire' seminar final communiqué
Pragmatic approach to Fiji censorship

'Courage under fire' workshop moves to Samoa

Pacific Media Watch

A regional media event aimed at boosting Pacific journalism's capacity to face challenges to media freedom has been switched to Apia, Samoa, next week. Journalists from around the region will gather for the conference.

The Pacific Freedom Forum, UNESCO and Secretariat of the Pacific Community (SPC) "Building Courage under Fire" three-day workshop was originally planned to take place in Suva, Fiji, this week, but was relocated due to the current emergency restrictions in place there.

On April 10, the Fiji President, Ratu Josefa Iloiloi, abrogated the Fiji constitution, sacked the judiciary and postponed elections until 2014. Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama was reappointed and rule-by-decree included a censorship crackdown on news media.

“While we felt that Fiji at this point in time would have been the ideal workshop venue, given our theme, we have a responsibility to ensure the funding support we received is used effectively> This would have been impossible given the emergency regulations in place there,” says PFF chair Susuve Laumaea.

Part of the cancelled event in Fiji was a regional UNESCO World Press Freedom Day celebration on May 3. The current emergency "laws" there make such an event illegal.

“The Fiji media situation shows clearly how media freedom affects all Pacific Islanders - not just those who work in the media. We want to look at ways to encourage that understanding, not just in our newsrooms, but across our communities and in the homes and minds of more Pacific people.”

Laumaea is joining delegates from Australia, Cook Islands, Fiji, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Palau, Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu and the host country at the media freedom workshop.

“Overall, the intent is not to single out any one country, but to ensure the Pacific context of the universal right to free speech and expression of opinions gets some timely attention and forward-thinking debate from journalists to enhance their everyday work,” he says.

The Pacific Media Centre and NZ Commission for UNESCO will be represented at the workshop.

'Sulu censors' stifle Fiji news media

‘Sulu censors’ stifle Fiji news media in regime crackdown

Reeling from four coups in two decades, journalists in the Pacific nation of Fiji bravely contesting draconian pressure from a military government are now taking no chances.

By David Robie: Pacific Media Centre

After a flurry of creative challenges to the military backed regime as it entrenched its power in the Pacific Islands nation of Fiji, the news media are now facing the harsh reality of life after the censorship crackdown.

Leading editors and journalists have opted to be cautious following the gag and threats by authorities that they will be shut down if they step out of line.

Not tolerating any dissent since martial law was declared on Good Friday, April 10, the regime has ordered “sulu censors” – so-called because of the traditional Fijian kilt-like garment some officials wear – and police into newsrooms to check stories and broadcasts.

The regime has expelled three foreign journalists, detained three local reporters and questioned many more.

Ironically, the government briefly performed an about face and invited approved international journalists back – but only a trickle have successfully entered the country. Those who have, report no interference.

Fiji, shaken by four coups over two decades, turned its back on democracy after a Court of Appeal – three Australian judges – reversed a lower court judgement and declared the post 2006 coup government illegal.

The following day the ailing President, Ratu Josefa Iloilo, abrogated the 1997 constitution, sacked the judiciary, postponed elections until 2014 and imposed martial law for 30 days.

Coup leader Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama was reinstated as prime minister. He reconstituted his cabinet and devalued the Fiji dollar by a fifth in a bid to shore up the economy.

He is ruling by decree, including media censorship and a legal “shield” for any abuses by military and the police.

'Journalism of hope'
Local journalists have been told to cut out negative news and report “journalism of hope” - a strategy rejected by critics as propaganda.

The regional news agency Pacnews, based in the capital of Suva and providing news on a cooperative basis to 16 countries, responded to threats by pulling the plug on all Fiji news.

This prompted calls for the service to be relocated temporarily in Australia or New Zealand.

The Pacific Islands News Association (PINA), owner of Pacnews, refused to consider moving - at least not until a regional convention due in Vanuatu in July.

Strongly condemning the regime for “bullying” the region’s news media, PINA president Joseph Ealedona, who is general manager of Papua New Guinea’s state-run National Broadcasting Corporation, appealed to President Iloilo to issue a decree for returning a “free media for the sake of the people of Fiji”.

He hoped the military intimidation of journalists would be ended by World Media Freedom Day on May 3. Already a regional media freedom conference organised by UNESCO for Fiji has been moved to Samoa.

A chorus of condemnation has come from global media freedom organisations including the Brussels-based International Federation of Journalists, Reporters Sans Frontières (Paris) and the Committee to Protect Journalists (New York).

An RSF statement accused the regime of dealing a “mortal blow” to press freedom and “heading dangerously towards a Burmese-style system in which the media are permanently subject to prior censorship”.

Amnesty International warned that the nation of 890,000 people was living in fear because of the “draconian measures”.

It called for the immediate restoration of the constitution, an independent judiciary and the rule of law.

'Culture of fear'
“The human rights situation in Fiji is getting worse by the day,” said Pacific researcher Apolosi Bose, who had visited Fiji on a fact-finding mission just before martial law was imposed.

“What is developing is a culture of extreme fear and intimidation.”

The Auckland-based Pacific Media Centre called on the Fiji regime of Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama to "end this Orwellian era of ruthless censorship and intimidation".

Initially, the media contested the regime’s crackdown with creative strategies.

The day after martial law was declared and regime censors took up residence in newsrooms, the largest of three national daily newspapers, the Murdoch-owned Fiji Times, ran a largely blank page two and several blank boxes where stories and a political cartoon had been censored.
The editors were warned don’t do it again or face being shut down.

Fiji Television, owned by the nation’s 14 provinces and the state, canned a national news bulletin and blamed it on censorship.

Management were told stop this or be closed.

The Fiji Sun announced in an editorial it would not publish any political stories and other media have now followed their lead.

The Daily Post, smallest of the three dailies, tried humour instead. The paper ran funny non stories, such as “Man gets on bus”, another man watching paint dry for four hours, and a “senior reporter” having leftover roti for breakfast – “as usual”.

Blogs back
But in the end the news media “buckled down” in a climate of fear and blogs are resurfacing, said a prominent journalist. New ones with a news focus include Fiji Uncensored and Coup Four and a Half.

Another journalist, who has written widely for international media, said: “It just isn’t worth the risk now. We have wives and children and with no independent judicial system, we can be detained without charge.”

Other editors and journalists are concerned about how quickly a culture of good news and no politics has taken over at some media organisations.

In May 1987, after the first coup by Lieutenant-Colonel Sitiveni Rabuka, Pacnews refused to be censored and moved into exile for seven years in Auckland (New Zealand) followed by Honiara (Solomon Islands) and Port Vila (Vanuatu) before returning to Fiji.

But now journalists are worried Pacnews and other media are bending too far to appease the regime.

One local journalist told the Pacific Media Centre: “Journalism has sunk so low as a result of the rule by decree that a state radio reporter rang an economist and asked, ‘Can you say something positive about the 20 percent devaluation’.

“Isn’t that shocking?”

Media developments recorded by Pacific Media Watch since April 10:

• April 13: Three foreign journalists - Sean Dorney of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, and Sia Aston and photographer Matt Smith from New Zealand’s TV3 - were expelled from Fiji.

• April 13: Fiji Television reporter Edwin Nand was detained for about 36 hours over an interview he did with expelled Australian reporter Dorney. The interview was widely distributed to international media.

• April 15: The regime ordered ABC to shut down its two FM transmitters in the capital Suva and in the tourist town of Nadi. This move also affected Radio New Zealand International because it also relayed programmes via the ABC transmitters.

• April 15: Journalist Kavai Damu from the web-based news service Fijilive was detained for questioning about a story he wrote about the devaluation of the Fiji dollar. He was released later with a warning.

• April 16: The regime detained Pita Ligaiula, a reporter for Pacnews, over his stories filed to the international news wire Associated Press. He was released after being held for about 12 hours.

• April 22: Government censors forced Pacnews to remove an online story about the UN Security Council's condemnation of the scrapping of the constitution. Editorial staff removed the story, but refused a demand by the censors and police to screen stories.

Instead, Pacnews stopped publication of all Fiji news stories.

The Pacific Freedom Forum, a collective of Pacific journalists worried about growing repression against the region’s media, has launched a news group and blog and has protested over the “spin not journalism” stance of the regime.

And to give its free media message a higher profile in support of Fiji journalists, the PFF has promoted a global online petition.

Dr David Robie is director of the Pacific Media Centre at AUT University. Photo: Radio Fiji.

Blogs rule as Fiji regime cracks down on media

Fiji regime leader's brother slams 'bad guy' image

By Violet Cho: Pacific Media Watch

The older brother of Fiji’s military strongman, Sefanaia Bainimarama, has defended the commodore against criticisms as a “bad guy”, saying many people are involved in the coup.

“I don’t think he is [a bad guy],” said Sefanaia Bainimarama during a panel discussion about the Fiji crisis in the weekly Maori-language Marae current affairs programme on Television New Zealand.

“He [Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama] has been put up as a bad guy, but there are a lot of people involved in this coup and all of these problems. They haven’t come to the fore.

“It’s Frank that’s bearing all this things - all the other people are not visible in there.”

Sefanaia Bainimarama justified the coup by saying his brother was trying to achieve a “peaceful country” for the future. Fiji has been hit by four coups in two decades.

The commodore had to do what was needed - “when the country’s in trouble, somebody needs to step in and take order.”

He also compared the situation in Fiji with countries in Africa.

“We do not want to be like other countries in Africa that are taking arms and fighting with each other - that’s the last thing we need in the Pacific and in Fiji.”

Though international and local media strongly portray Voreqe Bainimarama negatively, some claim he is the only person who can restore a fair and non race-based democracy in Fiji.

But, said Nik Naidu, spokesperson for the Auckland-based Coalition for Democracy in Fiji (CDF), it was the commodore himself who had “stolen democracy from the people”.

On April 10, the Fiji President, Ratu Josefa Iloilo, abrogated the 1997 constitution, sacked the nation’s judiciary, postponed elections until 2014 and reappointed Commodore Bainimarama as prime minister.

The regime has imposed draconian censorship by decree on the media as part of a 30-day martial law.

“The problem in Fiji is not about democracy or elections, it is about some people retaining power, privileges and money,” said Naidu.

“As long as elections are not held to put them back into power that will never be acceptable.

“So they will wait until the time is right for them when they brainwash the population and social engineer people to think in their way. And they can guarantee a result that can put them back into power. Otherwise, they will not have election.”

Naidu confirmed that Bainimarama had choices to put things right and he could also do it.

But “there are other forces that are pushing him along to their agenda,” he said without clarifying this.

Sefanaia Bainimarama said media hype was a big thing that spoiled much in every country in the Pacific, including Fiji.

Sireli Kini, a former chief executive of Fiji Broadcasting Corporation Ltd, said a lot of Fijians relied mainly on radio for their news.

Due to the crackdown on media, Radio Fiji news now hardly carried anything for the people about what was happening in the country at present.

For a good country with good government, there should be media freedom and information was very important, Kini said.

He said people needed to know what was happening and what the government was doing.

If people did not get information, it was hard for them to "react” and they did not know what they were supposed to do about the crisis.

Since the Fiji regime declared martial law, there has been a massive crackdown on media with journalists being asked questions, intimidated, detained - and three Australian and New Zealand journalists were deported.

The government gagged Fiji Television and has forced the regional Suva-based Pacnews agency to self-censor its news on the republic.

Picture: Commodore Voreqe "Frank" Bainimarama. Photo: Radio Fiji.

Media freedom organisations condemn censorship
Fiji on TVNZ's Maori-language current affairs programme Marae [video]

A tale of censorship crises – Fiji and Thailand

By Violet Cho and David Fisher: Pacific Media Centre

While the international media is relaxed about Thailand's Easter political crisis, condemnation is being heaped on Fiji's military regime. Thais and Fiji islanders have woken up to a new era of shadowy rule of law - a challenge for local and foreign journalists alike.

Geographically, Thai and Fiji politics are worlds apart - but the military dictatorship in Fiji and the barely democratic Thai government share a similar view towards independent and alternative media.

Both view media as a threat to their rule, and justify repression through maintaining stability.

Both countries are currently under a state of emergency.

In recent weeks, the fragility of democracy has again been on display in Thailand and Fiji, two popular destinations for Australian holidaymakers, noted the Melbourne Age, making comparisons between the two countries and censorship.

In Fiji, the “systematic dismantling of the planks of democracy” was certainly to the detriment of the country’s long-term interests. In Thailand, the “passionate supporters of the ‘real democracy movement — the urban and rural poor who form the bulk of the electorate” — had eased off their street protests.

On the April 10, Fiji’s President, Ratu Josefa lloilo, revoked the Constitution adopted in 1997. He repealed the state courts, postponed elections until 2014 and declared himself the head of the state.

Then he reinstated the coup leader Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama as prime minister and decreed a 30-day “public emergency” in Fiji.

Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva’s government also introduced martial law in Bangkok and areas around the city two days later on the April 12 after a massive protest asking him to step down.

Abhisit has been under pressure to step down from the United Front of Democracy Against Dictatorship (UDD), which is a major anti- government force in Thailand.

Emergency decrees
The emergency decrees highly affect people and allow governments to have full control over media by forcibly stopping publication or broadcast in justification to control the disorder in the country.

Since the state of emergency was introduced, at least five community radio and television stations in Thailand have been targeted with raids, arrests of staff and the confiscation of equipment.

This followed an order from the Internal Security Operations Command for community radio stations to stop inciting unrest or face closure, which was reported in Asia Media Forum.

Other stations in regional areas have reported various forms of threat and harassment by local authorities exploiting the current situation.

So far, one community radio station in Chiang Mai, Northern Thailand and DStation TV based in Bangkok have been forced to close.

Under the name of state martial law, the regime in Fiji had threatened human rights defenders and government critics. The government detained and intimidated local journalists and deported three foreign reporters who were filing critical stories.

The journalists - Sean Dorney from the Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC), and New Zealand’s TV3 crew of reporter Sia Aston and photographer Matt Smith - were expelled from Fiji.

The regime detained local journalists who gave interviews to foreign media and news reporting about the situation in Fiji.

The regime also shut down two repeat transmitters belonging to the ABC in the tourist town of Nadi and the capital of Suva, forbidding Fiji journalists to speak to foreign media about the crisis in the country.

Mass resistance
Unlike the Fiji’s military crackdown on media, Thai government mainly targeted the media which clearly links to anti-government groups which – also unlike Fiji - have a presence on the street and are actively staging mass resistance.

DStation, for example, is an important part of the UDD propaganda network, as it is used to broadcast protests and speeches.

Partiality, of course, is no excuse to limit media freedom. What is alarming is how this crackdown on “pro-UDD” media and the UDD in general exposes the deep bias of the central institutions of the state, the monarchy, military, judiciary and bureaucracy, when dealing with political dissent.

No attempts were made to restrict the media of the People’s Alliance for Democracy (PAD), the yellow shirt group which occupied Thailand’s Government House for three months last year and Bangkok’s international airport for eight days, causing massive damage to an economy reliant on tourism.

There was never a crackdown on the PAD and there have been no arrests of their leaders, who are part of the Thai elite and have support from the powerful old guard of Thai society.

UDD or red shirt protesters are asking for a representative democracy, and challenging a system that gives huge power to unelected courtiers. They want a system that will provide services for the majority of Thai people, not just benefits for the rich.

In contrast, PAD want an end to representative democracy, replaced by a system where a large proportion of seats in parliament are appointed by the monarchy and military. This explains why red shirt protests are crushed by the military within days, while PAD alternatively have a free hand to protests for months.

Future in doubt
The current conflict in Thailand is a fundamental one: the monarchy is in crisis because the king is old and the crown prince is unpopular, which leaves the institution’s future in doubt.

Any discussion of the role of the monarchy and succession is strictly forbidden, enforced through a lese majeste law, which is the centerpiece of the Thai censorship regime.

The monarchy is a key battleground. The institution conveyed open signals in support of the 2006 coup that overthrew the populist elected government of Thaksin Shinawatra, and directly led to the current crisis.

Thaksin has now openly accused King Bhumibol of giving his blessing to military leaders before the coup and announced that two privy councilors were the masterminds.

The 2006 coup can be seen as a favour to the king, who was threatened by the grassroots popularity of Thaksin. The monarchy gave clear signals supporting the PAD, through Queen Sirkit’s attendance at the funeral of a protester who died during clashes with police.

There was also no dissent from any royals when the PAD in part justified their actions as necessary to protect the monarchy.

The Thai background is a long and complicated story, and is too often left out of mainstream media reports of the Thai crisis. There has been a lot of praise in foreign media for the Abhisit Government’s handling of the crisis, showing restraint and sparing civilian casualties.

But since local media reporting heavier casualties have been censored, and there are no independent investigation, who knows what the story really is?

Partial justice
The “restraint” shown must be seen in comparison with the lack of action against the PAD. It then becomes obvious that Thailand has a partial “justice” system – that goes after red shirts, Thaksin and his supporters and turns a blind eye to crimes carried out by the military (the 2006 coup being an obvious one) and yellow shirts.

Rarely is the term “monarchy” used in foreign media, without descriptors attached such as “much revered”, “Buddha-like”, “loved” and “immensely popular”. How can journalists know this when criticism can lead to long prison terms?

In contrast, international media overwhelmingly condemns the actions of the Fiji government.

Thai and Fiji islanders have woken up to a new era of shadowy rule of law. This is a challenge for local and foreign journalists alike, who will have to walk carefully.

Picture: Thai anti-censorship protesters at Pantip Plaza, a popular IT mall, during a previous rally. Photo: Global Voices.

Violet Cho is the Asian Journalism Fellow at AUT University’s Pacific Media Centre.

Media freedom groups keep up pressure over Fiji censorship

By Violet Cho: Pacific Media Watch

International media freedom organisations and human rights advocacy groups continue to raise concerns over freedom of the press and civil rights in Fiji.

The International Federation of Journalists (IFJ) has appealed to the Fiji’s regime to repeal its gag on the media.

On Good Friday, President Ratu Josefa lloilo abrogated the 1997 constitution, sacked the judiciary, postponed elections until 2014 and reinstated coup leader Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama as prime minister.

He also declared martial law for 30 days in Fiji.

Since then, the regime has gagged Radio Australia broadcasting repeater stations in Fiji, imposed censorship, and intimidated, detained and deported journalists.

The IFJ also urged the regime to avoid international isolation.

It argued that harsh government suppression of both foreign and local media risked isolation from international communities and this would “greatly harm the people of Fiji”.

“There is no right to propaganda,” said Aidan White, general secretary of the IFJ.

'Warped view'
“Fiji’s military leaders have a warped view of the role of a healthy media if they believe that they are entitled to media reporting that put them in a good light, regardless of their actions.”

The International Press Institute also condemned the regime’s crackdown on media.

David Dadge, director of IPI, said the regime’s strong control would only accelerate the problem in the country and he called for an end to censorship and the intimidation of journalists.

In response to Bainimarama, who blamed media for the Fiji political turmoil in an interview with Radio New Zealand, Dadge argued that it was a “deplorable attempt to hide the truth at a time of political uncertainty”.

Instead, he said: “Contrary to what the regime says, the media can contribute to better understanding and can ease tension in divided societies.”

The Pacific Media Centre at New Zealand’s AUT University condemned the regime’s "ruthless censorship" and harassment of media organisations.

Associate professor David Robie, director of the PMC and a former head of the University of the South Pacific regional school of journalism in Fiji during the 2000 coup, criticised the government repression of media and dissidents.

Dr Robie praised Fiji journalists for a “creative and courageous” response to martial law.

'Burmese-style system'
Reporters Without Borders (RSF) appealed to Fiji’s president and coup leader to reverse the regulation against media institutions and the Paris-based organisation also compared Fiji military government with Burma’s military dictatorship.

“The military government is heading dangerously towards a Burmese-style system where the media are permanently subject to prior censorship and other forms of obstruction,” said RSF.
The Pacific Freedom Forum, an advocacy group of journalists, criticised the intimidation and detention of journalist.

"This bullying behaviour on the part of Fiji authorities will only serve to still further focus attention on that country's situation, because the story will still, eventually be told," PFF chair Susuve Laumaea, of Papua New Guinea, said.

Amnesty International said Fiji’s military government’s “draconian measures” had systematically caused deteriorating human rights in the country and civilians were feeling insecure living in the unstable country.

A Pacific researcher for Amnesty International based in London, Apolosi Bose, said after a fact-finding visit to Fiji: “What is developing is a culture of extreme fear and intimidation.”

He added: “The government’s emergency regulations, which include exoneration of police and soldiers from responsibility for actions, even when they cause injury or death, are having a major impact.”

In the statement, Amnesty International also said that the regime had threatened human rights defenders and government critics as well as detaining reporters.

Key actions
In key developments since the repeal of the constitution on April 10:

• April 13: Three foreign journalists - Sean Dorney of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, and Sia Aston and photographer Matt Smith from New Zealand’s TV3 - were expelled from Fiji.

• April 13: Fiji Television reporter Edwin Nand was detained for about 36 hours over an interview he did with expelled Australian reporter Dorney.

• April 15: The regime ordered ABC to shut down its two FM transmitters in the capital Suva and in the tourist town of Nadi. This move also affected Radio New Zealand International because it also relays programmes via the ABC transmitters.

• April 16: The regime detained Pita Ligaiula, a reporter for Pacnews, a regional news agency owned by Pacific Islands News Association (PINA), over his stories filed to the international news wire Associated Press. He was released after being held for about 12 hours.

According to IPI, the regime has warned Fiji journalists not to speak to foreign media about the political crisis and some journalists have been taken into custody for questioning.

The regime announced in a change of policy it would accept “approved” foreign journalists into the country. It also asked local reporters to practise the “journalism of hope”.

Meanwhile, news media organisations in the country such as the Fiji Times, the Fiji Sun and Fiji Television have stopped publishing political stories after the regime warned the Sunday Times not to carry on publishing blank spaces or it would be closed down

Violet Cho is the Asian Journalism Fellow at the Pacific Media Centre.

The Fiji crisis - behind the headlines

By Fr Kevin Barr for the Pacific Media Centre

Many believe that coup leader Voreqe Bainimarama’s intentions are good and are in opposition to the aims of the previous indigenous supremacy coups. Some think he is power-hungry but others say that he needs time to carry out the necessary reforms and set in place a new non-racial vision for Fiji.

Background
In order to understand the current situation in Fiji we need to go back a little.

In 2000 the democratically elected People’s Coalition Government of Mahendra Chaudhry was ousted by George Speight in a coup involving civilians and some elements of the army. The proclaimed aim of the coup was to protect indigenous Fijian rights. Political hostages were taken, parliament was trashed and orgies held for almost a month. Finally Commodore Frank Bainimarama (newly appointed head of the army) tricked Speight and put down the rebellion and released the hostages.

He took over the reins of government temporarily until he was able to appoint a civilian interim government led by Laisenia Qarase (a banker). The deal he struck was that Qarase and his interim government were not to seek election but be a caretaker government until elections were held. However, Qarase and his team used their position to fight the election. They won and proceeded to introduce very racist or pro-Fijian legislation which discriminated against Indo-Fijians and other races. They even took back into their government a number of people associated with the 2000 coup. Bainimarama objected and by 2006 friction between Qarase and Bainimarama was high and Bainimarama threatened to take over the reins of government if Qarase did not back down on his pro-Fijian legislation. He was very stubborn and refused. Finally on 6 December Bainimarama took over in a bloodless coup.

Bainimarama in charge
Unlike the 1987 and 2000 coups, which were carried out in the name of “indigenous Fijian rights”, this coup was in the name of multiculturalism. Moreover, while the 1987 and 2000 coups sought to protect the economic interests of certain business and traditional elites, this coup aimed to address corruption and economic mismanagement and see that the economy works in the interest of all Fiji’s people (35- 40 percent of whom live below the poverty line).

Despite some opposition from various political parties and other groups, Bainimarama took over and appointed an Interim Government. There was strong opposition from the SDL party (Qarase’s Party) and the Methodist Church (which took a very strong pro-Fijian nationalistic stance in the 1987 and 2000 coups).

Bainimarama tried to unite people by inviting everyone to come together and draw up a People’s Charter – a way forward for Fiji. The Catholic Archbishop (who had firmly stated his opposition to the coup) agreed to be co-chair of the People’s Charter Committee with Bainimarama. Unfortunately the SDL Party and the Methodist Church refused to be part of the Charter and stood in opposition. After 6–8 months of work, the People’s Charter was promulgated by the President. It is a very good document and tries to address Fiji’s problems and show a way forward.

Since December 2006 life in Fiji has been very calm and relatively peaceful. There were three unfortunate incidents of men being taken into police or army custody and dying because of the severe treatment they received. (Courts have since brought the perpetrators of two of the incidents to justice.) Some women’s NGO groups have taken a strong stand in opposition to the Interim Government and the army and have spoken up against any appearance of human rights violations. However, they have a very narrow interpretation of human rights. Other prominent NGOs (such as the Citizen’s Constitutional Forum and ECREA) while condemning the unlawful take-over of government and occasionally voicing opposition to some decisions, have tried to work with the Interim Government in helping to find a way forward.

One constant problem has been the holding of elections. Australia, New Zealand and the countries of the Pacific Forum have been pushing for elections as soon as possible in order to return Fiji to democratic rule. Early on Bainimarama (under pressure) said elections would be held in April-May 2009 but he withdrew this promise. In fact he does not want to have elections until some of the big problems underlying previous coups have been addressed. These are ethno-nationalism (often mixed with religious fundamentalism), the position and authority of the Great Council of Chiefs, economic mismanagement, and most of all the biased electoral process enshrined in the Constitution. Many agree on the need for electoral reform but it was difficult to undertake this because it was part of the Constitution. Unfortunately Australia, New Zealand, the US and the EU have been obsessed with pushing Fiji to have immediate elections. If this happened we would almost surely have another racist government followed by another coup. Elections alone will not ensure democracy.

The media (newspapers and Fiji TV) have taken a very negative approach to Bainimarama and the Interim Government and have often been very unbalanced in their reporting of the news. Despite many calls for a better reporting of the news from within the country the media have taken a very negative stance. The Government expelled the expatriate publishers of two of the newspapers.

Court cases
Qarase took out a court case to challenge the authority of the President to appoint Bainimarama as Prime Minister after the 2006 coup. The three local judges of the High Court unanimously (and without any pressure) declared the President did have the power to do so and that the Bainimarama Interim Government was legal. The case then went to the Court of Appeal. The three judges were from Sydney and they declared Bainimarama’s regime illegal. They said he must resign and that the President should appoint a new caretaker Prime Minister (not Qarase) to be in charge until elections were held as soon as possible. Bainimarama resigned but the President then abrogated the Constitution and said he would rule by decree. He appointed Bainimarama as Prime Minister and basically reinstated the Interim Government. Bainimarama said elections would not be held until 2014. A state of emergency for one month has been declared, foreign journalists expelled and a curb placed the local media. Constitutional appointments are being re-negotiated. The currency has been devalued by 20 percent

To all intents and purposes the country goes on as usual. There is the usual peace but everyone knows that temporary controls have been set in place. No public protests and gatherings are allowed. But day to day life goes on without interruption. Kids go to school, workers go to work, tourists arrive (in slightly less numbers maybe) and no-one is harmed.

With the Constitution abrogated the way is open for electoral reforms to be carried out so that a more free and fair non-racial election can be held. Almost surely the People’s Charter will provide a road-map for the way forward.

After the Supreme Court decision of the Sydney judges (which hopefully was not biased but which nevertheless upheld Australia’s position) I think the rest was inevitable – abrogating the Constitution, the President ruling by decree, clamping down on the media, the appointment of Bainimarama as Prime Minister and the re-appointment of the Interim Government.

Conclusion
Many believe that Bainimarama’s intentions are good and are in opposition to the aims of previous coups. Some think he is power-hungry but others say that he needs time to carry out the necessary reforms and set in place a new non-racial vision for Fiji. Maybe he does not always get the best advice and certainly some mistakes have been made. There is division in the political parties, the judiciary, the churches and the NGO community. Your position depends on the perspective you take.

There has been some religious mirth surrounding the coup. Some called it a “Catholic coup” because many of the army officers involved were Marist Brothers Old Boys (and then the Archbishop became co-chair of the People’s Charter and two catholic priests had non-political positions on the electoral and other boards). Some called it a “Muslim coup” because a number of Muslims took up positions of authority under the Interim government. Again, others called it a “Hindu coup” because it received support from a number of Hindu organizations.

Very recently New Zealand seems to have taken a different stance towards Fiji. The Foreign Minister says perhaps they should not criticise Fiji and harp on about elections. Perhaps they need to offer their assistance and leave Fiji decide what is best for itself. They recognise that Fiji needs to be allowed to solve its own problems in its own way. This has been a dramatic change and a very welcome one. Hopefully Australia and the US will take a similar approach. Because of the strong opposition from Australia and New Zealand, Fiji has been turning for help to India and China and receiving it. This “look north” policy may in effect be a good balance to the previous strong influence of Australia and New Zealand.

Picture: Squatters in Suva - up to 40 percent of people in Fiji live in poverty. Photo: Fiji government.

Father Kevin Barr is economic and social justice coordinator of the Ecumenical Centre for Research, Education and Advocacy (ECREA). He is an outspoken advocate on the issue of poverty and squatters in Fiji.

ECREA
www.ecrea.org.fj

Media not telling the full story, says former Fiji publisher

By Josephine Latu, contributing editor of Pacific Media Watch

As Fiji’s political crisis unfolds under intense international scrutiny, some critics say the media furore is overlooking some key issues.

Thakur Ranjit Singh, former publisher of the Fiji Daily Post, and Dr David Robie, director of AUT University’s Pacific Media Centre, have criticised “simplistic” media portrayals of the cultural and socio-political complexities in Fiji.

Speaking on Television New Zealand’s digital Media 7 programme last night, they claimed Australia and New Zealand could have done more to head off the current crisis – by interfering less and being more understanding of Fiji’s problems.

Singh, now a community advocate and chief reporter of the Auckland-based Indian Weekender, Dr Robie and TVNZ Pacific affairs correspondent Barbara Dreaver were hosted by Russell Brown in a panel discussing censorship in Fiji and the country’s political future.

Fiji – best known for its mineral water, sunny beaches, rugby and military peacekeepers – faces a deluge of international condemnation over the Easter putsch.

President Ratu Josefa Iloilo abrogated the 1997 Constitution, reinstated 2006 coup leader Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama as prime minister and sacked the judiciary following an Appeal Court judgment by three Australian judges that ruled the interim government illegal. A 30-day state of emergency was declared.

Waves of criticism have reached the United Nations, with Secretary General Ban Ki-moon saying he “deplores” the regime’s actions and calling for a reversal.

Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd and NZ Foreign Affairs Minister Murray McCully have both condemned Bainimarama and his methods.

Peacekeeping challenged
McCully called on the UN to stop recruiting Fijian troops for peacekeeping, and discouraged New Zealand tourists from visiting the islands.

“There will be a significant number of New Zealanders who think that this is a regime that doesn’t deserve any indirect support in the way of their tourism dollars,” he told the New Zealand Herald.

But the Fairfax New Zealand website Stuff reported that responses sent to the NZ Newspaper Publishers Association special email address freefiji@newspapers.co.nz showed support for the regime leader’s efforts to clean up corruption and the race-based politics of the previous "democratic" administration.

One Indo-Fijian writer, Anita Thomas, called for Australia and New Zealand to be more sincerely involved in developing solutions instead of pointing fingers from the sidelines.

New Zealand’s Fiji Club president, Alton Shameem, said the UN, Australia and New Zealand should stop “bullying” Fiji and give Bainimarama time to put a democratic system in place.

Ranjit Singh said on last night’s Media 7 panel: “I feel that in the Western media, especially New Zealand media, there has been too much emphasis on reporting what has gone wrong.”

He said more emphasis should be put into rebuilding for the future.

He said the Fiji people had experienced hardships before under the coup culture.

“There is no more shock treatment left for them… We have been in so many situations like that, and it is like this is just another cyclone rising and it will subside,” he said.

Race-based politics
Fiji has undergone four coups in the past four decades, including the December 2006 bloodless overthrow that brought the current regime to power.

The coup, led by Bainimarama, had an agenda to clean up corruption and install a “one person, one vote” system to replace Fiji’s current “democracy” based on communal votes from racially gerrymandered electorates.

“Any democracy unable to guarantee equality and social justice for all its people is not worth defending,” said Singh.

The head of Grubstreet media Graham Davis, a Fiji-born journalist, says the Fiji story has taken on a simplistic "good guy, bad guy narrative", at least in Australian media.

"There's no one-man, one-vote in Fiji but a contorted, distorted electoral system along racial lines that was always designed, in practice, to ensure indigenous supremacy", he wrote in The Australian.

However, critics say the military’s approach has been quite arbitrary.

Freedom of speech and the press have been virtually crushed under the emergency regulations decree.

The decision to devalue the Fiji dollar by 20 percent on Wednesday means a hike in inflation, compounded by an order that civil servants over the age of 55 will be forced to retire in two weeks.

Australian and New Zealand leaders have threatened possible expulsion of Fiji from the Commonwealth as well as the Pacific Islands Forum (PIF).

Share blame
According to PMC director Dr David Robie, former head of the University of the South Pacific’s regional journalism programme in Fiji, the two developed nations should share some of the blame for Fiji’s current political disorder.

“I think we are seeing the results of Australian and New Zealand policies whose failure over the last two years has driven Fiji to this point,” he told Media 7.

In a separate interview with PMW, Dr Robie said while he strongly condemned the crackdown on media freedom and democracy, the two governments had forced an “unrealistic” deadline for Fiji’s elections, and consistently “pushed Bainimarama into a corner”.

He said the Papua New Guinean Prime Minister, Sir Michael Somare, had in the past showed a more conciliatory approach.

Dr Robie said there was a lack of understanding of the factors that led up to the current upheaval and radical change.

But now Fiji could be facing a situation similar to the rise of Suharto to power and the rise of a military dynasty.

Singh said other development issues needed to be considered and Fiji should not be a case of “trying to impose a First World solution on a Third World problem”.

However, Barbara Dreaver said Bainimarama was losing support - even in his own camp - and the recent political sweeps were an effort to protect himself and his own interests.

Both Dreaver and Robie paid tribute to the courage and determination of Fiji journalists.

Dr Robie warned that a major risk for Fiji and the region was the possibility of a counter-coup arising from within the military with “harrowing consequences” for the Pacific region.

Media7
Dealing with the dictator - Graham Davis
Stewart Firth's reply (former USP professor)
UN not helping Fiji situation: McCully