Friday, 04 September 2009
-
Soqosoqo Duavata ni Lewenivanua
The Following Information was released by the SDL Party
There is a criminal craziness in the recent vilification of the SDL Party and its leader Laisenia Qarase by international con artist Peter Foster.
The schemer and master deceiver has left a trail of infamy wherever he has gone. Foster is totally dishonest and deceitful; an absolute liar and a fraud. By his own confessions, and through his own actions, Foster has reached the pinnacle of moral and criminal corruption. He admits that he has seen the inside of 16 prisons in six countries. But for all we know, this tally may be understated.
It is more than bizarre therefore, that Foster should be levelling accusations of corruption at Mr Qarase and the SDL. Virtually everything he says should be treated with outright scepticism. Lies are his stock in trade, an indispensable professional qualification for a criminal of his type.
The SDL party, in the interests of setting the record straight, intends to nail numerous lies concocted and spread by Foster in his recent story, Fiji Truth, which has been published on the Internet. In Foster’s case, the title of this is a contradiction in terms. His Fiji Truth, as expected, is a litany of untruth. It is his latest con job.
Obviously his motive is to ingratiate himself with Commodore Frank Bainimarama and the Republic of Fiji Military Forces so that he might secure a safe haven in Fiji to continue with his nefarious deeds.
But the military was burned previously when it became entangled with Foster in an outlandish and clandestine attempt to gather evidence of abuse of office by the SDL. This episode predictably backfired in a storm of embarrassing publicity for the army, and Foster disappeared from Fiji in mysterious circumstances. So Commodore Bainimarama is unlikely to succumb to Foster’s overtures through his “Truth” article.
The SDL considered whether it should bother to acknowledge or rebut what Foster is saying. But the party decided to respond on the off-chance that the gullible, the deluded, and those opposed to the SDL, might actually believe what Foster says or try to use it in some way to smear and demonise the party.
This statement will, therefore, concentrate on demolishing Foster’s corruption diatribe against Qarase and SDL and, once more, place on record the party’s commitment to honest, open government.
First, the party will reject in their entirety some of the other Foster falsehoods that underline his utter lack of credibility. Rebuttals of more of Foster’s deceit will follow.
Here then is what the SDL has to say at this stage about scurrilous and defamatory statements by Foster:
The Howard government in Australia had no part in the election of Laisenia Qarase’s government in 2001 and again in 2006;
Mark Textor was hired by the SDL party to advise on election strategies. The Australian government had nothing to do with this. John Howard, then prime minister of Australia, was not involved in any way. Mark Textor was hired as an independent consultant to undertake specific jobs;
Mr Qarase was not involved in George Speight’s coups. Foster would do well to highlight the role of elements of the military in Speight’s take-over of Parliament and hostage-taking;
Mr Qarase is not the “failed head” of the Fiji Development Bank (FDB), neither is he a failed businessman. He was never a businessman. He was the successful chief executive of the FDB from 1983 to 1997 and at the Merchant Bank from 1997 to 2000;
During Mr Qarase’s leadership of the FDB from 1983 to 1997, it was recognised internationally as an accomplished development finance institution. Foster’s reference to a “loss of $220million” has been pulled out of thin air. FDB has never suffered an operating loss. During Mr Qarase’s tenure, the independent annual audit reports were never qualified and commented favourably on the bank’s performance;
Navitalai Naisoro did not serve as chairman of FDB when Mr Qarase was managing director. Mr Qarase did not approve any loans by the FDB without adequate security, collateral and guarantees;
After the Chandrika Prasad case in 2001, Mr Mahendra Chaudhry advised the President to dissolve parliament and then resigned as prime minister. Mr Qarase had no influence over Chaudhry’s decision. He therefore continued as interim prime minister until the general election of August/ September 2001. Mr Qarase’s SDL Party won that election and he became the elected prime minister;
Mr Navitalai Naisoro did not interview candidates for the position of prime minister after the 2000 coup. Mr Qarase was chosen for this interim role by the Military Council at the time;
Foster’s allegations of rigged elections are false. There is no credible evidence to support what he says. No one was charged for an election offence linked to the 2001 and 2006 polls despite loud complaints, mostly from the Fiji Labour Party. Both elections were declared free and fair by international observers. Commodore Bainimarama was quick to support the rigging refrain from Labour in 2006, although he should have known it was without substance.
The fact is that Fiji does not have any tradition or record of cheating at the polls. The 2006 poll was the most scrutinised in Fiji’s political history. A large number of international, regional and local observer groups carefully studied every aspect of it. They all gave the elections their stamp of approval, although acknowledging room for improvement in some of the organisational procedures. Of the 71 seats contested, legal action to challenge results was brought in only two constituencies. One was dismissed by the courts, while the other was withdrawn;
The 2001 election campaign of the SDL party was not funded by the government. It was funded entirely by contributions from supporters;
Foster’s contention that the SDL and Qarase’s campaign would be based on racial divide and fear, is another malicious fantasy. The SDL’s campaign strategies were drawn from the party’s 2001 and 2006 manifestos. Our fundamental message was that we would work for the removal of barriers that separated the communities and replace animosity and fear with trust and co-operation. There was no racial boundary to our desire to serve Fiji. We spoke of peace, conciliation, rebirth and national renewal.
The SDL will now consign to the rubbish tip, Foster’s ravings on corruption.
If Foster is as well informed as he makes out, he would have known that Transparency International (TI) in 2005 ranked Fiji at 55 in a corruption perceptions index, covering 158 countries. This exposes the untruthful and vindictive claims by Foster. He is jumping on a politically-motivated bandwagon to try to portray Fiji as one of the most corrupt countries in the world under SDL leadership. This nonsense had to be corrected by the local TI chair.
According to the TI findings, Fiji was perceived to have less corruption than nations such as Brazil, Jamaica, Mexico, Poland, China, Sri Lanka, Romania, Argentina, Nepal, Philippines, Venezuela, Pakistan, Thailand, Trinidad and Tobago, India, Iran, Turkey and Russia. Papua New Guinea, the other Pacific Island country listed, was at 130 on the perception index.
For the SDL government, Fiji’s ranking gave us a benchmark for progressive improvement consistent with the values that guide our party.
Foster conveniently omitted to mention a Commonwealth Business Council report that classified Fiji as one of the best five performers in 2005 for introducing measures to reduce and eliminate corruption. This assessment was drawn from a survey of 32 Commonwealth countries.
Fiji was ranked fourth for the reliability and effectiveness of its justice system. It was almost level with New Zealand for having balanced and effective business regulation. Fiji also did well in ratings for government – business relations, free media, effective government, efficient administration and future outlook. This survey outcome completely explodes the doomsday picture so dishonestly painted by Foster and those in Fiji and elsewhere who think like him.
During the SDL’s term in office, the World Bank placed Fiji 34 out of 155 countries for ease of doing business. Fiji was well ahead of some nations with developed economies. This World Bank report, highlighting key factors of good governance, again demolishes assertions by Foster, the Fiji Labour and the Military that Fiji was corrupt beyond redemption and beset by a governance crisis. The only crisis was that caused by the army. It says much that more than two and a half years after the coup, there has not been one conviction of an SDL minister on a corruption charge.
The positive perception of Fiji was reinforced in an independent assessment by the Australian National University published in November 2004. This noted that there was no sign in Fiji of the widespread corruption that affects some other Pacific Island countries. Again Foster, and those who are like-minded, conveniently overlooked this.
While the SDL was in charge, the Fiji Public Service Commission set up a special unit to investigate corruption reports, and make inquiries if there was a suspicion of corrupt activity. The SDL government enacted a Financial Reporting Transaction Act to counter money laundering. This resulted in the setting up of a Financial Intelligence Unit to monitor and implement the Act.
A report and review of corruption and bribery laws was tabled in Parliament. It was undertaken by the Fiji Law Reform Commission through a committee chaired by Justice Fatiaki, who later became Chief Justice.
At a Cabinet meeting in late 2006, the Attorney-General was instructed to draft an Anti-Corruption Bill to be submitted to Parliament the following February. It was to be based on several reports and studies prepared on the instruction of the SDL government.
Plans for code of conduct and freedom of information legislation were well advanced. These Bills were in the consultative stage in 2006 and were to be tabled in Parliament in early 2007. In the light of all the facts, Foster’s corruption allegations collapse completely.
Frank Bainimarama's rating is the 1st Bar
As you can see, the lowest in 10 years in all categories of Governance.
-
email
- sent 0
