Wednesday, 04 November 2009

• The Root Cause of Frank Bainimarama's 2014 Elections

  There is something special about the art of magic, you see there are normally three parts to an act, the first is to show an object. The second is to create a diversion to make it disappear. Frank Bainimarama missed the third and most important part of his 2014 magical show, that is to make the object reappear, otherwise known as the Prestige.

  The Crime

  Let us begin with one of the 69 criminal offences relevant to Frank Bainimarama for illustration purposes only as Commander and Chief Accounting Officer of the RFMF, notwithstanding the provisions of the RFMF Act and in particular the United Kingdom Forces (Jurisdiction of Colonial Courts) (Prescribed Offences) Order in relation to the Penal Code.

  Section 305 of our Penal Code states that :

  Any person who, being a trustee of any property for the .. benefit .. of some other person, .. with intent to defraud .. appropriates .. any part thereof .. for his own .. benefit, .. is guilty of a misdemeanour, and is liable to imprisonment for seven years.

  This however requires two more elements to invoke depending on the method of invocation.

  First, in a criminal prosecution as envisaged by the above, the sanction of the Director of Public Prosecutions is required.
  

  Second, if civil proceedings are instituted by the beneficiaries (the ordinary foot soldiers) against the Trustee then it would require the sanction of the Court or Judge.
  

  This is why the Fiji Police Force, Office of the DPP, the Chief Registrar and Chief Justice needed to be “controlled” by Frank Bainimarama.

  The Evidence

  The relevance, veracity, reliability and probative value of the “evidence” presented in a criminal trial is crucial in securing a conviction for a criminal offence beyond reasonable doubt, likewise to satisfy the standard of proof required in a civil suit, on the balance of probabilities.

  But what happens when the “evidence” no longer exists, because the law no longer requires it to exist?

  Our Banking Act requires the retention by a financial institution of all cheques, bankdrafts, bills of exchange and promissory notes for a period of 7 years. The law also prohibits the destruction of such documents for the period of 7 years.
  

  The law enables our financial institutions to keep a copy of the original and store same in another format such as electronic. The law also enables a copy of a document to be admissible in evidence in any legal proceedings to the same extent as the original.

  Our Bankers Books Evidence Act states that a copy of any entry in a banker's book shall in all legal proceedings be received as prima facie evidence of such entry and of the matters, transactions and accounts therein recorded but only if it was produced in the ordinary course of business and that same is in the custody and control of the bank.
  

  The Plan

  Plan A :

  Control the Fiji Police Force, Office of the DPP and the Judiciary.

  Control the RBF who are tasked with Banking Supervision of the Banking Act.

  Plan B:

  Approximately 7 years from the date of the 2006 coup enact a pocket sized Constitution to have elections the following year by which time the Banks would have destroyed both the original and copies, which in any event would not be in the custody and control of the Bank and hence inadmissible as evidence.

  Plan C:

  If we do not reach 2014, we have the Wontok connection who have bought the Institution, hence there is always the option of a fire that destroyed documents and a virus that deleted all electronically stored data during the “change management” phase or was it the new improved more efficient information technology system to replace the Banks outdated archaic one, courtesy of our UN rep which reformatted and purged the backup?

  Plan D:

  Become the President.

  Xanga Teams Pledge:

  We have approximately 69 options available to send Frank Bainimarama & Co to Naboro and when we come we promise you that we will come with the Thunder.

  Remember Frank, Tony, Aiyaz, Sada, John, Esala and Mohammad :

  “An unconstitutional act is not a law, it confers no rights, it imposes no duties, its affords no protection, it creates no office, it is in legal contemplation, as inoperative as though it had never been passed.” (Norton v Shelby County [1885] 118 US 425)

  Check Mate <><

  • 11:52 AM
  • 397 Views