Category: Contempt of Court

  • New York Justice Juan Merchan, the judge overseeing the trial regarding former President Donald Trump allegedly concealing “hush money” payments in an illegal manner, has ruled that Trump violated terms of his gag order and fined him thousands of dollars for doing so. Within his order, Merchan ruled that Trump was in contempt of court for issuing nine statements, on his social media site Truth…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • By Rashika Kumar in Suva

    Suva lawyer Richard Naidu is a free man after the Suva High Court ruled this week that no conviction be recorded against him.

    High Court judge Justice Daniel Goundar ruled on Tuesday that the charge of contempt scandalising the court against Naidu be dismissed.

    He said summons to set aside the judgment that had found Naidu guilty in November last year was by consent and was dismissed as he did not have jurisdiction.

    Justice Gounder ordered the parties to bear their own costs.

    While delivering his judgment, Justice Gounder said while mitigation and sentencing were pending, a new government had come into power and a new Attorney-General had been appointed.

    He said that after the change of government [FijiFirst lost the general election last December], Justice Jude Nanayakkara, who had been previously presiding over the case, had resigned as a Fiji judge and left the jurisdiction without concluding proceedings.

    Justice Gounder said the new Attorney-General, Siromi Turaga had taken a different position regarding the proceedings, which he had expressed in an affidavit filed in support of the summons to dismiss the proceedings.

    Ruling set aside
    Turaga stated that his view was that the proceedings should never have been instituted against Naidu in the first place.

    In the affidavit, Turaga said he had conveyed to Naidu that his view was that the ruling of 22 November 2022 ought to be set aside and the proceedings dismissed.

    He added that Naidu had confirmed he would not seek to recover any costs he had incurred in defending the proceedings.

    Justice Gounder said the Attorney-General played an important function as the guardian of public interest in contempt proceedings which alleged conduct scandalising the court.


    Lawyer Richard Naidu’s conviction ruled not to be recorded and the charge of contempt dismissed. Video: Fijivillage.com

    He said the position of the Attorney-General had shifted and he was not seeking an order of committal against Naidu.

    The judge said Turaga dkid not support the findings that Naidu was guilty of contempt scandalising the court.

    He said it had not been suggested that the present Attorney-General was acting unfairly as the representative of public interest in consenting to an order setting aside the judgement.

    Facebook posting
    Naidu was found guilty in November last year by High Court judge Justice Jude Nanayakkara for contempt scandalising the court.

    Naidu posted on his Facebook page a picture of a judgment in a case represented by his associate that had the word “injunction” misspelt [as “injection”], and then made some comments that he was pretty sure the applicant wanted an injunction.

    The committal proceeding was brought against Naidu by the then Attorney-General, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum.

    Naidu was represented by Jon Apted while Feizal Haniff represented the Attorney-General.

    Rashika Kumar is a Fijivillage reporter. Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • By Repeka Nasiko in Suva

    The Fiji Attorney-General’s office has terminated the instructions of lawyers Devanesh Sharma and Gul Fatima in the contempt of court case involving Suva lawyer Richard Naidu.

    Mary Motafaga, a lawyer in the Attorney-General’s office, confirmed to Justice Daniel Goundar when the matter was called in the High Court yesterday, that the law firm of R Patel & Co was no longer retained.

    Justice Goundar told Motafaga and Naidu’s counsel, Jon Apted, that he had called the matter before him to ensure that the parties were aware of the resignation of the previous judge in the case, Justice Jude Nanayakkara.

    Naidu was alleged to have scandalised the court in a Facebook post sharing an excerpt of a judgment which showed the word “injunction” misspelled as “injection” and suggesting that “maybe our judges need to be protected from all this vaccination campaigning”.

    On November 22, 2023, Justice Nanayakkara found Naidu guilty of contempt of court and convicted him of scandalising the court.

    Justice Goundar said that Acting Chief Justice Salesi Temo had now allocated the case to him.

    “I understand that we are now at the sentencing stage of the proceedings,” he said.

    Justice Goundar said he wished the parties to note that he had no personal interest in the case or any relationship with any of the parties to it.

    “We are at the sentencing stage and I would like to hear the parties on where we go from now regarding this matter.”

    Motofaga confirmed to the court that the A-G’s office had taken over the matter but had not yet received the files on the case, so was requesting a three-week adjournment.

    Justice Goundar adjourned the case to April 3, 2023, for mention “to check the position of the Office of the A-G in relation to this matter”.

    Repeka Nasiko is a Fiji Times reporter. Republished with permission.

  • By Ian Chute in Suva

    Fiji lawyer Jon Apted was yesterday accused of contempt of court for comments made in court two weeks ago while defending his client, lawyer Richard Naidu.

    Gul Fatima, the lawyer for Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, told the High Court yesterday that Apted had said that if evidence could not be challenged in court proceedings, “that would be a kangaroo court”.

    She claimed that Apted’s comments were “contempt in the face of the court”.

    “What this means is that there was an officer of the court present in court on October 14, who made a statement to mean, that if this honourable court were to decline orders being sought, this honourable court would be a kangaroo court,” she said.

    “Invariably kangaroo courts are not run by presiding judicial officers, with respect, they would be run by kangaroos.

    “So the ordinary Fijian reading this article receiving the news in respect of this decision would hold a certain view about this court.”

    Fatima asked whether Justice Jude Nanayakkara wanted to launch committal proceedings under Order 52 of the High Court rules of his own motion or refer Apted to any other body.

    Application refused
    She said the A-G had the right to consider issuing proceedings against Apted in respect of his comment.

    Justice Nanayakkara said a matter of contempt in the face of court should go before another judge and that Fatima could inform the court registry.

    Justice Nanayakkara yesterday refused Naidu’s application to cross-examine Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum at the hearing of his contempt of court case, scheduled for next month.

    He said that Naidu was given full opportunity to defend the alleged contempt or to respond to the alleged contempt by filing an affidavit in reply, denying the allegation or providing some explanation.

    “At the hearing of the application if he expresses a wish to give oral evidence on his behalf, he shall be entitled to do so,” he said.

    “The court had adopted a sound and pragmatic approach which balances the rights of both the applicant and the respondent.”

    Justice Nanayakkara said the cross-examination could be largely directed to a collateral purpose and would, therefore, operate unfairly against the A-G.

    He said a “clear line” needed to be drawn between acceptable criticism of the judiciary and statements that are downright harmful to the public interest by undermining or ridiculing the legitimacy of the judicial process.

    Ian Chute is a journalist with The Fiji Times. Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • COMMENTARY: By Wadan Narsey

    There is a shameful public tragedy unfolding day by day as the Bainimarama government tries to stop a potential political candidate, lawyer and former journalist Richard Naidu, from getting into Parliament by trying to “criminalise” him over a trivial social media post.

    Richard Naidu is one of Fiji’s leading lawyers, for decades a fighter for democracy and rule of law, with a deep social conscience that drove him to frequently write articles in the media to enlighten Fiji on relevant issues of vital interest.

    Naidu’s alleged crime: a trivial post on his personal Twitter account that a legal judgment probably intended to say “injunction” rather than “injection” — an error that may have even been a typist’s error which the learned judge failed to pick up (as we all all do now and then).

    No big deal any sensible person or judge would have thought, or even slightly funny.

    But the malevolent forces running the Bainimarama government, suddenly pounced on Richard Naidu five months after that social media post, for allegedly “scandalising the judiciary”.

    The media speculation was that Naidu became a target when there were public indications that he might be a candidate for the opposition National Federation Party (NFP), and if elected would have made an excellent Attorney-General.

    But if he is convicted of this alleged “crime”, Richard Naidu would not be allowed to be a candidate in the 2022 elections, he might face a jail term and be deprived of legal practice. One can only imagine the dreadful trauma for his wife and family — all for a trivial throwaway line on Twitter, by a witty lawyer.

    The tragedy is not that the Attorney-General and Minister of All Things (Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum) is driving this legal persecution — which he is — just as he has been the driver of the Bainimarama government for more than 14 years.

    The real tragedy is the utter silence of the many bright people, once upon a time pro-democracy fighters with me, who have helped to bring Bainimarama to power and strengthened his government’s credibility nationally and internationally over the last 16 years.

    The unfolding tragedy is far more painful for me personally as most of these silent warriors for Bainimarama and Sayed-Khaiyum, were friends with whom I closely interacted more than a decade ago.

    Richard Naidu in "good governance"
    A recent Fiji Times article on “good governance” by Richard Naidu … enlightening Fiji on relevant issues of vital interest. Image: The Fiji Times screenshot APR

    The shameful silences
    At the head of the list of course has to be Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum himself, who shared a cell with me for our 1988 Sukuna Park protest against the Rabuka coup. My wife and I attended his first wedding function.

    Then there is Riyaz Sayed-Khaiyum who was a good journalist friend who used to invite me to his family home for Eid. Riyaz has been driving the vicious Fiji Broadcasting Corporation (FBC) media campaign to tarnish Richard Naidu. Aiyaz and Riyaz are sons of Khaiyum Sr who welcomed me into the NFP parliamentary team in 1996.

    Wadan Narsey elected MP in 1996
    Wadan Narsey (second from left) being welcomed by friends after being elected National Federation Party’s MP for Suva Central Indian in 1996. (Syed Abdul Khaiyum is on the right). Image: Narsey On Fiji

    Then there are Nazhat Shameem and Shaista Shameem who were part of the Shameem family who used to welcome me and my wife to their mother’s home in Samabula.

    As a bright High Court judge, Nazhat took to the slippery slope when she irregularly chaired a committee that replaced Chief Justice Danial Fateaki with Tony Gates.

    We all remember that Gates tried to justify the 2006 coup alongside fellow High Court judges Davendra Pathik and John Byrnes, but failed when the 2009 Court of Appeal overturned their judgment.

    Nazhat Shameem is now a high flying international bureaucrat, President of the International Human Rights Council. But she has been totally silent on the abuse of human rights going on in Fiji, and currently to the mistreatment of her old legal colleague Richard Naidu.

    Shaista Shameem, a friend for decades until she justified the 2006 coup as a Fiji Human Rights Commissioner assisted by once radical unionist James Anthony. Despite that, I went to months of trouble to help her in making the legal case for pensioner (the late) David Burness against the Bainimarama government’s illegal reduction of his pension.

    Shaista Shameem is now professor of law and vice-chancellor at the University of Fiji. She is totally silent on the abuse of human rights in Fiji and that of Richard Naidu who is also a lawyer like her.

    Shaista has even appointed as professor of law Brigadier Aziz who saw at close quarters through his membership of the Evans Board of Inquiry into the 2000 coup and mutiny, the erosion of human right to life in the Republic of Fiji Military Force (RFMF).

    There is Dr Satyendra Prasad, a former USP colleague who was part of our group (including the Citizens Constitutional Forum) that battled for democracy and racial equality after the 1987 Rabuka coup. Dr Prasad has astonishingly resurfaced politically serving the Bainimarama cause in New York and Washington.

    Then there is Ashwin Raj (head of the Fiji Human Rights and Anti-Discrimination Commission) who once upon a time was helped by Professor Biman Prasad and me to get a substantive post at USP.

    He has faithfully served the Bainimarama regime for years (including the vicious persecution of the late Ratu Timoci Vesikula for an alleged racist remark), but Raj could never be accused of defending the many persons in Fiji whose basic human rights have been attacked by the Bainimarama regime itself.

    Ashwin Raj is silent on this current attack on the basic human right of a Fiji citizen to point out on social media, a possible spelling mistake in a legal judgment.

    There is the shadowy RFMF Military Council which is the real power behind Voreqe Bainimarama, that Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum has silently used. I have little doubt that many of these officers were in the post-2000 classes I taught at the RFMF Officer Training courses in Vatuwaqa.

    They would also have been in the early 2006 pre-election workshops at the RFMF camp in Nabua, attended by the top 400 RFMF officers, including Commander Voreqe Bainimarama who today is allegedly powerless to control his rampaging deputy.

    Wadan Narsey with Voreqe Bainimarama
    Wadan Narsey (right) with the late former NZ High Commissioner Michael Green (left), Police Commissioner Andrew Hughes and Commodore Voreqe Bainimarama – well before the 2006 Fiji coup. Image: Narsey On Fiji

    Then there is also Brigadier General Ioane Naivalarua who, as Commissioner of Police in 2010, invited me to give a two hour workshop to his top police officers on how to tackle escalating crime in Fiji and the costs to the police of the coups.

    It would seem that all my detailed explanations to the RFMF and police hierarchy of the terrible economic costs of the coups — and to them — clearly fell on deaf ears.

    Wadan Narsey lecturing to the Fiji troops
    Wadan Narsey lecturing to Fiji troops and Police Commissioner Brigadier Ioane Navalarua. Image: Narsey On Fiji

    Then there are the corporate giants of Fiji who have been financially backing the Bainimarama government’s FijiFirst Party for years. The donors’ lists released by the Supervisor of Elections through the Fiji Sun two years ago, showed conclusively that hundreds of thousands of dollars were donated over the period 2014 to 2018 by the owners, their wives, daughters, mothers and even employees of Tappoos, Vinod Patels, Punjas, RC Manubhais, CJ Patels, the Wella Pillays etc through the strong-arm fundraising by Sanjay Kaba and other collectors.

    These corporate giants, while occupying key positions on pubic enterprise boards in Fiji as never before, have never spoken out on their social responsibilities in Fiji such as the protection of human rights.

    Yet Richard Naidu is a principal lawyer of a top law firm in Fiji, Munro Leys, with a well-earned reputation for protecting lawful corporate rights in Fiji — including theirs.

    The silent Pontius Pilates
    Like modern day Pontius Pilates, the above silent protagonists for Bainimarama and Khaiyum seen to have washed their hands of the basic human rights of Fiji citizens which are being battered left right and centre by the Bainimarama government that they helped to install.

    As if all that matters to them are their profits and their personal careers and interests.

    But Fiji will not forget them and their complicit silences, nor their shared responsibility in the abuses of human rights taking place in Fiji.

    Sadly, Fiji people have not spoken out and taken to the streets when so many individuals have been unjustly persecuted after the 2006 military coup, like Russel Hunter, Hank Arts, Fred Wesley, Netani Rika, Anish Chand, Mereana Kitione, Kemueli Naiqama, Professor Pal Ahluwalia and so many others.

    Many, like Professor Biman Prasad and other critical opposition MPs face daily attacks by the FBC and Fiji Sun for their efforts to hold the Bainimarama government to account.

    And now they are after decent law-abiding lawyer Richard Naidu, all because he put up his hand to serve Fiji in Parliament at great financial cost to himself.

    As I have done before, I remind Fiji readers of the wonderful lines attributed to Lutheran Pastor Martin Niemöller who was originally anti-Communist, an early supporter of Hitler, and even thought by some to have had anti-Semitic views:

    First they came for the Socialists, and I did not speak out – because I was not a Socialist.

    Then they came for the Trade Unionists, and I did not speak out — because I was not a Trade Unionist.

    Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out — because I was not a Jew.

    Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.

    Pastor Niemöller, like Archbshop Chong (head of the Catholic Church in Fiji) currently, frequently spoke on the dangers to decent society of the apathy of the general public.

    I would urge the governments of Australia, NZ, US and Canada to keep a close watch on the progress of this legal case by the Bainimarama government and also of the names of the silent collaborators, who will one day no doubt want to settle in decent countries with respect for the rule of law, which they have helped to destroy in Fiji.

    Dr Wadan Narsey is a former professor of economics at The University of the South Pacific and a leading Fiji economist and statistician. This article is republished from the author’s blog Narsey On Fiji with his permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • New York, February 9, 2022 — In response to news reports that a Ghana court on Tuesday convicted and sentenced Oheneba Boamah Bennie, a host and commentator with privately owned Power FM, to two weeks in prison and fined him 3,000 Ghana cedis (US$468) for contempt of court, the Committee to Protect Journalists issued the following statement condemning the verdict:

    “It is alarming that journalist Oheneba Boamah Bennie has been jailed in Ghana, especially considering reports that he is in poor health,” said Angela Quintal, CPJ Africa program coordinator. “Journalists should not be jailed in connection with their reporting or commentary about public figures, whom one would hope would have a thicker skin when it comes to criticism.”

    Bennie was charged with contempt of court in connection with a video posted on his personal Facebook page in late 2020 in which the journalist alleged that Ghanaian President Nana Akufo-Ado had conspired with judges to influence the 2020 presidential elections. Bennie was detained for two days in December 2020 and placed under investigation over the same video, as CPJ documented at the time.

    Bennie asked if his prison term could be substituted for an additional fine because he was in poor health, but the judge declined, Eric Ahianyo, deputy chief executive officer in charge of XYZ Broadcasting, which owns Power FM, told CPJ by phone.


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • PNG Post-Courier

    A Supreme Court ordered mass eviction of settlers on land between Papua New Guinea’s University of PNG, Gerehu Stage 3B and Morata stage one in the National Capital District has been stopped at the 11th hour by Chief of Police Operations and Deputy Police Commissioner Operations Anton Billie.

    Deputy Commissioner Billie’s orders to stop this mass eviction have put him in a collision course with two separate orders of country’s highest court — SCA 19 of 2018 and SCA 77 of 2015 — unless he reviews and rescinds his orders within 72 hours.

    Lawyers representing the land developers have threatened the police with a contempt lawsuit.

    Deputy Commissioner Billie ordered a freeze on the mass eviction citing concerns that the court order was not clear and that the legal ramifications of police involvement were not properly clarified in such a large scale operation involving many families.

    In a minute sent to NCD Central Commander, Deputy Commissioner Billie said: “After having been briefed on the matter involving the occupants of the portion of land, NCDC, Sixth Estate Limited and Lands and Physical Planning Department, I believe it is a very complex issue as it is.

    “If a request with clear court orders have been presented for police assistance, then we have to engage our Legal Directorate to clarify our legal standing in the matter first before engaging our men.

    “There is no real need for impetuosity.”

    Land dispute settled in 2016
    But the registered proprietor of the land — as determined and settled by a three-man Supreme Court bench in 2016 — the Sixth Estate Limited, through its chairman and chief executive officer Philip Mark Paguk, said the Deputy Commissioner may not have been privy to the history of the issue.

    In a detailed, five-page letter, including attachments, lawyers of Sixth Estate Limited, Kandawalyn Lawyers, explained the background to all the court proceedings from the district, national and Supreme Court and two police operational orders for the eviction exercise.

    The law firm urged the Deputy Commissioner to revoke his earlier orders within 72 hours or contempt proceedings in the Supreme Court would be filed against him and others who were hindering the mass eviction.

    “There is no stay order of the Supreme Court Decision in Otto and Others vs Sixth Estate Limited and Others; SCANO. 19 of 2018 and SCA. NO.77 of 2015, hence the runway is clear for the proposed eviction to progress in compliance with the Supreme Court Order,” the lawyers advised.

    The letter went on further and stated that: “As far as we are concerned, there is no court order in place stopping/hindering/restraining the pro-posed eviction exercise.

    “There is a Supreme Court order in place as mentioned in our letter for police assistance, and that paves the way for the eviction to commence with the assistance of police.”

    CEO Paguk said that while he appreciated the concerns raised by Deputy Commissioner Billie in his minute freezing the eviction exercise, his company had spent millions of kina in mobilisation for this eviction after almost 10 years of court battles.

    Republished with permission.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Washington, D.C., January 5, 2022 – The Committee to Protect Journalists today expressed grave concern over the Islamabad High Court’s decision to indict Pakistani journalists Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman, Aamir Ghauri, and Ansar Abbasi, calling it a dangerous attack on press freedom and freedom of expression.

    On December 28, 2021, the Islamabad High Court decided to indict Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman, owner and editor-in-chief of the Jang Media Group–which owns the English-language newspaper The News International; Aamir Ghauri, editor of The News International; and Ansar Abbasi, investigations editor of The News International, for criminal contempt of court in relation to a November 15 investigative report by Abbasi, according to The News International, news reports, a statement by the Pakistan Press Foundation, and Abbasi, who spoke to CPJ in a phone interview. The report included the content of a notarized affidavit accusing the former chief justice of Pakistan of judicial interference in a corruption case involving former Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif and his daughter, Maryam Nawaz, according to those sources.

    The court appointed Attorney General Khalid Javed Khan as the prosecutor in the case to pursue charges and set an indictment date of January 7, when the court is scheduled to frame, or precisely inform, the nature of the contempt charges against the three journalists, according to those sources.

    “The Islamabad High Court’s decision to indict journalists Mir Shakil-ur-Rahman, Aamir Ghauri, and Ansar Abbasi is a disturbing act of retaliation for reporting a matter of public interest,” said Steven Butler, CPJ’s Asia program coordinator. “The decision creates a dangerous judicial precedent that could lead to further retaliation against journalists who are simply doing their jobs.”

    On the same day that The News International published Abbasi’s investigative report, the Islamabad High Court initiated contempt of court proceedings under the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003, by issuing notices to the three journalists to appear before the court the next day in relation to the report, according to Dawn.

    On December 28, Islamabad High Court Chief Justice Athar Minallah issued an order stating that the journalists had committed criminal contempt of court because the affidavit was not part of any court proceedings, and that freedom of expression protections did not apply to cases pending in courts, according to The News International.

    If convicted of criminal contempt of court, the three journalists could face up to six months of imprisonment and a fine of 100,000 rupees (US$566), according to the Contempt of Court Ordinance, 2003.

    On January 1, Abbasi filed an application before the Islamabad High Court seeking the modification of Chief Justice Minallah’s December 28 order, claiming that it falsely stated that Abbasi said that he would publish untrue facts intended to influence the outcome of pending judicial proceedings if it was in the public interest, according to The News International and Dawn.

    The application also stated that Abbasi had verified the existence and authenticity of the affidavit prior to his investigative report’s publication, but not the allegations made in the affidavit, according to those reports.

    CPJ called and emailed the Islamabad High Court and called and messaged Attorney General Khalid Javed Khan for comment but did not receive a reply.

    Rehman was detained from March 12, 2020, to November 9, 2020, on allegations that he illegally leased land in 1986, according to CPJ documentation and news reports.


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • RNZ Pacific

    Samoa’s HRPP party — the country’s caretaker government — has now lost six seats since the April 9 general election, with eight byelections to come.

    The incoming FAST Party government holds 26 seats to the HRPP’s 19.

    FAST, which won the election but has been stymied in its efforts to assume power by the HRPP, continues to hold a majority of the 51 seats in the Parliament.

    The caretaker government has lost six seats during the electoral petitions while a further two are to be contested again at the agreement of candidates.

    Today, as the electoral petitions continue to come before the court, three HRPP candidates who had won their seats, agreed to resign, ahead of facing the judge, and so force byelections.

    The HRPP’s Tuila’epa Sa’ilele Malielegaoi has been pushing for a new general election to solve the political impasse since he first prompted the crisis by refusing to step down.

    Meanwhile, a Supreme Court hearing set to determine if Tuila’epa will face criminal contempt proceedings has been delayed.

    Tuilaepa, the attorney-general, Parliament’s former speaker and its clerk were to appear for preventing Parliament from convening on May 24 as the court ordered.

    The court is to probe the roles played by the four in defying the May 23 order that the 17th Parliament convene the next day and members be sworn in.

    The contempt citation was brought by FAST, but its lawyers today sought a delay in proceedings.

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.

  • Asia Pacific Report newsdesk

    In the latest twist in Samoa’s political rollercoaster, the FAST party has accused the rival HRPP leader of contempt of court, reports Pacific Media Network News.

    Tuila’epa Dr Sa’ilele Malielegaoi has been accused of ignoring a Supreme Court ruling to convene Parliament, when FAST should have been sworn in as government.

    Also accused alongside Tuila’epa is the Speaker of Parliament, the Clerk of the Legislative Assembly and the Attorney-General.

    The motion was filed by Prime Minister-elect Fiame Naomi Mata’afa, leader of the FAST party, who has also accused Tuila’epa of undermining the judiciary through disparaging comments.


    Fiame Naomi Mata’afa speaking on 531pi’s Pacific Days. Video: PMN News

    Speaking on 531pi’s Pacific Days, Fiame claimed her opposite number was still refusing to accept his defeat in the April 9 general election.

    Negotiations between Fiame Naomi Mata’afa and Tuilaepa Sailele Malielegaoi broke down earlier this week after they disagreed on a transition to a new government

    Fiame claims there was nothing out of the ordinary regarding her request.

    Transition to new government
    “We were looking for a discussion to transition to a new government and then moving out.

    “It’s not as though he [Tuila’epa] should be surprised. I think the man is in serious denial, as though it’s very unusual for a party that has won the election to say, ‘Listen mate, these are the results and you should be moving out and let’s have a discussion about that’.”

    Fiame doubts there will be further negotiations given the stance taken by herself and her opposite, Tuila’epa.

    “Well, you never say no to a negotiation if there’s some rational outcome to be gained from it, but from the positions that we’ve taken and especially the interpretations of the appeal court’s decision, I don’t see it.”

    Fiame told Pacific Days that she found it an irony about what was being discussed between the two political party leaders.

    “This whole impasse is centered around representation for women, so as a woman, I’m quite fascinated,” she said.

    “I’m always pleased if there’s an increase of women in Parliament, but people need to understand that this is a particular provision within the law and there are issues around it.”

    Prepared for court rulings
    The FAST party leader said she was prepared to go through the formal process of the court ruling on election petitions in order to come to a resolution.

    “He’s [Tuila’epa] wanting to delay the process of government, of Parliament meeting and for us to move in and he was saying to us, it was in our interest to cut short this process and do what he was offering of 26 members each going into the House,” Fiame says.

    “So I said to him, ‘Listen, however long it takes, you can be sure that we will be pursuing that and through the law’.”

    When asked whether the FAST party would be willing to go through a second election, Fiame replied: “Why would we? We won the election. We’re not silly.”

    This post was originally published on Asia Pacific Report.