The Yash Ghai Draft Constitution was flawed

yashThe Yash Ghai Draft Constitution was flawed, and so is the Attorney Generals Draft Constitution.

The Yash Ghai draft was to have been submitted to a Constituent Assembly who could have corrected the anomalies and made recommendations to government. 

The administration did not accept this procedure; they then chose to draw up a constitution that in the event it is altered must have the approval of 75% of the electorate.

Surely it follows that the Attorney Generals initial draft should have the support of 75% of the electorate before becoming the established Constitution of the Nation.

Give the public a choice, very simple, ask the electorate which one they prefer. Whichever one gets at  least 51% of the vote then goes before a Constituent Assembly. Take another 6 months… Get it right 

The truth is the Attorney Generals draft is being rammed down the throats of the people of Fiji, who are being advised they can make written submissions, but no one has said who will review those submissions, and whether or not they will be catalogued or considered.

A very shaky start, for a new constitution that we should all be able to build a secure future on.

Robbie Burns to the Rescue

Only general prayers allowed at goverment functions when Fiji becomes secular state.
When asked on how the government departments will handle prayers at functions when the constitution is adopted, Acting Prime Minister and Attorney General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum said a prayer can be said that is acceptable to all.

BurnsRobbie Burns Selkirk Grace can now be used by all.

Scots:
Some hae meat and canna eat,
And some would eat that want it;
But we hae meat, and we can eat,

Sae let the Lord be thankit.

Fijian:
E so e tu vei ira na leweni manumanu qai sega ni rawa ni kania
E so e rawa ni kania, na ka era vinakata
Ia, e tu vei ira na leweni manumanu qai sega ni rawa ni kania
Me da vaka vinavinaka ga vua na Kalou.

Hindi:
कुछ hae मांस और भंग खाते हैं,
   और कुछ यह चाहते हैं कि खाना होगा;
लेकिन, हम मांस hae, और हम खा सकते हैं
   Sae प्रभु thankit हो.

Chinese:
一些肉HAE和美人蕉吃的,
  有些人会吃的希望;
不过,我们虽生的肉,我们可以吃,
  SAE让主thankit。

Arabic:

بعض اللحوم هاي والقنا أكل،
   وسوف تأكل بعض الذين يريدون ذلك؛
لكننا هاي اللحوم، ونحن يمكن أن تأكل،
   اسمحوا SAE الرب يكون thankit.

English:
Some have meat and cannot eat,
Some have none and want it,
We have meat and we can eat.
So let the Lord be thanked for it.

Justice Delayed is Justice Denied

ASK 3Concerns have been raised again in the Cuvu draft constitution session by a Fiji National Provident Fund pensioner why their pension rates have been cut as part of the FNPF reform.

The Cuvu resident asked Attorney General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum why this is being done to the retired persons.

Sayed-Khaiyum said in the late 1980s and 1990s, experts recommended to review FNPF pension rates which was as high as 25 percent. 

However, nothing was done.

The Attorney General said the review of the pension rates was absolutely necessary.

He had earlier stressed that the FNPF decree cannot be challenged in court however the next parliament can decide to amend or repeal the decree if they do not agree with the reform.

He said that decision will depend on the next parliament.

JUSTICE DELAYED IS JUSTICE DENIED.

Sayed-Khaiyum SHOULD BE REPLACED AS MINISTER FOR JUSTICE AND NEVER PERMITTED TO HOLD THE POSITION AGAIN

PENSIONERS SHOULD NOT VOTE FOR THIS MAN IN THE 2014 ELECTION, THEY SHOULD ALSO THINK TWICE BEFORE VOTING FOR ANY PARTY THAT SUPPORTS HIM

Still Cannot Trust Them

fnpfIs it any wonder that many of the innocent and anguished pensioners, who are being so ruthlessly selected for a reduction in income by the Fiji National Provident Fund, no longer trust the Fund?  They have lost confidence and trust in the FNPF Board chair, Ajith Kodagoda, and his fellow trustees Tom Rickets, Sashi Singh, Taito Waqa and Tevita Kuruvakadua.

These five must bear the very heavy burden of responsibility for the injustice the FNPF is now imposing on many of its middle and working class members.

The FNPF representative who has attracted most of the anger and despair of the pensioners is chief executive Aisake Taito. 

Mr Taito, as the public face and voice of the FNPF, is a catastrophe. His performances at meetings with the FNPF victims were marked by obvious impatience, evasions and arrogance. He contemptuously dismissed or ignored difficult questions and had the hide to remind frightened pensioners that they should not be “personal” about the FNPF’s plans.

Personal?  For God’s sake, of course it’s personal when your very own pension fund, that had promised your pension rate was for life, is getting ready to shaft you.  The shafting process goes right to the core of an elderly person’s life. In their autumn years their retirement plans, founded on their FNPF irrevocable pensions, are thrown into upheaval.

They face an immediate drop in their standard of living; it is harder for them to put food on the table, pay the bills, meet their medical expenses and their family responsibilities.  Those who have obligations to banks and other financial institutions based on their fixed and legally binding lifetime pensions, have been betrayed in a most cruel way.

When a despairing casualty told Mr Taito that he might now lose his home and that the Fund was “ruining our lives” the FNPF CEO appeared unmoved and unimpressed.  He showed not a shred of compassion. The complainant was merely told not to make the issue personal. Those in the audience heard this with disbelief. What sort of man was this?
 

When Mr Taito indicated in a media interview that the FNPF is enforcing its pension cuts from a position of strength, he completed the transformation of the Fund into a callous and pitiless bully.

To the hapless victims the message is clear: ‘We are strong, you are weak. So we will do what we like because we can.’

This FNPF strength Mr Taito refers to must also mean that the fund is quite capable of honouring its contracts with its members if it so wishes.

But it does not wish to. The FNPF was always going to slash the payments of those it had in its sights. Put another way it was ready and willing to default on its obligations. For make no mistake, what we are witnessing here is a default. The FNPF is brazenly failing to meet a financial obligation. No shame, no regrets and hang the consequences.

It has obligations to the pensioners who entered into irrevocable contracts with it. Those contracts could not be changed.  Even the FNPF has said this. In a statement earlier this year it emphasised that pensions were paid out monthly for as long as a member lived.

It is instructive and enlightening that, when pension rates were changed previously, current contracts were honoured.

Messrs Kodagoda, Rickets, Singh, Waqa and Kuruvakadua should reflect deeply on this. So should Mr Taito. They should not just reflect. They should examine their consciences.

Mr James Raman, a reputable citizen and former FNPF trustee, states emphatically that during his time the Board made sure that whatever decisions were taken were in compliance with trustee obligations and in accordance with the laws.

He adds: “Furthermore, the question of annuity paid to existing pensioners did not arise as it was a non-issue since pensions were paid under a legally binding contract entered (into) between the FNPF and the pensioner. To do otherwise would have been illegal. The present board should take note of this.”

Messrs Kodagoda, Rickets, Singh, Waqa, Kuruvakadua and Taito have gone into a state of deep and deadly denial on this issue of contracts. It is deadly because of the harm it is doing to their pensioners.

Mr Taito, meanwhile, is asserting that the FNPF is acting within the law because the Solicitor General says so! The CEO appears to be refuting the existence of contracts.

But he has been unable to explain why Shauna Tomkins and Stephen Mason of the Promontory Financial Group, consultants to the fund, acknowledged the FNPF did have contracts with its pensioners. Mr Mason in particular should know about this. He was a special counsel with a major Australian law firm, a member of the Australian Law Reform Commission, and had worked as a parliamentary counsel.

In a report, Promontory makes at least five references to contracts FNPF has with pensioners. It talks of contract law and contracted rate – meaning the rate at which a pension is contracted. Promontory said there would be difficulty under contract law in adjusting current pensions and it assumed they would not be changed. It says sufficient funds should be set aside to ensure future payments at the “contracted rate” were met. Promontory found little support for withdrawing existing pensions, “capping” them or resetting them.

So the FNPF board now has an unavoidable duty to explain why it tossed aside this expert advice from its own consultants.

The answer must surely be that it was dead set on trashing its pensioner contracts come what may. But we need to know why it was so fixated on doing this? From where did this obsession come?

The FNPF has now decided on its unjust and cruel course of action.

 But many questions and issues remain. They will not go away now, or in the future.  They will haunt the Fund and the current trustees.

 If the FNPF is so certain that it does not have contractual obligations, why is it afraid to confront that question in court?  Why is it a party to an iniquitous decree that robs its own members of a fundamental legal right?   When Mr Taito speaks of acting from a position of strength, is he referring to the savage force of the decree?

Are the FNPF trustees prepared to go down in history as the perpetrators of the Great Contract Smashing? Are they ready to take responsibility for making Fiji into a land of broken contracts?

They know very well that observance of the law of contracts is vital for creating and maintaining commercial, investment and community confidence. The businessmen among them have an especially keen understanding of this.

 If the law governing contracts is broken, an economy is damaged and investors shy away. Without investment an economy cannot produce enough jobs.

If the FNPF – Fiji’s largest financial institution – has dumped contracts once, what is there to stop it doing so again?  Why should members ever trust the FNPF?

Messrs Kodagoda, Rickets, Singh, Waqa, Kuruvakadua and Taito: Hear this. Our struggle continues against all your power and strength. It will end when we have the justice to which we are entitled.

What Justice for FNPF Pensioners ?

RickmanAttorney General & Minister for Justice

Hon: Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum

Fax 3310807

The Facts

1 The FNPF is currently withholding $154,440 net of interest, of my money. (saved over a period of 20+ years which should have accrued interest)

2 My current FNPF pension payment is $3.34 per month or $40.08 per annum

3. I would have to live in excess of another 3,600 years to exhaust my monies currently held by FNPF, since I am in my 79th year now, the odds of that seems rather short.

4. I have asked the FNPF to refund/return the money and have had no response.

5. You as the Attorney General and Minister for Justice introduced a decree that permitted FNPF to breach basic contractual laws. Notwithstanding that, at the time of your decree these monies were part of a contract that the FNPF had not fulfilled, hence they should be returned to me.

6. We requested you to investigate this matter, but at the time of writing we have had no response from you.

7. We again seek justice from you in your capacity as Minister for Justice, and suggest the following compromise.

These monies that were paid to the FNPF in order that my wife should receive a pension after my death, should now refunded in full and be put into a trust fund controlled by a bank (not the FNPF) to be paid to my wife upon my death. Taxes to be paid to the Government on any interest earned.

It would be a sad day for the people of Fiji, if you now applied all your legal skills to defraud my wife of a pension that has already been paid for.

I await your response

Sincerely

R T Rickman