Ralulu claims 999-year lease was illegally enacted

Listen to this article:

Chairman of the mataqali Tilavasewa Tevita Ralulu. Picture: REPEKA NASIKO

A FORMER senior police officer Tevita Ralulu claims the Toko 999-year lease was a deliberate act to deprive the ownership of the landowners.

The dispute revolves around claims that the original lease of 99 years was altered to 999 years because of a typewriter mistake.

Speaking on behalf of the Tilivasewa landowning unit, Mr Ralulu said the 999-year lease was illegal and brought by the British using an agricultural lease.

The iTaukei Land Trust Board said in a public notice last month, it was exercising its powers in surrendering the said lease on an area of 701 acres and owned by the mataqali Navusabalavu and Tilivasewa, which was initially leased to Eva Annie Easton and Harold James Thomas by the then Commissioner of Lands following an Order-in-Council.

“The lessees partially surrendered two lots from the lease (5acres 24perches) on 31 July, 1937 and subdivided the balance area between 29 August, 1941 and 27 October ,1944 (26 subleases).

“Upon their demise, the head-lease was transferred to the board on 12 May, 1970,” said the TLTB.

Mr Ralulu said this was not a mistake but a deliberate act.

The chairman of the mataqali Tilivasewa and Navusabalavu claims there was illegal land being sold during the colonial days which was not reviewed by the TLTB.

“They were in the process of doing freehold when it was detected by the former Governor of Fiji, Sir Arthur Gordon. They had to call him back, he was the adviser to the Queen for Pacific affairs.

“So, they had to stop the sale of land, but he kept doing it. So, instead of doing freehold they inserted this 999-year lease.

“But it does not go together with the way it was enacted, and it became an agricultural lease which was wrong.”

He said the 999-year lease was enacted by British law for public purposes.

“Arthur Gordon was a person who was delegated to look at the affairs of land in the South Pacific.

“He was in the House of Lords and this law when this 999-year lease was brought in. It was illegally applied on that ground.

“Why I say it was illegal is because this 999-year land lease was enacted by British law for public purposes like a church or a park where they have public gatherings.

“And this is when then brought this law or applied it here.

“They used it when they knew it was wrong. They used it as agriculture law or agriculture lease.”