On 23 September 2023, Parliament passed a motion moved by National Federation Party MP Sashi Kiran for the establishment of a Truth and Reconciliation Commission, with 28 votes “for” from the Government side, and very tellingly, 23 votes “against” from the Opposition members who were elected under the FijiFirst party led by Voreqe Bainimarama. Almost a year later, this motion has not been actioned by the Rabuka Government. Are the cynics correct in thinking “the powerful ones on both sides have too many skeletons in the cupboard”? But a repentant Josefa Nata, recently released after 23 painful years in prison for his role in the 2000 coup, has started the ball rolling by revealing to Island Business magazine (in April this year) that George Speight was “never the main player. He was ditched with the baby on his lap”. To put it bluntly, all the media and public references about the “civilian coup led by George Speight” have been grossly misleading. Which begs the question: who were the real leaders of the 2000 coup? While Josefa Nata probably knows who were the “main players”, he is not revealing any names. Nevertheless, there are three published sources which any honest Commission of Truth can and must closely examine, especially because they point the finger at the highest levels of the RFMF:
- the RFMF’s own Evans Board of Inquiry Report (EBOIR)
- the ANU PhD Thesis of Dr Lt. Col. Jone Baledrokadroka Sacred King and Warrior Chief: the Role of the Military in Fijian Politics (2012). As a senior RFMF officer observing the 2000 coup and mutiny which he helped to put down, his observations also reinforce the findings of the EBOIR once you have got past his academic language. Some bits also need to be read with caution given that Baledrokadroka was also a participant in the action he describes
- an extremely detailed paper on the events of 2000, by Mark Tedeschi QC in Australia Law Journal (2007) Criminal Law and Social Change in Fiji. Australian legal counsel Tedeschi had assisted the Fiji Director of Public Prosecution in the 2000 mutiny trials.
Also useful are the honest observations of some totally trustworthy senior RFMF officers like Col Ilaisa Kacisolomone (Chairman of the Court Martial of the CRW soldiers involved in the mutiny) and Lt Col Seruvakula’s evidence to the EBOI
The need for truth
Islands Business quoted Paulo Baleinakorodawa, a respected Fiji-based peacebuilding practitioner, who reminded Fiji that for there to be any genuine national healing process, “there must be full disclosure, including finding out who (were) behind the coups…. People have to tell the truth.” Paulo Baleinakorodawa who has worked extensively in the Pacific and Asia in conflict prevention and transformation, trauma healing, restorative justice and reconciliation acknowledged “We know a lot of worms are going to come out when the cans are opened” and that “the worms will need to be put back”. One truth for instance has been reported by Islands Business that after the mutiny was quelled, “the military tortured and killed four rebel soldiers”. To this day no one knows who exactly in the RFMF tortured and killed those five CRW soldiers taken from Nabua Police Station, and without any trial, judge or jury, and under whose orders. This was a fundamental abuse of the basic human right to life, that no constitution, and certainly not the 2013 Document, can give immunity for. Why is it not on the agenda of Fiji Law Society?
RFMF and the truth
Island Business also reported that the RFMF Commander announced that “the military will engage in a trauma healing program with the families of the three Counter Revolutionary Warfare (CRW) soldiers who were killed during a mutiny at the Queen Elizabeth Barracks in November 2000, months after the Speight takeover of Parliament ended. But why is the RFMF leadership today not talking about trauma counselling and healing programs for the families of these five CRW soldiers, one of whose sons recently called on the police to explain the death of his father? Indeed why has the RFMF not ever conducted or called for an independent inquiry into their blatant treasonous failures in the coups of 1987, 2000 and 2006? I suggest that to clarify the truth behind the 2000 coup and 2000 mutiny will also assist Fiji to clarify more of the truth behind the 1987 Rabuka coup (which some today will not want revealed) and also the Bainimarama 2006 coup (which some today will also not want revealed). Evans Board of Inquiry Report (EBOIR) The EBOIR has been publicly available on the blog TruthForFiji initiated by Ratu Tevita Mara who fell out with Bainimarama after the 2006 coup and escaped to Tonga while his colleague Pita Driti was imprisoned by Bainimarama. The EBOI Board comprised Lt. Col. JN Evans, Major Aziz Mohammed, Maj. T. Gucake, and WOI H Macomber. They were tasked with inquiring into the CRW Unit’s illegal takeover of Parliament on May 19, 2000 and the holding of hostages between May 19, 2000 and July 13, 2000. Wile the 30 questions which the Evans BOI were tasked to answer were extremely comprehensive, those which attempted to identify who were responsible for the 2000 coup were simply not answered at all, although it was clear that many of the witnesses knew the names of coup supporters and their powerful political and civilian collaborators. The EBOIR also makes clear that while the few senior officers of the RFMF who appeared before the Board were quite reluctant to reveal what they knew, their positions in the hierarchy would suggest that they would have known the answers to most if not all of the EBOIR questions. Lt Col. Baledrokadroka’s observations, analysis and conclusions cannot be ignored.
Baledrokadroka’s conclusions
Baledrokadroka’s PhD thesis (p. 143-4) points to all the evidence in the EBOIR on the utterly irregular support of senior RFMF officers in the 2000 coup:
- Major Ligairi was brought out of retirement three weeks before the coup. Ligairi led the CRW troops into Parliament.
- The RFMF supplied rations to the rebel First Meridian Squadron soldiers throughout their time in Parliament.
- The rebel soldiers continued to get paid throughout their time in parliament.
- A senior officer took leave forms for the rebel soldiers in Parliament to sign so they could be excused from normal duties
- The First Meridian Sqn continued to take arms out of the camp 36 hours after the coup.
- Two separate officers informed Bainimarama there was going to be a coup.
- President Ratu Mara had questioned Bainimarama whether it was wise to travel as there was a possibility of a coup.
- Several of the senior military officers were sympathetic to the George Speight cause.
- Bainimarama refused to appear before the Board of Inquiry.
Baledrokadroka concluded (p.185) that the EBOIR evidence showed: “the duplicity of intention and shirking of responsibility by Commodore Bainimarama… Bainimarama who led, or rather misled, the military into a political role in the 2000 crisis has a lot to answer for, given the findings of the Evans report…”.
The questions about Bainimarama
Readers can themselves ask (as would any genuine Truth Commission), would the following events ever happen in Australia against a lawfully elected Government? EBOIR (p. 16): Commodore Bainimarama was told by his RFMF intelligence officers six months before the May 19 coup that some senior RFMF officers were meeting with failed politicians from the Opposition parties (SVT and FAP) at the home of a high chief (named in the EBOIR). Why did Bainimarama not have them arrested by the police? While the RFMF Commander was allegedly told the exact date of the coup two weeks prior, why did he choose to go off to Norway and leave the handling of the calamitous coup to his subordinates? The EBOIR noted that the CRW weapons were stored in the Fijian Association Party Office and that a high chief was heard discussing matters with George Speight two weeks before. Why was this high chief not a “person of interest” to the police? The EBOIR (p.17) states “there are indications that certain RFMF officers knew of and had been approached to take part in the events of May 19 including the takeover of Parliament. Exhibit F is an intelligence report that indicates that Lt.Col Baledrokadroka was approached but the officer indicated that no such offer was made to him. Baledrokadroka left for the Sinai a week before the coup. So which senior army officers authorized the arms and ammunition and rations to keep going into the Parliament to the CRW soldiers holding hostages? Which senior RFMF officers authorised the continuation of the salaries of the CRW soldiers in Parliament? Why is it that after the CRW soldiers took hostages in Parliament, their leader Ligairi had gone to the RFMF HQ and told senior officers (named in the Report and including Col. Vatu) that he was going to support his “boys” in parliament and for them to make sure that the Police did not do anything, yet these officers let freely Ligairi go back to Parliament?
The EBOIR concluded (p.20) that the CRW Unit had the understanding that the “army was supporting the takeover” because of “logistics and administrative support that was provided to the Meridian Squadron personnel in Parliament by their fellow squad members at Queen Elizabeth Barracks. Another indication was the numerous visits of all ranks of the RFMF to the Parliamentary Complex. These visits were both official and casual and “it sent the wrong signals”. Was this the reason why the CRW Unit felt betrayed and some later did staged he mutiny against Bainimarama?
So who were the real coup leaders who failed to materialise, leaving George Speight to “hold the baby” as Jo Nata revealed?
Broader questions
Why did Commodore Bainimarama (and with several other senior former RFMF officers) ask his Commander in Chief and President (Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara) to “step aside”? Why did Commodore Bainimarama state on 1 July 2000 that Fijian interests and aspirations would be given priority in the appointment of the Interim Government (of Laisenia Qarase), one of whose first tasks would be a review of the Constitution? Why did Commodore Bainimarama claim in 2000 to have abrogated the Constitution and taken “Executive Authority”? Why did Bainimarama file an affidavit in the Chandrika Prasad case that he had abrogated the 1997 Constitution (only to be judged otherwise by Justice Anthony Gates)? Did Bainimarama attempt even in 2000 to become Prime Minister (but was stopped by some senior officers)? Why was the lawfully elected Chaudhry Government not returned to power following the ending of the hostage crisis by the RFMF?
The 2000 mutiny
Why has there never been a public inquiry into the 2000 mutiny, the most devastating internal event to occur in the history of the RFMF, which resulted in the deaths of three innocent soldiers during the attempt to kill Bainimarama? Those involved in the mutiny such as Ratu Inoke Takiveikata, Shane Stevens and the dozens of CRW soldiers, faced trials, were convicted and sentenced to long terms in prison. Not so have been shadowy figures behind the scenes. President of the Court Martial (Col. Ilaisa Kacisolomone) called for an investigation into “the disloyalty virus within the military which has the potential to become an epidemic”. While convicting some, he doubted “whether all the key players behind the mutiny have been or will fully be exposed.” Baledrokadroka states (p. 186): Sitiveni Rabuka was drawn into the military barracks that fateful afternoon (of the mutiny) by a phone call by mutiny leader Captain Shane Stevens.” Why did this former Commander of the RFMF go to the barracks at the height of the mutiny around 5 pm. with his Commander’s uniform when he had not been asked by Commander Bainimarama to mediate?
The CRW murders
Who were responsible for taking five CRW soldiers from police custody at the Nabua Police Station and torturing them to death? Why has there never been a police investigation into the deaths of the five CRW soldiers taken from Nabua Police Station and tortured to death? Afterwards when Lt Co Filipo Tarakinikini had gone to the United States and Bainimarama was trying to get him back to Fiji to be charged with “desertion”, Tarakinikini called for a public inquiry which would establish who exactly controlled the CRW soldiers before the 2000 coup and who had “failed the nation” (Daily Post, April 18, 2002). The RFMF refused to comment on Tarakinikini’s statement saying “it was an internal matter”.
Falsehoods and truth
As Josefa Nata has clearly revealed, it is totally inaccurate to call the 2000 coup a “civilian coup led by George Speight” as the world’s media (including Fiji media) continues to do today. George Speight was not the original planner or leader of the coup, but merely became the civilian face of a military coup sanctioned by
- some of the highest officers and former officers in the RFMF;
- some of the highest of politicians; and
- some of the highest of some traditional chiefs (all named in the EBOIR).
None of these real leaders of the 2000 coup have ever served time in prison as have George Speight, Josefa Nata, Shane Stephens and a large number of CRW soldiers.
The 2006 coup
There is little doubt about the leader of the 2006 coup which removed the lawfully elected Prime Minister, the late Laisenia Qarase. What has never been clarified are his real reasons for the coup.
Many historical accounts have suggested he would face possible charges by Police Commissioner Andrew Hughes relating to the five CRW deaths in military custody in 2000, sedition against Mr Qarase, issues with regimental funds, and others. Andrew Hughes had to flee back to Australia just before the 2006 coup. What of the politicians who supported the 2006 coup? The President of the Fiji Labour Party had publicly called on Bainimarama to remove Qarase’s multi-party SDL/FLP Government. Chaudhry later joined Bainimarama as Finance Minister. The leading lights of many Indo-Fiji social organizations like Arya Samaj, Sanatan Dharm and Fiji Muslim League soon joined in Bainimarama’s initiatives as did leading Indo-Fijians from abroad.
The 2024 Rabuka Government
Given some of the history of the actors in the 2000 coup and mutiny, and the 2006 coup, the trajectory of the Coalition Government of Sitiveni Rabuka must be puzzling to say the least. In or supporting Sitiveni Rabuka’s Government are individuals convicted in the aftermath of the 2000 coup and ethnonationalists from the PAP and SODELPA as MPs. Then again, how surprising that Lt Col. Dr Jone Baledrokadroka was appointed to review the future role of the re-established Great Council of Chiefs. Even stranger, Lt. Col Viliame Seruvakula was elected Chairman of the GCC. Indeed, nine MPs, among whom are several former RFMF officers of the highest of ranks, have pledged their support to Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka. The public knows that the PAP, NFP and SODELPA have a formal agreement as the Coalition Government. But if push comes to shove, the declared support of the nine Opposition MPs suggests that Rabuka may not need the support of NFP and SODELPA to remain Prime Minister. Is there any likelihood of the 2024 Rabuka Government ever establishing a genuine Truth Commission for the 2000 coup and mutiny?
- PROF WADAN NARSEY of the region’s senior economists and a regular commentator on political and economic issues in Fiji. The views expressed in this article are not necessarily the views of The Fiji Times.
