High court judge Justice John Byrnes today ordered the state and Fiji Times lawyers to provide the court with written submissions regarding Fiji Times Publisher Evan Hannah's illegal detention and deportation case.
Justice Byrnes said this case has raised serious questions on constitutional and immigration laws. Submissions need to be handed in by the 5th of June.
State lawyer Sarvada Nand Sharma also advised the court today that he will file affidavits by Thursday in response to Hannah's application last week seeking certain orders for the discharge of leave to appeal.
Justice Byrnes did not object to this saying the state will be given time.
The case has been adjourned to the 12th of next month for hearing.
Hannah Case: Leave to Appeal Denied
The leave to appeal the decision made by the High Court yesterday to strike out the writ of Herbeas Corpus, filed by the Interim Government, has been denied by Justice Filimoni Jitoko this afternoon in chambers, with regards to the case of Fiji Times Publisher Evan Hannah and the deportation order.
Fiji Times Lawyer Jon Apted, confirmed this outside court.
“We argued the respondents (the governments) summons for leave to appeal. they sought leave to appeal yesterday's decision against striking out.
“They also sought to stay these proceedings, pending their appeal. In other words the habeas corpus wouldn't go ahead while they went to the Court of Appeal.
In other words leave to appeal was denied by the High Court.” Jon Apted
Apted added that the respondents in the case have the right to make an application for leave to appeal.
"The respondents have the right to make an application for leave to appeal to a single judge of the Court of Appeal, so they've been given seven days to take their leave to appeal issue to the Court of Appeal and they also have the right to apply to the Court of Appeal for a stay.
“And the judge gave reasons, orally, but essentially what the judge held was that their leave to appeal application was without merit. A written ruling will be available on Monday morning.” Jon Apted
Hannah Case Continues 15th May 2008
The High Court today denied the application to strike out the writ of Habeas Corpus filed by the Interim Attorney General in the Evan Hannah case.
Fiji Times Lawyer Jon Apted said the application filed last week by the Interim Attorney General, on behalf of the respondents - Immigration Director Viliame Naupoto and Permanent Secretary Immigration Malakai Tadulala - to strike out the writ of Habeas Corpus was denied by the Courts.
Apted confirmed that Judge Justice Filimoni Jitoko is now listening to arguments on whether or not the Court Order was given to Immigration Officials before Hannah's deportation two Friday's ago.
Apted said the next issue being argued in court is whether adequate service of the writ had been affected on the respondents.
Hannah was deported two weeks ago for supposedly breaching his work permit.
The case continues at 2.30pm tomorrow.
Evan Hannah’s deportation on the eve of Media Freedom Day
Evan Hannah’s deportation on the eve of Media Freedom Day has brought into contention several issues that have been, for several months, tossed back and forth in the media and around the grog bowl and on the street. These are the freedom of the media in Fiji, the supposed agenda of the media and the respect for the rule of law.
The Deportation
Fiji Times Publisher Evan Hannah was taken from his home on Thursday 1st May 2008. Fiji Times Editor Netani Rika confirmed to FijiVillage that a group of officers – believed to be policemen – and immigration officers visited Hannah’s home at 7pm advising him that they had orders for his deportation.
On the morning of Friday 2nd May, 2008 Rika told FijiVillage that Hannah had left with the officers and when contacted confirmed that he was on his way to Nadi and said that he could not make any more comments.
Sources had advised FijiVillage that Hannah, who is an Australian Citizen, was booked to fly out on an Air Pacific flight bound for Sydney – FJ911, scheduled to depart Nadi at 9am.
In the meantime, the Fiji Times had obtained a Court Order from High Court Judge Justice Filimoni Jitoko demanding that Hannah be produced at the High Court in Suva at 3PM that day.
FijiVillage reporter Gulsher Ali reported from Nadi International Airport, that Munroe Leys lawyer, Faizal Hannif, representing the Fiji Times, had driven from Suva to Nadi attempting to serve legal papers to airport immigration officials in trying to stop the Fiji Times Publisher from leaving Fiji.
This was the second deportation of a foreign media person this year, after Fiji Times Publisher Russell Hunter was deported in February.
When FJ911 left Fiji, Hannah was not on board. Reports later emerged that Air Pacific officials “recognized” the Court Order, and refused to board Hannah. But before the Fiji Times could breathe a sigh of relief – he had been put on an Air Korea flight which left Nadi at 9.35am for Seoul, Korea.
The Fiji Times Editor said: “We know that he has now been put on a Korean Airlines flight to Seoul. This was after court documents were served at the Airport and our national carrier Air Pacific refused to put Mr. Hannah on the plane. But officials have put him on a flight to South Korea – of course we are disturbed.”
Reactions
Reactions were swift and to the point, with most expressing shock at the Interim Government’s actions especially on the eve of World Media Freedom Day.
The Fiji Media Council Chairman Daryl Tarte said he was appalled by Evan Hannah’s detention and immediately called an emergency meeting. The council meeting, which was held at the Fiji Media Council Offices, released a statement, which was delivered by Tarte, expressing shock at the actions taken against Hannah.
“The Council is shocked and dismayed that on the eve of World Media Freedom Day, the Interim Government should make such a mockery of its claim that the media in Fiji is free,” he said.
“While the media in Fiji is still coming to terms with the deportation of Russell Hunter, it is rocked by the deportation of the Publisher of the Fiji Times Mr. Evan Hannah.
“Apparently Mr Hannah is alleged to have breached his work permit by publishing matters that could be a threat to national security.
However, rather than be transparent and publicly displaying it actions, the government is hiding behind a cloak of secrecy.”
Tarte said the council was worried for Hannah’s family.
“The council is also concerned for the family of Mr. Hannah and is concerned that he is being deported not to his home country of Australia but to Korea.”
The council also called on the Interim Government to explain its actions.
“If the government truly believes in media freedom then it is under an obligation, to the people of Fiji, to justify its actions. The council is not only concerned about the threat to media freedom, but equally disturbed about the effects of this latest action on the Fiji economy.
“There will be publicity all over the free world about the deportation of Mr. Hannah and this will certainly impact on investment in our country. Potential investors will start to equate government’s actions with those of places like Zimbabwe.
“If the Interim Government believes the expulsion of people like Russel Hunter and Evan Hannah is going to force the media to be more accommodating to them, they are wrong. The media is unlikely to be intimidated by this latest threat. “
The Pacific Island News Association also deplored the action of the Interim Government to deport the Publisher of the Fiji Times. PINA President Joseph Ealedona said this action was a blatant attack on the freedom of the media in Fiji.
He said the arrest and deportation was clearly calculated to intimidate and silence voices that criticize the government. He also called on the Interim Prime Minister to stick to his promise of upholding media freedom.
The Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs Stephen Smith said that unless the Interim Government could provide satisfactory explantation, Hannah’s deportation would only be seen as another blatant attack by the illegal Fiji Interim Government on the media, in an attempt to muzzle freedom of speech.
He said: “It is disappointing that the Fiji regime have behaved in this manner on the eve of Media Freedom Day. This is yet another reprehensible act in a disturbing pattern of behavior, since the coup of December 2006, which has resulted in the severe erosion of fundamental human rights and the rule of law in Fiji”
Smith said given the discussion at the Pacific Island Forum Ministers meeting in Auckland in March, the Interim Government can be under no illusion that the region would consider Fiji’s continued attempts to muzzle the media as acceptable.
New Zealand Prime Minister Helen Clark echoed his sentiments saying that Evan Hannah's deportation is not conducive to Fiji holding free and fair elections.
Clark said the military regime clearly does not place a high value on freedom of the press as the action against Hannah has coincided with World Media Freedom Day
The Fiji Australia Business Council said it was concerned at Hannah’s deportation especially as he is a member of the council and a high profile Australian.
The Local Presidency of the European Union sent regrets that Hannah was deported in defiance of a Court Order.
National Federation Party’s Pramod Rae said the abduction, detention and forcible deportation of Hannah is a shameful, despicable and cowardly act and a testimony to the fact that Fiji is now being controlled by dictators, who were prepared to blatantly disregard the rule of law and resort to the law of the jungle to satisfy their greed for power.
The United States Government said Hannah's expulsion from the country raised serious questions about the Interim Government's respect for the freedom of the press as this is the second time the Interim Government has expelled a newspaper publisher in less than 10 weeks.
In a statement US State Department urged the Interim Government to respect the rights of all its citizens, including the rights to freedom of the press and other civil liberties.
Also, the Pacific Centre for Public Integrity Director , Angie Heffernan calls on the interim regime to concentrate its efforts on preparing for elections instead of pursuing its vindictive anti media crusade.
Fiji Women's Rights Movement’s Executive Director Virisila Buadromo said the interim administration is contradicting itself.
“The Fiji Women’s Rights Movement is appalled by the deportation of a respected journalist from Fiji. We feel that the illegal detainment and deportation of Evan Hannah is an unbelievable, repeated intimidation of the free press which is the pillar of a free society.
“We are disappointed that the Interim Regime continues to blatantly violate human rights. We call on the interim administration to honour our rights under the 1997 Constitution as well as under the International Human Rights Law and to allow the media to operate freely, without threat and intimidation. We also think that the deportation two days before International Media Freedom Day makes a mockery of what the interim administration said.”
The Fiji Law Society also pointed out the irony of Hannah’s deportation occurring a day before Media Freedom Day and said the matter of the Interim Government’s acknowledging the Court Order raised the added question of whether or not the Rule of Law was in operation in Fiji .
SDL also expressed dismay at the deportation of Hannah.
SDL National Director Peceli Kinivuwai said: “The SDL is very much dismayed and shocked that the interim regime has decided to take this stand.
“It shows very clearly to the people of this country and the outside world the form of government that is existing in this country at the moment.
“It has shown very clearly to the people of Fiji that it has violated the rights of individuals living in this country.”
The coordinator of FemLINK PACIFIC Sharon Bhagwan-Rolls said Hannah’s deportation was not a platform for peace.
“It is very unfortunate that on the eve of Media Freedom Day that in Fiji we are experiencing this situation. I think the message is going out very clear to us that this is the reality that Fiji media both mainstream and community media will suffer and it is very unfortunate.
“Even more what is saddening is that it’s a clear reminder of the political regime that we’re working within. The message is really to Fiji’s political leaders right now is if you’re talking about partnership for peace – you can’t shake hands with a clenched fish.”
The Young People’s Concerned Network spokesperson Peter Waqavonovono said the deportation drags the country backward.
“We feel that high profile deportations like this must stop. It is a crime against humanity. I ask the interim Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama and the Interim Immigration Minister Epeli Ganilau, how does deportation help Fiji? Hannah’s detainment is a sad presentation of policy in Fiji – where people who speak out against the government are actually targeted.
“Fiji is struggling to move on, but every day the Interim Government drags us back. This is not normal politics. This is banana politics.”
And the Fiji Human Rights Commission remained silent on the issue preferring not to comment while the matter was before the courts.
Hannah Comments
In the meantime Evan Hannah, who was appointed Publisher of The Fiji Times in 2007 and lived in Fiji for the last five years, arrived in Sydney early on the morning of World Media Freedom Day Saturday 3rd May 2008 to the waiting media.
He said his deportation marked a sad day for Fiji’s media.
“It’s a deeply sad day for Fiji’s media.
Hannah criticized the Interim Government saying that they persist in the concept that a publisher directs editorial content and makes decisions about editorial content – which does not happen.
"This is another demonstration that the interim government doesn't understand media freedom,” he said. "Since overthrowing the elected government in December 2006, Bainimarama has been accused of waging a campaign of intimidation against media outlets critical of his rule."
But he said despite his deportation, the Fiji Times would remain a solid newsroom. He also emphasized that he did not breach the terms of his work permit as he has no role in the editorial directional content in the newspaper.
In an earlier meeting with Interim Attorney General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum he said he had explained his role that he was not involved in the editorial role. Hannah had been summoned to meet the Interim AG regarding an article alleged to have been written by Suva lawyer, Grahame Leung and printed in the Fiji Times.
And a day after Hannah’s deportation The Fiji Times Editor Netani Rika said life goes on in the Fiji Times Newsroom and Evan Hannah is still Publisher of the Fiji Times.
“As you know in a news organization, the news component of the business is controlled by the Editor or the News Director,” Rika said.
“And so there have been no disruptions, we’ve run the news as normal since Thursday and that’ll continue to go on.
“As far as management is concerned, like in the business sense, Evan (Hannah) is still the publisher, even though he is not in the country at the moment.
However, when asked as to whether Hannah's absence will be seen as a hindrance to operations, Rika said the Company is waiting for the High Court ruling on Wednesday and operations will continue as normal.
In Sydney, Hannah said he was annoyed at this lack of understanding.
“It’s pretty annoying and from a family perspective, it is distressing,” said Hannah, who is married to a Fiji Citizen, Academic Dr. Katarina Tuinamuana.
Tuinamuana, who on Sunday said she was still in shock over the way her husband was removed, invited the interim Government to come forward and explain how he had breached the terms of his work permit.
She also said that the incident had not only affected her, it had also disrupted the daily life of their young son and that of her parents and sister.
Tuinamuana later said she was thinking of taking legal action but would have to tread carefully as the lives of her students and her son are involved.
The Government Responds
The main players in the Interim Government tried to explain.
The Police were quick to deny involvement in the removal of Evan Hannah from his home on Thursday. In an initial statement on Friday morning via spokesperson Ema Mua, Fiji Police Force said that details were sketchy. Later in the day, Commissioner of Police – Commodore Esala Teleni denied Police involvement and refuted reports that a police officer went with immigration officials to visit Hannah’s home the previous evening.
The Director of Immigration Viliame Naupoto said he was following orders and if he had not carried out the directive – he would have failed in his duties.
“We are the body that executes the order to remove people,” Naupoto said.
He said once a person is declared a prohibited immigrant, it is enough to cancel his or her permit. Naupoto said Hannah was declared a prohibited immigrant as his actions were prejudicial to and thus he was deported.
“As far as work permits are concerned, whenever someone who is here on a work permit is declared a prohibited immigrant under Section 13 (2) b of the Immigration Act – that automatically cancels his permit,” Naupoto said.
But the Immigration Minister for Defence and Immigration, from whom the order for Hannah’s removal came, said in a statement Fiji Times Publisher Evan Hannah’s actions were breaching national security in the country and that is why he was deported.
In a statement released on the afternoon of the day of Hannah’s deportation, Ratu Epeli Ganilau said Hannah has been removed from Fiji based on Section 13(2) of the Immigration Act relating to Prohibited Immigrants and it was done according to law, in a humanly manner and it is not a special case of removal.
Section 13(2) of the Immigrations Act states that a person who prior to or after entry into the Fiji Islands, as a result of information received from any country, through official or diplomatic channels, or from any other source that the Minister considers as reliable, is deemed by the Minister to be a person who is or has been conducting himself in a manner prejudicial to the peace, defence, public safety, public order, public morality, public health, security or good governance of Fiji.
Ratu Epeli confirmed that the Removal Order and Detention Warrant against Hannah was signed by his Permanent Secretary Malakai Tadulala on Thursday and it was served at his home and no force was used in this case.
He said Hannah, who did not automatically become a Fiji Citizen when he married Dr. Tuinamuana, was escorted from home with courtesy and in a cordial manner. He said he was also accorded the right to make phone calls up to a certain time and his removal will not have any immigration implications on his family.
The Interim Immigration Minister said based on credible evidence and advise furnished to him, Hannah's actions were breaching national security of the country.
Ratu Epeli Ganilau stressed that the security interests of the sovereign state of Fiji at this point in time were of paramount importance. He said Hannah was previously cautioned of the implications of his actions however he chose to ignore this.
On Monday, Ratu Epeli emphasized that Hannah cannot appeal his removal or deportation from Fiji.
He quoted the Amendment to the Immigration Act of 2003 under the Promulgation No.3 of 2008, "No appeal shall lie from decisions made by an immigration officer acting in accordance with the directions of, or instructions given in respect of any particular case by the Minister."
Media and Government Meeting
On Monday there was an invitation to all the mainstream news media organizations for a meeting with Interim Prime Minister at 3PM on Monday – three days after Hannah’s deportation – to be held at Government Buildings in Suva. The meeting did happen and ended with requests by the media for prompt responses from the Interim Government. And the Government called for balanced and fair reporting by the media.
Daily Post General Manager Mesake Koroi stressed that it was a good meeting.
Communications Fiji Limited News Director Vijay Narayan said the media was not told that they would not be allowed to report on certain stories.
PINA Chief Executive Matai Akaola said it was a session where strong views were raised from both sides.
Fiji Times Editor Netani Rika and Chairman of the Fiji Media Council Daryl Tarte refused to comment.
Later reports revealed that the Interim PM has restated the governments unwavering commitment to upholding media freedom however some media reports shed negative light on the Interim PM’s statements at the meeting. And just days after a meeting between heads of the mainstream news media, the Fiji Media Council and the Interim Government, the Interim Attorney General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum tried to clarify reports appearing in the media about alleged comments made by the Interim Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama.
Saiyed-Khaiyum rubbished news reports that the Interim PM said he wanted the media to be pro-government.
“What needs to be emphasized is: at the meeting the Prime Minister did not say that the media needs to be pro-Government.
“In fact, he did categorically state: ‘I don’t want you to be pro-government, I want you to be pro-Fiji’.”
The Permanent Secretary to the Prime Minister, Parmesh Chand also called on all concerned to move on in good faith, saying that certain news reports on comments made by the Interim PM at the meeting were “grossly exaggerated and taken out of context”.
Chand, who also attended the meeting, said both the Government and the media discussed respective concerns. He added that it was unfair that the media was strategically picking up issues from that meeting and sensationalizing them and called on people to move on with good faith and mutual trust, with the common objective of building better relationships.
At the meeting the Interim PM restated the interim government's unwavering commitment to ensure the freedom of the press and other media as enshrined in the constitution and reminded the media that with freedom comes responsibility. He also called for balance and fair reporting.
The Interim AG said today that several incidences where this did not occur and these were highlighted at the meeting
“What was highlighted was a number of anomalies that had occurred in respect of what was reported and what was actually factual - a number of anomalies regarding the emphasis that was placed by the media on certain individuals who were making all sorts of allegations that in fact were quite inciteful.
“These were the things that were discussed and in fact most of the times when these anomalies were raised the respective media outlets in fact had no response.”
At the meeting, the media called for better and timely responses from the Interim Government on issues of interest. The Interim PM agreed to do this and said that former Military Spokesperson Major Neumi Leweni would be re-called from China to facilitate this. The meeting ended with an agreement to hold monthly discussions between media executives and the interim government to ensure that misunderstandings are addressed.
Fiji Media Council Chairman Daryl Tarte has refused to comment on the meeting and told Radio New Zealand that he is not sure what else the organization can do beyond making a formal complaint.
And the Court Order?
At 3PM on the afternoon of Friday 2nd May 2008, High Court Judge Justice Filimoni Jitoko had ordered that Evan Hannah be physically produced at the High Court in Suva. The Court Order was allegedly signed on Thursday even and sent to the offices of the Director of Immigration.
But Immigration Director claims he did not receive the Court Order.
“We did not have any notice of any Court Order that was given. I was not given any Court Order last night and that is why we sent him away,” Naupoto said.
At 3PM that Friday, Munro Leys lawyer Jon Apted appeared at the Justice Jitoko’s Chambers at the Suva High Court for Evan Hannah. Representing the State was Solicitor General Christopher Pryde.
After the initial hearing, Apted confirmed that Jitoko had granted Pryde more time to take instructions to establish whether there was proper service of the Court Order issued the previous night. Apted said that the Court Order had in fact been faxed to the immigration offices.
“Mr Hannah was taken from his residence and moved over night. After we obtained the orders we had people in Nadi waiting to serve the people who had him. But they entered the Airport through a different entry. So we were forced to serve by fax, to serve by leaving it at the immigration office and the police office in Nadi while he was there to bring it to the attention of the authorities, the people who were detaining him,” Apted said outside the High Court on Friday.
The case was adjourned to the following Wednesday 7 th May 2008 at 10am where Justice Jitoko ordered that Immigration Director Viliame Naupoto and Immigration Permanent Secretary Malakai Tadulala appear the following day.
“The last occasion last week the return date on the writ was extended to today. What we obtained was a writ of habeas corpus. It commands the named respondents to produce the body and make a return on the writ which means an explanation of the detention,” Apted said.
“They didn’t come last Friday, remember, the date of the return was extended until today for them to make a return on the writ which is their explanation.
“They were not present today and Mr Pryde has had difficulty completing the return so he asked for and was granted further extension on the return date for 10 o’clock tomorrow (Thursday).
“The Director of Immigration and The Permanent Secretary are required to be there with the return on the writ.”
On Thursday, with Immigration Direction and Permanent Secretary bother present in the High Court, Solicitor General Christopher Pryde filed a summons in the High Court to strike out the writ of habeas corpus filed on behalf of the deported Fiji Times Publisher Evan Hannah last week.
He said they believed the case should not proceed as Hannah was no longer being detained by any state authority.
“We filed an application to strike out on the basis that there’s no reason for course of action. Mr Hannah is no longer in detention of the authorities, he is no longer in the country. The writ of habeas corpus is written to produce the body and to test the legality of the detention.
Pryde said Hannah must seek redress through separate actions if he wished to do so.
However, Hannah's Lawyer John Apted said they will strongly oppose the motion as they believe that Hannah detention must be looked into by the court.
Judge Jitoko said no court could hide away from accepting a writ of habeus corpus which is a fundamental right of the weak to protect themselves against the powerful and the court must safe guard the personal liberties of individuals.
The case has been adjourned until next Thursday.
