July 27, 2011

Military backed tourism sector continues to be protected

We've continued to keep our cross-hairs firmly affixed on the notoriously accommodating-of-the-illegal-and-treasonous-military-tourism industry in Fiji.

But with unions -- domestic, regional and global -- set to take up the mantle on our fight for the liberation of Fiji, the regime may want to re-assess all the major tourism-profiteering events that they are backing even to the the extent that bad tourism news is muzzled.

The predetermined farce regarding a pseudo legal challenge for our superannuation funds (the Fiji National Provident Fund) that is in full-steam ahead mode despite the logical view that all these issues are firmly linked to the fundamental respect for the rule of law, will undo it all and We The People must acquiesce no more.
Burness given 21 days to rectify application
Publish date/time: 27/07/2011 [08:12]

High Court Judge, Justice Pradeep Hettiarachchi has today given FNPF pensioner, David Burness 21 days to rectify various procedural errors in relation to his application against the FNPF, the Attorney General and the Republic Of Fiji.

The time was given after the Judge struck out Burness’ application for an injunction.

Although various questions were raised by the Judge on Burness’s application to stop the FNPF pension review, Justice Hettiarachchi said given that the matter is of national importance, he is of the view that Burness should be granted an opportunity to rectify his procedural and technical errors in the pleadings.

The Judge said based on the current application to the court, Burness has failed to present adequate material explaining how his human rights will be violated for the court to be convinced by any likelihood of reducing his FNPF pension.

Justice Hettiarachchi said Burness is relying on a statement made by the FNPF CEO on the proposed pension reduction.

The presiding judge said it must be noted that Burness mainly relied on a mere speculation rather than credible and reliable information.

He said his injunction application in any event would fail.

The judge further stated that the court had to satisfy that David Burness claim in fact is a claim for redress in human rights violation. He said under section 38 (5) of the Human Rights Decree any person can apply to the High Court for redress for the contravention of his or her human rights.

However this right is subjected to the proviso which reads as : “Provided however that no proceeding shall be taken to the High Court which seeks to question or challenge the legality or validity of the Constitution Revocation Decree 2009 or such other decrees made or as may be made by the President.”

The judge goes on to say that in the absence of any reliable and credible information as to the proposed review to the FNPF Act, the court is unable to decide the exact nature of Burness claim.

He said under the Administration of Justice Decree, Burness cannot even make a judicial review application if he intended to challenge the validity or legality of a decree.

The judge said Burness must show that he is pursuing purely a human right application, which further warrants additional material from Burness as well as from the respondents to determine the correct nature of the application.

For full report and the court ruling you can check our website, fijivillage.com

Story by: Vijay Narayan

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Well kudos to the Judge for giving the case a second chance but then again maybe Burness should've considered getting a more experienced lawyer to handle his case. Shaista Shamimi needs to go back to Law School 101 and pull her head out of her rear end.