FAIR DISTRIBUTION. So much hullabaloo and hype have been expressed on the status of the security of the native lands, and rightfully so the owners are put on a limbo as to the future of their heritage, especially when the perpetrators (land grabbers) are manipulating the legal system as well as the constitution to achieve their hidden agenda. The native Fijians have never refused to give away their lands for developments if it was for public use or for lease holdings, simply because they can also benefit from the rentals. They only object when they are not consulted thoroughly as to the purpose of the lease and the rate at which the leases were to be levied. Furthermore when the legal people fail to explain in details the implications of the leases the owners were always suspicious. Fiji had ratified the ILO Convention 169 on Indigenous and Tribal Rights, where the state was obliged to have dialogue with the indigenous people on any matter that affects them. This regime has failed to do this and has metaphorically shifted the goalpost on everything that is indigenous. The regime or any legal government will always have this problem unless consultations take place. The Great Council of Chiefs or BLV was the mouthpiece of the native Fijians on all matters, whether it be social, economic or vanua. One current contentious issue is the Land Use Decree or the Land Bank which alienates native lands for 99 years or three generations. This concept has been forced onto the native Fijians without consultations. I am not surprised if this issue will be the determinant as to who will win the election in September. Be that it may the powers to be should consider lessening or even remove the fear of the native Fijians on the future of their lands by making them active shareholders in every investments established on lands under the 99 years lease or Land Bank. Their shareholdings to be pegged at not less than 30% but not more than 45% of the annual turnover of the investment or not less than 15% and not more than 30% of the annual interests accrued whichever is higher. The shareholding does not alter the rentals and the initial premium. Most landowners would be happy with this strategy as they would also have opportunities to learn from the experts. A food for thought.
Posted on: Sat, 05 Jul 2014 01:32:26 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015