A delegation of Māori leaders visiting Israel under the banner of “business and innovation” faces public criticism over its timing and purpose, while questions remain about how the trip was organised and the full extent of its funding, itinerary and engagement with Palestinian organisations.

The visit comes as New Zealand criticises the Israeli government’s actions in the occupied West Bank but stops short of joining international moves to ban imports from illegal Israeli settlements.

Northland Regional Council chair Pita Tipene is among those who have visited Israel in recent days. The trip is taking place against the backdrop of Israel’s military campaign in Gaza, escalating Israeli settlement activity and settler violence in the West Bank.

• READ MORE:  Labour would prioritise recognition of Palestine, sanctions on Israel
• Peters’ ‘hot air’ over Israeli settlement trade ban rules out of step with world
• Palestine Forum condemns NZ for talk, no ‘meaningful action’ over illegal Israeli settlements
• Indigenizing Zionism: Narrative claims deployed by the Indigenous Coalition for Israel to evade settler-colonial characterization — Arama Rata
• Other Gaza reports

In September 2025, a United Nations Commission of Inquiry concluded that Israel committed genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. Israel has rejected that finding.

Former delegate says Israeli ministry funded the visit
Te Ao Māori News understands prospective delegation members were told the visit would focus on “business and innovation”.

Riki Manarangi, who travelled to Israel as part of a Māori delegation in November 2025, said he heard “through the grapevine” that another delegation was planned for 2026 and volunteered to recommend potential participants.

“I wasn’t formally approached or asked to organise anything,” he said.

“I reached out to a few people I thought would be a good fit and asked if they’d be keen to be considered. Some went, and some declined.”

Manarangi said he approached several people he believed would suit the delegation’s business and innovation focus but was not responsible for deciding who would participate.

He said Israel’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs organised and funded the visit.

“The Ministry of Foreign Affairs over there are the ones who organise and fund it,” he said. “They cover basics … transport, accommodation, and kai.”

Asked who helped coordinate the current visit, Manarangi described Yifat Goddard as “like the programme lead” and said she was unpaid.

Goddard, an Israeli-New Zealander, also proposed the November 2025 Māori delegation that Manarangi joined, according to an account published by the “Indigenous Embassy” Jerusalem. Te Ao Māori News has asked Goddard for comment and has not yet received a response.

The Indigenous Embassy Jerusalem said it had no involvement in the current delegation and had not been approached to help organise, recruit for, fund or facilitate it. It said it learned of the visit second-hand and through social media.

MFAT notified after delegation was underway
New Zealand’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade said it had no involvement in the visit.

“The Israeli government advised MFAT it was hosting the group once the visit was underway,” a spokesperson said.

MFAT did not say which arm of the Israeli government contacted it, what “hosting” involved or whether it was given information about the delegation’s funding.

Te Ao Māori News has requested further information under the Official Information Act, including correspondence about the visit and details of when and how MFAT was notified.

The Israeli Embassy’s initial response did not confirm who initiated or funded the delegation, what costs the Israeli government covered or how participants were selected.

It also did not identify which Israeli government officials or organisations the group was meeting or say whether the itinerary included engagement with Palestinians or Palestinian organisations.

Instead, the Embassy said it was pleased delegates had been able to visit Israel and “see the country for themselves, rather than relying solely on the picture presented through the media”.

It said delegations travelled throughout Israel, met Jewish, Arab, Druze and Bedouin Israelis, and were free to hear a range of views.

“Israel is a democratic country. Visitors are free to ask the questions they wish, to say whatever they want, and to make up their own minds,” it said.

Te Ao Māori News has since asked the Embassy to confirm Manarangi’s account, including Goddard’s role, whether international flights were covered and which Israeli government body administered the funding. It has not yet responded to that follow-up.

The New Zealand Israel Innovation Hub declined to confirm whether it was involved in the current visit.

It described the delegation as a “tremendous success”, saying that the assessment was based on social media posts and second-hand feedback. The hub said the visit had inspired plans for three Māori Innovation and Technology Delegations in 2027.

The first would focus on Northland Māori communities and educational outcomes. The hub also invited a representative from Whakaata Māori to consider joining one of its future delegations.

Pita Tipene says he will respond after returning to Aotearoa
Tipene declined an interview while overseas, saying he had received requests from several media organisations.

“I’ve responded by saying that I’ll speak my truth when I set foot home,” he told Te Ao Māori News.

Tipene has, however, responded publicly to criticism of his presence in Israel.

“It’s horrible and gut-wrenching, and it must stop!” he wrote.

“I am not pro-Israel — I am pro-peace and humanity, as the killing and destruction is happening across national boundaries here in Gaza and in other nations.

“I’m not here to judge, but I’m not immune to the gravity of what’s happening here either.”

Northland Regional Council said it had no involvement in the visit.

Chief executive Jonathan Gibbard said Tipene was travelling in a personal, non-council capacity and the council had not funded, organised or endorsed the trip.

Gibbard said the travel was not related to council business.

Other current delegates approached by Te Ao Māori News have not responded to requests for comment.

An invitation some Māori leaders declined
Some invited Māori leaders declined to participate. Te Ao Māori News understands concerns were raised during planning about the trip’s funding, its political context and whether delegates would have opportunities to hear directly from Palestinian communities.

Manarangi said prospective delegates who raised concerns were offered meetings with representatives of Israel’s Foreign Ministry and encouraged to participate. He said nobody was excluded because of concerns about Israel or Palestine, and those who did not travel had chosen to withdraw.

“There are plenty of people over there who are openly critical of the Israeli government, no different to here in Aotearoa; that’s just what living in a democracy looks like,” Manarangi said.

Te Ao Māori News continues to seek responses from others involved in facilitating the visit.

NZ condemns settlement expansion but does not join import-ban push

Questions about the delegation come as the United Kingdom, France and Canada move to ban imports from Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank.

The three countries were among 12 that issued a joint statement warning that unprecedented settlement expansion and settler violence were rapidly undermining the possibility of a Palestinian state.

Israel responded with retaliatory measures against the UK, including ordering the closure of the British consulate in East Jerusalem, which serves Palestinians.

New Zealand did not sign the statement and said it was not in a position to introduce an import ban before the election.

Foreign Affairs Minister Winston Peters issued a “standalone” statement on Wednesday saying New Zealand was “deeply concerned by the deteriorating situation in the West Bank”.

“There has been a marked escalation in Israel’s actions, jeopardising the prospect of a durable peace,” Peters said.

“Israeli settlements in the Occupied Palestinian Territories are a violation of international law. Expanding settlements undermines prospects for a two-state solution to the longstanding conflict.”

“New Zealand strongly opposes actions that advance annexation or threaten the forcible displacement of Palestinians,” he said.

“Such measures are incompatible with international law and risk perpetuating the cycle of violence and insecurity.”

A spokesperson for Peters said New Zealand had not traditionally used trade measures to address foreign-policy issues. Introducing an import ban would require a full policy process that could not be completed before the election.

New Zealand had previously imposed travel bans on 38 people over extremist settlement activity, including two Israeli ministers, with the latest three bans announced in June.

New Zealand had earlier joined an international statement specifically opposing the Israeli Government’s E1 settlement plan, warning it would divide the West Bank and further undermine the possibility of a two-state solution.

Israel faces international legal scrutiny over Gaza conduct
Israel’s conduct in Gaza is also under scrutiny before two international courts.

In November 2024, the International Criminal Court issued arrest warrants for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and then-Defence Minister Yoav Gallant.

The ICC found reasonable grounds to believe they bore criminal responsibility for alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity, including starvation as a method of warfare, murder, persecution and other inhumane acts.

The warrants are not findings of guilt, and neither man has been tried or convicted by the ICC. Israel has rejected the court’s jurisdiction and denies the allegations against Netanyahu and Gallant.

Separately, South Africa’s genocide case against Israel remains before the International Court of Justice. The court has not issued a final judgment determining whether Israel committed genocide.

The full funding arrangements, selection process and itinerary for the current delegation remain unconfirmed. It is also unclear how the proposed 2027 delegations would be funded, structured or opened to participants.

Republished from Te Ao Māori News by Pacific Media Watch.

ANALYSIS: By Hossam Shaker

Once again, the United Nations reminds us that genocide is taking place in the Gaza Strip.

A report issued on 23 June 2026 by the Independent International Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory documented what Israel has committed against the Palestinian people, especially children.

This followed an earlier report from the same commission on 16 September 2025, which found that genocide was taking place, as well as the report of the UN special rapporteur issued on 20 October 2025.

• READ MORE: Sanctioned ICC judges sue Trump in US over ‘attack on judicial independence’
• Chris Sidoti on UN inquiry into Palestinian rights
• Other Gaza genocide reports

But what can meticulously documented international reports do in the face of those who have insisted on averting their eyes from declared Israeli intentions to commit genocide, ethnic cleansing, comprehensive destruction and horrific starvation — not to mention the torrent of live images transmitted around the clock to mobile devices from the field of atrocities over the course of two full years?

Specialised UN reports, testimonies by international rapporteurs and experts, assessments by the most prominent global human rights organisations, and even Israeli testimonies have followed one another, all confirming the reality of the genocide committed by Israel under the eyes of the world since October 2023.

In contrast, most European and Western states have clung to a rigid position that ignores this glaring truth, despite genocidal intentions being openly expressed in advance by senior Israeli leaders, who continued to boast of what their army and authorities were doing on the ground.

Official western comments on those reports were often absent, unlike what would have happened in other cases

Avoided the term ‘genocide’
Is it not worthy of condemnation that senior European and Western officials have persistently avoided using the term “genocide” in relation to these systematic and horrific Israeli practices?

It is as though the word were a firmly established taboo in European and Western political, media and cultural discourse whenever Israel is concerned.

This taboo exerts its power over those officials and commentators who, in this way, give reason to suspect that acknowledging genocide depends on the identity of the perpetrator and the status of the victims.

Double standards
It is entirely understandable that the allies of a regime of occupation and genocide, or those who consider themselves Israel’s partners and friends, would avoid issuing a clear condemnation of conduct they themselves helped support and encourage, directly or indirectly, even if only through silence and denial of its atrocities.

Throughout this prolonged season of horrors, the Israeli side has enjoyed military and political backing, as well as propagandistic cover, through carefully crafted formulas uttered by senior European and Western officials.

These amounted to evasive justifications for whatever war crimes and grave violations an occupying authority and its military forces might commit against a population left utterly exposed to continuous bombardment.

This may be inferred from the phrase that has become a staple of Western speeches: “Israel has every right to defend itself” — words that Israeli leaders understand simply as advance legitimation for a policy of mass killing and comprehensive destruction on the ground.

Naturally, no mention is made in this context of any right of the Palestinian people to defend themselves, for example, or of their right under international humanitarian law to resist the military occupation entrenched on their land.

States, governments and political leaderships — joined by elites in the fields of thought, culture and media — insist on ignoring the reality of genocide against the Palestinian people, or conceal it through a tendency toward genocide denial, as though all the serious international efforts of documentation and investigation had no value for them.

Denying a genocide that has unfolded before everyone’s ears and eyes simply means minimising its confirmed atrocities. It also entails direct or indirect encouragement of this pattern of horrific violations, so long as they are met with such shocking laxity.

Clinging to outright denial
Moreover, clinging to outright denial encourages the perpetrators to resume committing appalling war crimes, so long as these crimes are not named as such. Which Western leaders — apart from a handful, such as Spain — have described what the Israeli leadership and its army have committed as “genocide” or “war crimes”?

It must be recalled that the centres of Western decision-making, including the European Union and its leading bodies crowned with slogans of noble values and human rights, became implicated in a sweeping display of bias when they chose very mild or evasive terms to describe Israeli war crimes that the entire world followed in images, sound and live broadcasts.

Leaders and spokespersons resorted to cold expressions such as the ploy of “expressing concern” and voicing “sorrow” over the victims, often without naming the perpetrator, because the perpetrator was the Israeli leadership and its army, whose brutal policies and measures were visible to all.

Observers around the world have noted how the charge of “double standards” clings to European and Western political discourse.

This is precisely what the former Vice-President of the European Commission, Josep Borrell, warned his EU colleagues against — in full view of a world that notices the grave moral gap between European positions on Ukraine and Palestine. He issued that warning days into the war, at a Foreign Affairs Council in Luxembourg on 23 October 2023.

One would not be exaggerating to conclude from these contradictory positions that they place some human beings above others in status, degree of concern and human dignity, so that the lives, safety and security of Palestinians are placed lower in rank than those of others.

Thus comes the tolerance of the crushing of children, mothers, the sick and the elderly in the Gaza Strip, without serious positions being taken to restrain the machinery of genocide.

The margins, not the centre
Those faltering positions gave the strong impression that they were conferring moral immunity on the perpetrator, namely the Israeli leadership and its regular army.

Prevailing European and Western criticism was limited to only two reckless ministers from the Israeli government, which amounts to little, since Itamar Ben Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich are already constantly criticised within Israeli circles.

The narrative has been shifted into familiar terms about a ‘humanitarian crisis’, as though the programmed genocide were merely a natural disaster

Meanwhile, the government and the political leadership more broadly continue to escape direct criticism, even after the accumulation of filmed atrocities and the issuance of an International Criminal Court (ICC) arrest warrant for Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself.

This evasion becomes even clearer when criticism, along with some sanctions of limited effect, has been confined to settler gangs and their leaders, without any verbal reproach or punitive gesture directed toward the Israeli army.

The latter not only sponsors and protects settlers on the ground but also directly commits grave violations, appalling war crimes and campaigns of ethnic cleansing within the context of a horrific genocide.

This contradiction betrays a firmly rooted European and Western position intent on exempting the state, its leadership and its regular military and security apparatuses from any clear criticism, explicit condemnation or accountability, while merely formal positions are issued concerning the margins rather than the centre: some settlers instead of the army, and only two ministers instead of the government.

Evading a simple question
Political Europe, and many elites in public life across Western states, have even evaded confronting a simple question: does what Israel has committed against the Palestinian people constitute genocide?

Denying the genocide committed in Gaza requires wilful disregard.

It begins by brushing aside these war crimes and behaving as though they merit no attention. The adopted narrative has been shifted into familiar terms about a “humanitarian crisis” and “alarming” conditions, or a show of concern for “civilian suffering” — as though the programmed genocide, reinforced by declared intentions to commit it, were merely a natural disaster that befell the place.

The states and governments that boast of their commitment to moral positions, human values, international law and human rights were supposed to honour those commitments. They should have warned against the campaign of genocide in its earliest stages, stripped it of political and propagandistic cover, and supported the enforcement of international justice and the cases filed over genocide against the Palestinian people.

Foremost among these is the case brought by South Africa before the International Court of Justice (ICJ), on the basis of Israel’s violation of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.

Instead, campaigns of moral targeting, incitement, intimidation and even the imposition of unjust sanctions on prosecutors have escalated, affecting international justice bodies and their personnel, as well as UN rapporteurs.

Thus, it becomes clear that complicity with the genocide committed against the Palestinian people goes ever further in undermining international law and threatening the foundations of international action and the protection afforded to its institutions and authorities.

Hossam Shaker is a journalist and an author who has extensively covered the topic of migration in Europe.This article was first published in the Middle East Eye.

The devastating United Nations report this week into the deliberate targeting and murder of Palestinian children by Israel is not very newsworthy in Australia apparently.

On Tuesday, the UN Commission of Inquiry on the Occupied Palestinian Territory and Israel released a harrowing report finding that Israel has deliberately targeted and killed Palestinian children.

The 94-page report documented children being shot by snipers, targeted by drones, denied medical treatment, subjected to starvation and detained in conditions involving torture, sexual violence and severe abuse.

• READ MORE: Israel’s deliberate targeting of Palestinian children — Al Jazeera
• Jale Moala: Why is the UN credible when Fiji agrees but not when it’s inconvenient?
• UN report must mark a turning point for accountability for Palestinian children

The commission concluded that the deliberate targeting of children was one of the key elements establishing genocidal intent.

These are extraordinary findings backed up by an in-depth investigation by a UN body, and one would think it would be of substantial public interest worthy of front-page headlines, but Australia’s mainstream media doesn’t seem to think so.

The ABC made somewhat of an effort by bringing on global affairs editor Laura Tingle to discuss the commission’s findings on its news programme. However, half of their article covering the report was dedicated to parroting Israel’s defence of the indefensible and was buried at the bottom of their website.

Guardian Australia was the only other mainstream Australian outlet to cover the UN report until yesterday. Again, it was buried, and the article has since been relegated to the bottom of its home page.

The Nine newspapers caught up two days late, with The Sydney Morning Herald framing it: “commissioned experts” (not simply the UN) had “accused” Israel … and repeated the “claim” of genocide. A significant portion of the article was dedicated to Israel’s denial of the report’s findings.

As for the rest of the media, Karl Stefanovic’s podcast interview with a right-wing racist grifter is apparently much more newsworthy.

Pacific Media Watch reports: Major New Zealand media outlets that covered the UN Commission of Inquiry report about the deliberate targeting of children included the public broadcaster Radio New Zealand (RNZ) and largest media website Stuff.

Also, leading advocacy groups in the country, such as Save the Children New Zealand, issued media releases urging global accountability in response to the report.

The Save The Children statement in New Zealand said the UN report must mark a turning point for the world to stop turning a blind eye to the suffering of Palestinian children and hold perpetrators to account.

Stephanie Tran is a journalist with a background in both law and journalism. She has worked at The Guardian and as a paralegal, where she assisted Crikey’s defence team in the high-profile defamation case brought by Lachlan Murdoch. Her reporting has been recognised nationally, earning her the 2021 Democracy’s Watchdogs Award for Student Investigative Reporting and a nomination for the 2021 Walkley Student Journalist of the Year Award. Republished from Michael West Media with permission.

Fiji Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka says his government will not interfere with the work of the country’s anti-corruption body following the latest turn of events involving a British-Fijian national.

On Monday, Charlie Charters, a former Fiji Rugby administrator and a journalist, was released on bail by the Suva Magistrates Court after being charged with aiding and abetting an unknown Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) whistleblower into releasing confidential information from the agency.

Charters, 57, was en route to Sydney on Saturday but was held at Nadi International Airport and reportedly asked by FICAC officers to reveal his sources in order to proceed with his scheduled flight.

• READ MORE: Arrest and charges against British-Fijian national spark free speech concerns
• FICAC defends silence in Charlie Charters case amid social media commentary
• Charters bailed and stop departure issued
• Other FICAC reports

He reportedly declined to comply and as a result spent two nights in FICAC custody before appearing in court yesterday. He has been released on strict bail conditions and has been ordered to surrender his travel documents.

Charters’ arrest comes amid a deepening constitutional crisis at FICAC.

According to local media, Fiji’s Judicial Services Commission, the body responsible for making recommendations to Fijian President on constitutional officers, is of the view that the appointment of FICAC’s current head Lavi Rokoika was not legal.

It makes the saga significantly complicated for Rabuka, as Rokoika was appointed in May last year following the sacking of FICAC’s previous chief, Barbara Malimali.

Appointment unlawful
While Rabuka said that the decision to dismiss Malimali was in response to the findings of a 650-page Commission of Inquiry led by Judge David Ashton-Lewis, the Fiji High Court has now ruled Malimali’s appointment was “unlawful”.

Charters has been using his Facebook platform to highlight what he describes as shortcomings of Rabuka’s coalition government which came into power in December 2022.

His posts have focused mainly on governance concerns, including issues at FICAC.

His arrest, detention, and charges have heightened anxiety among politicians, advocates and the public about FICAC and Rokoika using intimidation tactics — tactics for which the previous FijiFirst administration was accused.

“We will not interfere [with FICAC],” Rabuka told reporters in Suva when asked about the situation.

He said Fiji did not have a whistleblower policy but it needed one.

However, he added that questions needed to be asked about “how do we know that the whistleblower is genuine and the facts that they raised are factual”.

“Those are the things that will have to be considered before we formulate the policy on whistleblowing.”

Meanwhile, the case against Charters has been adjourned until March 2.

FICAC said the matter was now before the court and would proceed according to due process.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

With all the setbacks of recent years, Vanuatu’s citizenship sale schemes should be dead in the water — instead they are thriving, and geopolitical chaos is playing a part.

The citizenship-by-investment sector is the biggest single revenue earner for Vanuatu’s government, but lingering issues of integrity cast a shadow over it.

In 2024, when Vanuatu became the first country to lose its European Union visa-free access over concerns about its golden passport scheme, there were fears it would be a huge blow to the sector.

• READ MORE: Other Vanuatu passport sale reports

But designated agents for Vanuatu’s citizenship programmes have told RNZ Pacific this has not necessarily hurt them much, as their product has other benefits and passport holders can still apply to access Europe.

However, Vanuatu’s continued inclusion on an EU anti-money laundering blacklist hurts more, Francesca Grillon of approved agent Yawha & Associates said.

Currency hassles
Grillon said the decision to stop visa-free entry was not a major downfall for the citizenship programme.

“I think the main issue we are having is the blacklisting from Europe, because that that is an obstacle for receiving funds in foreign currency,” she said.

This issue came to a head last September when the Commonwealth Bank of Australia — which served as the correspondent bank for the National Bank of Vanuatu — advised it would no longer facilitate transfers for certified agents in the citizenship programmes

Melten Menauke of Smart Citizenship Vanuatu explained that this left the government in a bind over how it collects the donations and fees that foreign applicants pay.

“The National Bank is still looking for a correspondent bank to accept US dollars. I don’t know what is happening with the Commonwealth Bank of Australia.

“US currency was the first one they blocked, and now they are no longer accepting [Australian dollars]. They’re only accepting Japanese yen,” he said, adding that this created costly hurdles for agents and applicants alike.

But integrity issues are not just creating pressure on Vanuatu’s citizenship sector internationally.

‘Nobody trusts anyone’
A Commission of Inquiry into the citizenship programmes was initiated by Vanuatu’s government in 2024 following concerns about corrupt practices involving the sale of citizenship and misuse of the programmes for personal and political gain.

But the inquiry report has still not been made public, eight months after it was officially handed to the government. As calls for its release continue, Jenny Ligo, the chairperson of Women Against Crime and Corruption in Vanuatu, said citizenship schemes had been misled by political interests.

“That programme needs to be taken out totally. Because most of the projects under programmes in Vanuatu, it always ties in with pollitics and politicians,” Ligo said.

“This is all wrong. We need neutral people to run these programmes. But at the moment nobody trusts anyone.”

Vanuatu’s government has had a lot to contend with in the last few years, including responding to major disasters — earthquakes and cyclones — and the challenge of creating much-needed political reform. However, addressing the integrity problems of the citizenship-by-investment schemes is high on its priotiy list

Grillon said the government had been taking the right steps to improve compliance with regulations and rules, including strengthening the Financial Intelligence Unit which screens applicants.

“There’s a lot of effort, both from the high level government and directorship and public servants, in trying to really follow the international advice, and the newly introduced laws and doing everything properly.”

In demand
Overall, the sector is doing well. According to the Vanuatu Daily Post, citizenship sale receipts made up the bulk of the US$31 million in revenue in the past year — 24.3 percent more than what was forecast, with around 2000 foreigners granted citizenship last year.

Interest remains strong in several foreign markets, Norman Joseph of JG Marketing, Consulting and Recruitment Agency said.

“We have Chinese, we have Indonesians, we have Russians. Most of them are from different countries but they also have passports from different countries,” Joseph said.

“So they come in, for example, some might be Chinese but they also have a Mexican passport, so they apply from a Mexican passport.”

Ros Stanford of designated agent Stanford Knight said the Vanuatu passport was attractive for a variety of reasons.

“So, either for visa free travel — so global mobility is one option; for those that actually physically want to reside for tax benefits; and then we have a lot of clients currently who just want a safe like a Plan B, a safe alternative residence, in case things turn to custard globally.”

On the latter reason, Stanford said they had seen an uptick in the last couple of years, a reflection of ongoing ruptures in the global geopolitical order.

Even without visa-free access to Europe, and despite the concerns of ni-Vanuatu about its commodification, Vanuatu Citizenship is in demand — and agents tout it as one of the fastest citizenships to get any where in the world.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese has finally bowed to pressure from the Murdoch News Corp’s relentless media campaign and advocacy by political critics and victim’s families to announce a royal commission of inquiry into “antisemitism and social cohesion”.

The commission advocates were seeking his political downfall over last month’s Bondi Beach massacre that killed 15 people at a Jewish religious holiday of Hanukkah with complaints that he had “not done enough” against antisemitism.

One of the two allegedly ISIS-aligned terrorist gunmen was also killed at the scene of the tragedy and the other was wounded and arrested. He has been charged with 59 counts, including 15 charges of murder and committing a terrorist act.

• READ MORE: What is a royal commission? Could one into the Bondi attack create meaningful change?
• Australian PM backflips over royal commission into the Bondi shootings
• Israel’s propaganda machine endangers every Jew on the planet — including me —  Antony Loewenstein
• Mapping selective media coverage of the post-massacre discourse

Albanese held a press conference in Canberra yesterday and confirmed that former High Court justice Virginia Bell would lead the national inquiry.

While the royal commission has been mostly welcomed by survivors, victims’ families and Jewish community groups that have been lobbying for a national inquiry, some advocacy organisations have criticised the time it has taken before being called.

However, even more serious criticisms have emerged over the terms of reference and a widespread belief that the real objective is to mute criticism of Israel and its brutal policies of genocide and ethnic cleansing.

Award-winning journalist and Lamestream co-host Osman Faruqi, for example, argues “this royal commission won’t give us answers to Bondi — it’s set up to protect Israel.”

“The terms of reference for the Royal Commission should put aside any doubt: this is an inquiry designed to castigate critics of Israel.”

In the media release yesterday that Albanese, Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke and Attorney-General Michelle Rowland confirmed the four main areas to be covered, they stated:

• Tackling antisemitism by investigating the nature and prevalence of antisemitism in institutions and society, and its key drivers in Australia, including ideologically and religiously motivated extremism and radicalisation.
• Making recommendations that will assist law enforcement, border control, immigration and security agencies to tackle antisemitism, including through improvements to guidance and training within law enforcement, border control, immigration, and security agencies to respond to antisemitic conduct.
• Examining the circumstances surrounding the antisemitic Bondi terrorist attack on December 14, 2025.
• Making any other recommendations arising out of the inquiry for strengthening social cohesion in Australia and countering the spread of ideologically and religiously motivated extremism in Australia.

Missing from the terms of reference is anything related to the rise of Islamophobia in Australia. The brief is far too narrowly framed compared with what many had hoped for.

The Australian Government has announced the establishment of a Royal Commission following the antisemitic Bondi terror attack. This devastating event deeply affected the victims, their families, the Jewish community, first responders and the broader Australian public.

The Royal… pic.twitter.com/kFQbrJh5IZ

— Australian Human Rights Commission (@AusHumanRights) January 9, 2026

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had cynically jumped in within hours of the Bondi shootings to lambast Albanese and connect the massacre to the massive protests against the Gaza genocide — including 300,000 on the Sydney Harbour Bridge — even though there was no evidence of this.

He blamed the deadly Bondi attack on Albanese, accusing the Australian prime minister of pouring “fuel on the antisemitism fire” by recognising a Palestinian state. (The State of Palestine is recognised as a sovereign nation by 157 UN member states, representing 81 percent of membership).

“You took no action. You let the disease spread and the result is the horrific attacks on Jews we saw today,” said Netanyahu, who is wanted on an International Criminal Court (ICJ) warrant to answer charges of war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Israeli authorities have a pattern of blaming criticism of the Israeli government and military’s over its genocidal actions in Gaza for fuelling antisemitism.

Globally popular phrases such as ‘Globalise the intifada’, ‘From the river to the sea Palestine will be free’, and ‘Death to the IDF’ have frequently been targeted by Israeli officials and lobbyists seeking to shield their government’s atrocities.

Jewish-Australian author and journalist Antony Loewenstein, who wrote the 2023 bestselling book The Palestine Laboratory with powerful insights into Israel’s cruel military machine of repression against Palestinians, has been scathing in his television and newspaper commentaries, accusing Tel Aviv of “outrageous lies” that endangered Jews worldwide.

“Within hours of the horrific, antisemitic attack at Bondi Beach in Sydney [last] month, the Israeli government and its proxies started pushing false narratives, outright lies and racism to a grieving nation,” he wrote in Middle East Eye.

“Netanyahu and senior Israeli ministers blamed an Australian government that ‘normalised boycotts against Jews’, recognised the state of Palestine this year, and refused to shut down pro-Palestine marches.

“Former Israeli government spokesperson Eylon Levy posted on X (formerly Twitter): ‘Jews around the world live in fear because we are being hunted. October 7 inspired millions around the world and launched a global war against Jews.’

“There was no logic or sense to this verbal onslaught at a time when the dead bodies were still warm on Bondi Beach. At that point, and still now, there’s no clear picture of the motives of the father and son accused in the slaughter of mostly Jews who had gathered to mark the first night of Hanukkah, although a link to Islamic State has been explored.

“It was an outrageous intervention from a disgraced Israeli government accused of committing genocide in Gaza — and yet too many in the Australian and global media treated Netanyahu and his cronies as credible commentators, deferring to their supposed wisdom.”

“Israel’s propaganda machine endangers every Jew on the planet – including me”

Opinion by Anthony Loewenstein https://t.co/eQP0rdHB5I

— Middle East Eye (@MiddleEastEye) December 23, 2025

Indeed, what has been shocking for this New Zealand journalist holidaying in Australia for the past month — in Adelaide, South Australia — is the blatant way Israel has been  allowed to “shape” the public discourse and in the media. Remember, Netanyahu himself, has resisted a full Israeli inquiry into the 7 October 2023 Hamas attack, including his own alleged security failings, for more than two years.

One of the most recent cudgels being used to beat the Albanese Labor government was an open letter signed by 100+ “business leaders” supporting the royal commission call.

But what they wanted was a probe into the alleged “antisemitism” in Australia. What about the other forms of racism and harassment such an Islamophobia?

Signatories included billionaire businessman James Packer, News Corp Australasia executive chairman Michael Miller, and a whole bunch of banking and industry executives.

Mainstream media selective outrage.@Mondoweiss pic.twitter.com/9lgpNcpE1y

— Carlos Latuff (@LatuffCartoons) December 24, 2025

Editorials and cartoons in The Australian and other Murdoch media, such as The Advertiser in Adelaide, parroted each other in calling on Albanese to “serve the nation, not yourself.”

For almost four weeks none of the countless pages of articles canvassed other perspectives; to gain some balance it was necessary to turn to credible independent sources on social media. The job of the media is to serve the public interest, not themselves.

Take “serial inventor and entrepreneur” Jaqueline Outram posting on X for a counter view.

“More than 100 ‘business leaders’ signed a letter?

“Whoop-de-frickin-doo.

“Hundreds of thousands of Australians marched and will continue to march against genocide.

“Some capitalist opportunists signed a letter.

“Pfft …”

She added in a separate post, “Stop treating business leaders like they’re some kind of moral authority . . . Nobody cares what they think.”

More than 100 “business leaders” signed a letter?

Really? More than 100? Signed a letter?

Whoop-de-frickin-doo.

Hundreds of thousands of Australians marched, and will continue to march, against genocide.

Some capitalist opportunists signed a letter.

Pfft…#FreePalestine

— Jaqueline Outram (@JaquelineOutram) January 2, 2026

Commenting on the royal commission decision, prominent Brisbane journalist and media educator Kasun Ubayasiri questioned the “privileged” status of one section of the multicultural Australian society.

“So the government announces a royal commission on antisemitism when we have never had a Racism Royal Commission. Why the privileged status for one type of racism over others?”

The Jewish community in Australia numbers about 117,000 in a total population of 28  million – the ninth largest globally, and the biggest in the Indo-Pacific region. The Muslim community is about 815,000.

“More worryingly, the royal commission terms of reference seem problematic,” added Ubayasiri. “It makes no real attempt to untangle the morally repugnant antisemitism from anti-Zionism.

“The latter is easily defendable especially in its current format. The terms of reference particularly note the acceptance of the IHRA [International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance] definition of antisemitism as a working definition, suggesting this distinction between antisemitism and anti-Zionism is unlikely to be made by the royal commission.

“IHRA is already widely seen as chilling legitimate criticism of Israel. Arguably allowing the royal commission to draft its own definitional framing would have made more sense.”

Associate Professor Joseph Fernandez, a media law scholar and journalist, added: “Be very afraid of this exercise being hijacked to produce outcomes that will serve narrow and dubious interests — at the expense of the public interest generally, in a sound democracy.”

Apart from the royal commission issue, controversy has also blown up over an invitation by Albanese to the Israeli President, Isaac “Bougie” Herzog, the first head of state born in Israel since its founding in 1948, to make an official visit. Mounting calls are being made to drop the invite over Herzog’s implication in incitement to genocide.

The move was welcomed by Jewish community groups and February was touted for a likely date. However, his visit would be certain to attract protests from pro-Palestinian groups condemning Israel’s genocidal war on Gaza, which has killed at least 71,000 Palestinians, mostly women and children.

Such a trip would require a heavy security commitment and the Labor Friends of Palestine, a party group supporting the creation of a Palestinian state, has appealed to Albanese to call off the invitation.

Other pro-Palestinian groups have called for an investigation into allegations of incitement to genocide.

Also, at least 50 writers and poets are reported to be withdrawing from the Adelaide Writers Festival — Australia’s largest free literary festival — on February 28-March 5 in protest over a cancellation of an invitation to a Palestinian author, lawyer and advocate, citing the Bondi massacre as the reason.

Miles Franklin winners Michelle de Kretser and Melissa Lucashenko declared they would boycott the event in protest over featured Randa Abdel-Fattah being cancelled.

Others, including journalism professor and former foreign correspondent Peter Greste who was jailed by the Egyptian government for the “crime of being a journalist”, have also pulled out.

“We do not help social cohesion by silencing voices,” Greste posted on X.

My statement in response to the racist decision to cancel me from Adelaide Writers’ Week. https://t.co/HktwrcWveT pic.twitter.com/EDqTOteA1S

— Randa Abdel-Fattah (@RandaAFattah) January 8, 2026

Dr Abdel-Fattah accused the Adelaide festival board of “blatant and shameless” anti-Palestinian racism and censorship, adding that the attempt to associate her with the Bondi massacre was “despicable”.

“The Adelaide Writers Festival Board has stripped me of my humanity and agency, reducing me to an object onto which others can project their racist fears and smears.”

She had been expected to discuss her novel Discipline, which raises ethical issues about whose voices are allowed to be heard.

You can wake up one morning in Fiji and feel like you’re living in a totally different country.

Overnight we have lost two of our three Deputy Prime Ministers — by many accounts these were the two who were perhaps among the most influential and pivotal in the running of this government.|

Just like that. No longer in cabinet.

• READ MORE: Fiji’s Deputy Prime Minister Biman Prasad charged by FICAC
• Second Fijian Deputy PM charged with corruption-related offences
• Kamikamica resigns amid Fiji corruption charges

For days news of Biman’s impending arrest was being posted about in advance — clearly leaked by people inside Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC). So it did not come as a total surprise.

But reading the reactions on social media — what has surprised, unnerved and confused many — especially government supporters, is how and why does a government charge their own when many in the previous government they wanted to be held accountable continue to walk free?

Why did charges against the two DPM’s take priority?

Is that a sign of how divided they are — or how upright and full of integrity they are?

Charges seem small
The charges brought against the two DPM’s seem small when compared to the significant impact of their removal from cabinet. PM Sitiveni Rabuka, when he was SODELPA leader in 2018, was charged with more or less the similar offence DPM Biman is being charged with — inaccurate declaration of assets and liabilities under the Political Parties Act.

Rabuka was acquitted on the eve of the 2018 election.

Many thought then the whole charge was nothing more than the former Bainimarama government trying to take out its main competitor ahead of the 2018 elections. There was a strong anti-FICAC sentiment then by those now in power.

The main gripe of the coalition parties coming in was that FICAC was being used by those in power for their political agenda — and needed to be disbanded and come under the Police Force.

Rabuka said as much to me in a 2022 interview.

Inevitably, many are now openly wondering if the same thing FijiFirst was accused of doing is happening here, and if this is a machiavellian political strategy for power. To take out a potential internal challenger and clear out a coalition partner so PAP can fight the next elections on its own and focus on winning it outright.

With the support of some former FijiFirst MP’s — PAP has more than enough numbers — and not as reliant on NFP and SODELPA any more.

Coalition has been great
The coalition has been great — but it has been a headache keeping everyone together and managing everyone’s competing interests.

However, the PM has grounds to argue that he is just following the process and maintaining the integrity of FICAC’s fight against corruption — that was severely compromised with the appointment of Barbara Malimali as per the Commission of Inquiry report.

That all he is practising are the principles of transparency, accountability and good governance. Nothing more, nothing less.

That matter is being heard in court with the ruling to be delivered by 23 January 2026 — three months away.

Rabuka has stated that “no one is above the law” and seems confident of weathering any political storm.

But the dark political clouds are forming. Expect more thunder and lightning strikes as more influential people in key positions are expected to be arrested, putting the political and judicial landscape in turmoil.

Forecast is uncertain.

Many storms before
Rabuka has been through many storms like this before. He says he continues to have the support of everyone on his side, including the two DPM’s recently charged.

For now he remains firmly in charge.

But what was once just whispers of internal dissent and division that many of us once dismissed as rumours is starting to grow, as politicians weigh their options.

Whether it turns into a split or full on rebellion, or everyone realise they have no choice but to fall in line, we shall wait and see.

Could we see a repeat of 1994 when Rabuka’s government was brought down from within but he managed to win enough in the elections and form a coalition with the GVP to remain in power?

As of now many in politics are trying to work out which way the wind will blow.

Stanley Simpson is director of Mai TV, general secretary of the Fiji Media Association (FMA) and a media commentator. This is an independent commentary first published on his Facebook page and republished with permission.

MEDIAWATCH: By RNZ Mediawatch presenter Colin Peacock

Successive New Zealand governments have dodged the issue of how the news media should be held to account, leaving us with outdated and fragmented systems for standards and complaints.

But the issue erupted recently when the Broadcasting Standards Authority (BSA) advised The Platform it could consider public complaints about its online output.

That sparked calls to roll back the Authority’s authority — and one MP drafted a bill to scrap it.

• READ MORE: Other RNZ Mediawatch reports

Those who reckon we don’t need an official broadcasting watchdog point out we already have laws protecting privacy, copyright and other things — and criminalising harassment and bullying.

And if someone on air — or online — lowers your reputation in the minds of right-thinking New Zealanders without good reason, you can sue them for defamation if you think you can prove it.

News organisations don’t often end up in court for that, but when they do it’s big news. Reputations are at stake — and possibly lots of money too in damages.

Thirty years ago the country’s largest-ever payment followed scurrilous claims in Metro magazine’s gossip column — all about a journalist at a rival publication.

Ten years ago, foreign affairs reporter Jon Stephenson sued the chief of the New Zealand Defence Force (NZDF) for statements that wrongly cast doubt on his reporting about New Zealand soldiers in Afghanistan. After a full jury trial, a second was about to begin when the NZDF settled for an undisclosed sum and a statement of “regret”.

Last week, another defamation case concluded, but this time the plaintiff was not a person — and was not seeking damages.

The result may not be known for months, but it could change the way controversial claims about big companies are handled by newsrooms, and — depending on the outcome — how defamation law is deployed by those on the end of investigative reporting.

‘See you in court’
Over five weeks, lawyers for food giant Talley’s went toe-to-toe in the High Court with TVNZ and its lawyers, led by Davey Salmon KC, who also acted for Stephenson 10 years ago.

Talley’s sued TVNZ over six 1News reports in 2021 and 2022 — and also, unusually, sued Christchurch-based reporter Thomas Mead individually as well.

The series alleged problems with hygiene, health and safety at two Talley’s plants.

“To the public, the company presents a spotless image of staff producing frozen vegetables with a smile on their face, but 1News can now pull back the curtain of a different side to its Ashburton factory,” Mead told viewers in July 2021.

Whistleblowers — some of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity — told 1News about problems at two plants and shared photos of dirty equipment and apparent hazards.

Other reports investigated workers’ injuries and allegations that workers’ claims had been mismanaged by the company.

TVNZ also reported a leaked email telling Talley’s staff not to talk about an incident where emergency services were called to free a worker’s hand trapped in a machine.

Mead also told viewers an invitation to tour one factory was withdrawn at the last minute. Instead, senior Talley’s staff urged TVNZ not to air the allegations and the images.

“Discussion turned to intimidation,” Mead reported.

Anonymity and privacy
Before the trial, Talley’s went to court to try — unsuccessfully — to force TVNZ to reveal the identity of some of its sources and further details of their allegations. It said this would have allowed it to assess whether the sources had sufficient understanding of the safety issues that concerned them.

“I made them a promise, and I have kept it,” Thomas Mead told the court, insisting TVNZ protected their identities because they feared retaliation from Talley’s.

In court, Talley’s lawyer Brian Dickey KC said TVNZ could not produce any evidence that any workers had faced any actual retaliation. He alleged the anonymous sources were wrong and one had tried to extort the company.

Dickey even called one report by Mead “a hit piece”, and said TVNZ’s presentation was overly emotional and its reports displayed “animus” against the company.

TVNZ insisted the reports were accurate, verified and — crucially — in the public interest, and losing the case would set a dangerous precedent for journalism.

Talley’s told the court it did not want damages, just an acknowledgement that it had been defamed and had suffered losses because of the reports.

In this case, the lawyers were not seeking to sway members of a jury — only Judge Pheroze Jagose. He said his decision may not be released until Easter next year.

“It was probably best that it was just a judge-alone (trial) because it’s mind-numbingly complex when you get into the depth of detail and the layers of what’s being argued,” Tim Murphy, Newsroom co-editor, told Mediawatch.

Pecuniary loss
To win the case, Talley’s must show it suffered pecuniary loss.

“This adds a level because they have to show their business has been affected in a way that has cost them money,” said Murphy, who watched the trial from the press bench.

“They need to show that not only has there been loss immediately after or in the time frame of these pieces in 2021 and 2022 — but also that the particular statements in each story that they’re suing about — called ‘imputations’ in defamation law — then led to the loss.

“They said it couldn’t be specified to a dollar figure — but in their view it was obvious and inarguable that the TVNZ coverage had cost them financially.”

Talley’s said contracts with Countdown (now Woolworths) and Hello Fresh were affected.

“They also had the cost of an independent inquiry by former Police Commissioner Mike Bush, and the cost of a PR firm to handle all of this — and then costs of their management time diverted from their factories and so on,” Newsroom co-editor Tim Murphy told Mediawatch.

“They also said they had opprobrium for their staff in the community, and they said that was a cost because it can affect morale and productivity.”

What are the stakes?
“From past defamation cases that went a long way — even if they didn’t get to trial — both parties will have spent millions in legal costs to this point,” Murphy told Mediawatch.

“Talley’s have also gone for ‘indemnity costs’ so there could still be a substantial amount [to pay] for TVNZ should it lose.”

“Both parties (in court) painted this case as having a very big impact should it go the other way.”

“TVNZ’s view was that if . . .  a company can succeed with that level of loss, then it will open it up to all sorts of companies. Davey Salmon, their KC, said that it would be inviting Defamation Act cases from corporations who have effectively suffered no loss.

“Talley’s were of the view that if TVNZ won this, then it was open season on companies and corporations… and that no company would be able to withstand reporting that is in error or biased.”

Murphy’s predecessor as New Zealand Herald editor, Dr Gavin Ellis, appeared as an expert witness for TVNZ. Dr Ellis told the court TVNZ appeared to have verified sources and cross-checked key claims and sought independent views. He also believed Talley’s was given a reasonable amount of time to respond to allegations.

He also backed TVNZ’s decision not to surrender notes — or even redacted versions of transcripts from interviews with anonymous sources to protect their confidentiality.

“There were pretty good levels of both cross-referencing and validating. There are other aspects of the case with vulnerabilities and some of those were from at least one of the anonymous sources,” Murphy told Mediawatch.

“The need to be able to offer and guarantee anonymity and protection of identity in all respects is vital for that public interest function that journalists have.”

TVNZ argued that in the Court of Appeal, and won the right to continue that protection of those sources.

But TVNZ recently had to change its own policy after revealing too much of a vulnerable source itself in a recent documentary.

The jeopardy of brevity
Editors and reporters elsewhere were watching what Murphy described as a journalistic investigation, investigated.

The planning, decision-making and personal communications at TVNZ was scrutinised closely in court, as well as the reporting seen by the public.

One 1News broadcast in 2021 kicked off with host Simon Dallow saying: “a whistleblower tells 1News” Talley’s Ashburton plant was an “accident waiting to happen”.

In court it emerged that the anonymous source in question had not used those precise words, though Mead himself had put those words to the source during a conversation.

“[TVNZ] made claims that — when they were examined in microscopic detail — didn’t match what the story itself said. This is what lawyers do if they get this chance. They examine to that level and nuance,” Murphy said.

“Often in journalism if you get a clear affirmative to a question like that, then it’s fair to paraphrase it and say the person agreed it was ‘an accident waiting to happen’. But in this case the answer . . .  was very discursive.”

Talley’s also said some of TVNZ’s presentation was inappropriately emotive and Brian Dickey KC seized on individual words and phrases to allege TVNZ and Mead had taken against Talley’s.

Murphy noted Talley’s objected to reports that would “present anonymous source allegations, give Talley’s response and then end with a ‘but’. The company questioned why his summaries never raised a qualification like ‘but’ about the claims made by a source.”

“It alleged the technique undercut what Talley’s had said – and that there was a sort of default over-weighting of the critical view of them,” Murphy said.

Salmon claimed Talley’s was over-analysing the reports’ wording and amplifying their importance.

“News does not need to be presented in the austere form of a court judgment to be responsible. If it was, it would not be read or watched and it would not inform,” he told the court.

Will this change the way big stories are done?
Summarising complex things to make them easily understood in a three-minute TV news bulletin — or shorter — is a challenge.

Could this case prompt a move away from paraphrasing to make stories more engaging and comprehensible — and towards a drier, longer and a little less simplified style on television?

“In the quiet moments, all of those involved at TVNZ will see that there needs to be a tighter, clearer, more precise and weighted use of language and words — and images as well — in the bringing-together and presentation of these kinds of stories,” Murphy told Mediawatch.

“It’s no bad thing in a way for all the media to be given a sharp reminder that precision extends to every element of an investigative story and its presentation. The captions, the summary, the pull-quotes, the scripts, the promos of stories are all subject to this sort of scrutiny.”

Chilling effect?
Bryce Edwards of the pro-transparency Integrity Institute said this was an example of “the rich and powerful [using] these laws as legal weapons to silence critics, discourage investigative journalism, and shield themselves from scrutiny”.

“It put the very right of the media to hold power to account in the dock,” Edwards said.

Murphy said: “I think it was quite clear through the whole case that there was sort of a power play.

“The power of a big corporation with rich-lister family backers drawing a line in the sand and saying: ‘We’ve had power of the media thrown at us unfairly — so we’re going to exert some power back other way.'”

And while the media do not end up in court often defending defamation claims, we do not often know if media might be swayed by threats of defamation action from those with financial and legal clout. Or if they are deterred from publishing stories that could result in the kind of lengthy and potentially costly court case TVNZ has just faced.

“While there are many times where lawyers’ letters — or even perhaps injunctions to delay material being aired or published — occur, there are also many times where media companies have ploughed,” Murphy said.

“I don’t think the balance in the defamation setup we have is as yet favouring organisations or companies or the wealthy as much as elsewhere. We do have a defence of responsible publication in the public interest. But the key word there is ‘responsible’.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Fiji Deputy Prime Minister Manoa Kamikamica has stepped down from his position on the eve of his court appearance for corruption-related charges.

Kamikamica has been charged by the country’s anti-corruption office with perjury and providing false information in his capacity as a public servant.

Kamikamica, who also serves as the Minister for Trade and Communications, informed Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka yesterday that he would focus on clearing his name in relation to the charges laid against him by the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC).

• READ MORE: Fiji deputy PM faces corruption-related charges
• Charges against Kamikamica challenged
• Other FICAC-related reports

He is one of three deputy prime ministers in Rabuka’s coalition government.

“I have accepted his decision to step down, and he has assured me of his unwavering commitment to the government and the people of Fiji,” Rabuka said in a statement.

“I will be overseeing his portfolio responsibilities for the foreseeable future.”

The deputy prime minister was overseas on official duties and was returning to the country.

His case is scheduled to appear at the Suva Magistrates Court today.

FICAC has not publicly commented on the specifics of the case.

The charges were filed following investigations related to the Commission of Inquiry report into the appointment of Barbara Malimali as FICAC chief, according to the state broadcaster FBC.

FBC reported that FICAC officers had seized Kamikamica’s mobile phone in July during the execution of a search warrant.

Kamikamica is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

FBC reports that Kamikamica’s legal representative, Wylie Clarke, appeared before the court today and raised serious concerns about the validity of the charges.

Clarke told the court that the case was fundamentally flawed, both in its legal foundation and in the evidence supporting it.

A Fiji deputy prime minister has been charged by the country’s anti-corruption office with perjury and providing false information in his capacity as a public servant, according to local news media reports.

Manoa Kamikamica, who also serves as the Minister for Trade and Communications and a key part of Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka’s coalition government, is currently overseas on official duties.

His case is scheduled to be called on Wednesday at the Suva Magistrates Court.

• READ MORE: Other FICAC-related reports

According to Mai TV’s Stanley Simpson, Kamikamica will not attend court hearing and will be represented by his legal counsel Wylie Clark, who is the current head of the Fiji Law Society.

“The case, brought by the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption [FICAC] is listed under case number 06/25 in the Magistrates’ Anti-Corruption Division at Suva Court 4,” Simpson said.

“Kamikamica has referred all questions to his legal counsel.”

FICAC has not publicly commented on the specifics of the case.

According to the state broadcaster FBC, the charges were filed following investigations linked to the Commission of Inquiry report into the appointment of Barbara Malimali as FICAC chief.

“FICAC officers had seized Kamikamica’s mobile phone in July during the execution of a search warrant.”

Kamikamica is presumed innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

This morning there is no article on the political page of The New Zealand Herald about the plight of people in Gaza, the same is the case at The Post and at RNZ. Even the 1News political page is Gaza free but what may stun you over a Sunday morning coffee is the fact that there is also no mention of Gaza on the “World Pages” of any of these so-called news organisations.

It’s not news in the world of our mainstream media journalists.

Instead, there is articles about “no deal” between Trump and Putin, 300 dead in Pakistan, Trump will meet Zelenskyy, Stone Age Humans were picky about what stones they used . . . and other things — in fact the only article in the “big ” New Zealand mainstream media “World” pages about Gaza is at Stuff and it’s a link to a three minute news video item from yesterday’s Auckland protest about Neil Finn supporting Green Party co-leader Chlöe Swarbrick.

• READ MORE: Luxon ‘grow a spine’ chants as big rallies call for NZ to recognise Palestine state
• Nick Rockell: Supporting Palestine
• Gordon Campbell: The lack of spine in New Zealand’s foreign policy on Gaza
• Other Israeli war on Gaza reports

Chlöe said the evidence is pretty clear and you don’t kill journalists for no reason when Israel laughed off claims that people in Gaza were starving.

Last night, TVNZ 1News broadcast a news item that led with Neil Finn singing “Don’t Dream it’s Over” and Simon Mercep interviewing Chlöe about her stance on an apology.

The news Chlöe would be back next week at Parliament probably shocked Duncan Garner but there was precious little coverage of what was said in protest speeches because the limitations of broadcasting news concision (a sequence of soundbites) prevent the New Zealand public from hearing too much about Gaza from our own mainstream news services.

Gordon’s action list
Over on social media many people are sharing Gordon Campbell’s article around — where he details the actions you could take and points out how the people of Gaza don’t have time for symbolic stances and the kinds of actions that might help — like sanctions and UN peacekeeping intervention on the ground.

Gordon Campbell has “a go at” the stance taken by the NZ government that “it’s not a matter of if, but when” by adding “but not now” and why not now?

G News on yesterday’s Palestine solidarity rally in Te Komititanga Square, Auckland.

One reason for “but not now” pitched by Campbell is that with Todd McClay now heading over to the US to beg for a return to 10 percent tariffs, New Zealand is stalling and playing a wait and see game — watching whether Australia will be punished for backing a Palestinian state and whether tariffs will be part of the game.

A map of the nations in the world who support a Palestinian state shows most of it in green — and the holdouts in white — with New Zealand holding out in white as we recite “Not if, but when, but not now”.

The editorial at The New Zealand Herald this morning is about how Labour MPs should have shown up and performed publicly at the Covid Circus Phase 2 Royal Commission of Inquiry in the opinion of the Herald (run by Steven Joyce and cookers from The Centrist) — because an urgent Taxpayers’ Union Poll claims 53 percent say so with a giant margin for error not even mentioned — nor how the Royal Commission has all the information it needs from the previous government but it needs the same questions answered in public.

The priorities and partisanship of The NZ Herald are on show as it campaigns hard against Labour and the left bloc even while there’s an unfolding genocide taking place in the world and it’s “World” pages are empty about this — while decent people cancel their subscriptions.

Many of us are still aghast at the way senior political correspondent Audrey Young wished Chlöe would go away when all she was doing was asking National MPs to act with their conscience and Speaker Gerry Brownlee had taken offence and dished out injustice — which now has backfired at grassroots level across the nation and media starve us all of the real content in those speeches.

Chlöe has said from the start this is not about her and she was telling people this again yesterday as folks thanked her for taking an unapologetic stand.

Who controls the spotlight? Media!
We wanted to hear from Chlöe and we wanted to hear those speeches.

I personally felt I had let down the show yesterday because my cell and sound gear seized up in the bitter cold wind and rain so I missed Chlöe’s speech and some of the other messages — Hey Now Don’t Dream it’s Over — but with no umbrella, no raincoat and standing in the rain my frozen fingers took some time to come right and I sat on a ferry in cold wet clothes like a failure afterwards but it is what it is.

My apologies for not being better prepared.

It was pointed out in speeches at the rally (there has almost been 100 of them now) how NZ journalists do not support their colleagues who are being murdered for doing their jobs in Gaza and when I got home and warmed up we discussed the way Al Jazeera is a good news channel and how crap things are in New Zealand media.

Gordon Campbell and a few other notable exceptions keep the faith and his observation “but not now” has done the thinking for many of us about the spineless government who are stalling and pretending this is complex and needs to take weeks while every day more people starve to death, get shot going for food. And it all just happens as if — it’s “a mystery” – while our government names Hamas strongly but nobody else.

Criticism of State Terror is more toned down and we care more about our US relationship than anything much else it seems — putting our own interests first and not reporting much about the facts.

RNZ has finally published “Spine and Punishment: A review of Swarbrick v Brownlee” because the media spotlight was on this local issue and the history of Speakers’ rulings versus “a new decency” because Gerry was offended and overreached.

Gerry must withdraw
In my opinion, Gerry has got to withdraw and apologise or step down and any more stick about this towards Chlöe is going to further the focus on National MPs who are silent and hiding behind “But not now”.

If only six of 68 National MPs voted with their conscience and not their party “but not now” instructions then we’d be actively progressing a new law to sanction Israel — and our actions would speak louder than merely words and symbolic gestures.

“But not now” is the order of the day for New Zealand’s mainstream media as Dr Paul Goldsmith is caught out supporting what David Seymour wrote to the UN — Education Minister Erica Stanford overreaches banning Te Reo words, Public Service Minister Judith Collins is threatening to prevent strikes, and PM Christopher Luxon is now loathed by the business community as his fluffers at The NZ Herald look the other way.

The unfolding genocide in Gaza seems to be going to plan as NZ news media also lack a spine and any kind of support for their dead colleagues while this one term government clings to “Not if, but when — but not now”.

Might as well carry on starving until September.

“He’s lost the plot” – “but not now”.

Because this government and its sycophantic media need more time to argue about this very “complex” issue.

Gerard Otto is a digital creator and independent commentator on politics and the media through his G News column and video reports. Republished with permission.

Porirua City Council is set to create a memorial for more than 1800 former patients of the local hospital buried in unmarked graves. But Pacific leaders are asking to be “meaningfully involved” in the process, including incorporating prayer, language, and ceremonial practices.

More than 50 people gathered at Porirua Cemetery last month after the council’s plans became public, many of whom are descendants of those buried without headstones.

Cemeteries Manager Daniel Chrisp said it was encouraging to see families engaging with the project.

• READ MORE: Other Pacific burial reports

Chrisp’s team has placed 99 pegs to mark the graves of families who have come forward so far. One attendee told him that it was deeply moving to photograph the site where two relatives were buried.

“It’s fantastic that we’ve got to this point, having the descendants of those in unmarked graves encouraged to be involved,” he said.

“These plots represent mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, children and other relatives, so it’s important to a lot of people.”

The Porirua Lunatic Asylum, which later became Porirua Hospital, operated from 1887 until the 1990s. At its peak in the 1960s, it was one of Aotearoa New Zealand’s largest hospitals, housing more than 2000 patients and staff.

As part of the Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care, the government has established a national fund for headstones for unmarked graves.

Porirua City Council has applied for $200,000 to install a memorial that will list every known name.

Criticism over lack of Pacific consultation
Some Pacific community leaders say they were never consulted, despite Pacific people among the deceased.

Porirua Cook Islands Association chairperson Teurukura Tia Kekena said this was the first she had heard of the project, and she was concerned Pacific communities had not been included in conversations so far.

“If there was any unmarked grave and the Porirua City Council is aware of the names, I would have thought they would have contacted the ethnic groups these people belonged to,” she said.

“From a Cook Islands point of view, we need to acknowledge these people. They need to be fully acknowledged.”

Kekena learned about the project only after being contacted by a reporter, despite the council’s ongoing efforts to identify names and place markers for families who have come forward.

The council’s application for funding is part of its response to the Royal Commission of Inquiry.

Kekena said it was important how the council managed the memorial, adding that it mattered deeply for Cook Islands families and the wider Pacific community, especially those with relatives buried at the site.

Reflect Pacific values
She believed that a proper memorial should reflect Pacific values, particularly the importance of faith, family, and cultural protocol.

“It’s huge. It’s connecting us to these people,” she said. “Just thinking about it is getting me emotional.

“Like I said, the Pākehā way of acknowledging is totally different from our way. When we acknowledge, when we go for an unveiling, it’s about family. It’s about family. It’s about family honouring the person that had passed.

“And we do it in a way that we have a service at the graveside with the orometua [minister] present. Yeah, unveil the stone by the family, by the immediate family, if there were any here at that time.”

She also underscored the connection between remembering the deceased and healing intergenerational trauma, particularly given the site’s history with mental health.

Healing the trauma
“It helps a lot. It’s a way of healing the trauma. I don’t know how these people came to be buried in an unmarked grave, but to me, it’s like they were just put there and forgotten about.

“I wouldn’t like to have my family buried in a place and be forgotten.”

Kekena urged the council to work closely with the Cook Islands community moving forward and said she would bring the matter back to her association to raise awareness and check possible connections between local families and the names identified.

Yvonne Underhill‑Sem, a Cook Islands community leader and professor of Pacific Studies at the University of Auckland, said the memorial had emotional significance, noting her personal connection to Whenua Tapu as a Porirua native.

“In terms of our Pacific understandings of ancestry, everybody who passes away is still part of our whānau. The fact that we don’t know who they are is unsettling,” she said.

“It would be a real relief to the families involved and to the generations that follow to have those graves named.”

Council reponse
A Porirua City Council spokesperson said they had been actively sharing the list of names with the public and encouraged all communities — including Pacific groups, genealogists, and local iwi — to help spread the word.

So far, 99 families have come forward.

“We would encourage any networks such as Pacific, genealogists and local iwi to share the list around for members of the public to get in touch,” the spokesperson said.

The list of names is available on the council’s website and includes both a downloadable file and a searchable online tool here.

Porirua councillors Izzy Ford and Moze Galo, two of the three Pacific members on the council, said Pacific families must be central to the memorial process. Ford said burial sites carried deep cultural weight for Pacific communities.

“We know that burial sites are more than just places of rest, they are sacred spaces that hold our stories, our ancestry and dignity — they are our connection to those who came before us.”

She said public notices and websites were not enough.

“If we are serious about finding the families of those buried in unmarked graves here in Porirua, we have to go beyond public notices and websites.”

Funding limited
Ford said government funding would be limited, and the council must work with trusted Pacific networks to reach families.

“It means partnering with groups who carry trust in our community . . . Pacific churches, elders, and organisations, communicating in our languages through Pacific radio, social media, community events, churches, and health providers.”

Galo agreed and said the memorial must reflect Pacific values in both design and feeling.

“It should feel warm, colourful, spiritual, and welcoming. Include Pacific designs, carvings, and symbols . . .  there should be room for prayer, music, and quiet reflection,” he said.

“Being seen and heard brings healing, honour, and helps restore our connection to our ancestors. It reminds our families that we belong, that our history matters, and that our voice is valued in this space.”

Galo said the work must continue beyond the unveiling.

“Community involvement shouldn’t stop after the memorial is built, we should have a role in how it’s maintained and used in the future.

“These were real people, with families, love, and lives that mattered. Some were buried without names, without ceremony, and that left a deep pain. Honouring them now is a step toward healing, and a way of saying, you were never forgotten.”

Members of the public who recognise a family name on the list are encouraged to get in touch by emailing cemeteries@poriruacity.govt.nz.

LDR is local body journalism co-funded by RNZ and NZ On Air. Asia Pacific Report is a partner in the project.

The Fiji government looks set to pay around NZ$1.5 million in damages to the disgraced former head of the country’s anti-corruption agency FICAC.

The state is offering Barbara Malimali an out-of-court settlement after her lawyer lodged a judicial review of her sacking in the High Court in Suva.

Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka suspended Malimali from her role on May 29, following a damning Commission of Inquiry into her appointment.

• READ MORE: Other FICAC reports

Malimali was described as “universally corrupt” by Justice David Ashton-Lewis, the commissioner of the nine-week investigation, which involved 35 witnesses.

“She was a pawn in the hands of devious members of government, who wanted any allegations against them or other government members thrown out,” Ashton-Lewis told RNZ Pacific Waves earlier this month.

Tanya Waqanika, who acts for Malimali, told RNZ Pacific that her client was seeking a “substantial” payout for damages and unpaid dues.

Waqanika met lawyers from the Attorney-General’s Office in the capital, Suva, on Tuesday after earlier negotiations failed.

Expected to hear in writing
She declined to say exactly what was discussed, but said she expected to hear back in writing from the other party the same day.

A High Court judge has given the government until 3pm on Friday to reach a settlement, otherwise he will rule on the application on Monday.

“We’ll see what they come up with, that’s the beauty of negotiations, but NZ$1.5 million would be a good amount to play with after your career has been ruined,” Waqanika said.

“[Malimali’s] career spans over 27 years, but it is now down the drain thanks to Ashton-Lewis and the damage the inquiry report has done.”

She said Malimali also wanted a public apology, as she was being defamed every day in social media.

“I don’t expect we’ll get one out of Ashton-Lewis,” she said.

Adjournment sought
During a hearing in the High Court on Monday, lawyers for the state sought an adjournment to discuss a settlement with Waqanika.

However, she opposed this, saying that the government’s legal team had vast resources and they should have been prepared for the hearing.

Malimali filed a case against President Naiqama Lalabalavu, Rabuka and the Attorney-General on June 13 on the grounds that her suspension was unconstitutional.

Waqanika said the President suspended her on the advice of the Prime Minister instead of consulting the Judicial Services Commission.

Government lawyers approached Waqanika offering a compensation deal the same day she lodged a judicial review in the High Court.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Fiji police have commenced investigations into a Commission of Inquiry report on the appointment of the country’s now sacked head of the anti-corruption office.

Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka stood down Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) commissioner Barbara Malimali last month after a months-long inquiry was completed.

Malimali was appointed as FICAC chief in September last year despite being under investigation by the anti-corruption office.

• READ MORE: Why Fiji’s new anti-corruption commissioner was arrested on her first day in the job
• Fiji govt sticks with new anti-corruption chief after astonishing turn of events
• Other FICAC reports

Opposition figures at the time slammed it as “unbelievable” but the government backed her appointment.

The 648-page inquiry report, prepared by the Commissioner of Inquiry and Supreme Court Judge David Ashton-Lewis, has rocked Rabuka’s coalition government in recent weeks, with one political expert calling it a “full-blown crisis”.

The report, which has now been leaked online, includes allegations not only against Malimali, but senior government officials and lawyers, including the nation’s highest judicial officer and the head of the Law Society.

Local media are reporting that the inquiry found a “systematic failure of integrity” across Fiji’s governance and justice systems.

They report that the inquiry states the appointment process for Malimali was “legally invalid” and “ethically reprehensible”.

Investigations started
Police Commissioner Rusiate Tudravu confirmed via a statement on Wednesday that investigations into the Commission of Inquiry Report findings commenced after the police received a formal letter of referral from President Ratu Naiqama Lalabalau.

“A formal letter of referral was sent to the Fiji Police Force and the Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption, to investigate the Final Report of the Commission of Inquiry and persons of interests, and where warranted, prosecution,” he said.

Tudravu said he had met with the FICAC acting Commissioner Lavi Rokoika, alongside senior Fiji police officers “to discuss the specific areas of investigation to be undertaken by our respective institutions, to avoid duplication, and ensure efficiency of the investigation process”.

He has given his assurance for a thorough independent investigation by the team of senior investigators from the Criminal Investigations Department.

“A Commission of Inquiry report into the appointment of Barbara Malimali as head of the Fiji Independent Commission against Corruption has cost the country’s Attorney-General Graham Leung his job, embroiled Fiji’s Law Society in an acrimonious feud and exacerbated tensions in the governing coalition,” Victoria University of Wellington’s political science professor John Fraenkel wrote for the DevpolicyBlog on Tuesday.

Among the accused
“The country’s Chief Justice Salesi Temo is allegedly among those accused by the COI (though, at the time of writing, the report has not been publicly released).

“Worryingly, given Fiji’s history of coups in 1987, 2000 and 2006, military chief Jone Kalouniwai has visited the Prime Minister’s office reminding the nation of his constitutionally-bequeathed responsibility for the ‘wellbeing of Fiji and its people’.”

According to Fraenkel, the inquiry controversy comes at a critical juncture, with the Supreme Court due to rule on the legal status of the country’s 2013 Constitution in August and with Fiji drawing closer to the next election, scheduled for 2026 or, at the very latest, February 2027.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

The Department of Justice and Legal Services in Bougainville is aiming to craft a government policy to deal with violence related to sorcery accusations.

The Post-Courier reports that a forum, which wrapped up on Wednesday, aimed to dissect the roots of sorcery/witchcraft beliefs and the severe violence stemming from accusations.

An initial forum was held in Arawa last month.

• READ MORE: Other PNG sorcery reports

Central Bougainville’s Director of Justice and Legal Services, Dennis Kuiai, said the forums’ ultimate goal is crafting a government policy.

Further consultations are planned for South Bougainville next week and a regional forum in Arawa later this year.

“This policy will be deliberated and developed into law to address sorcery and [sorcery accusation-related violence] in Bougainville,” he said.

“We aim to provide an effective legal mechanism.”

Targeted 3 key areas
He said the future law’s structure was to target three key areas: the violence linked to accusations, sorcery practices themselves, and addressing the phenomenon of “glass man”.

A glassman or glassmeri has the power to accuse women and men of witchcraft and sorcery.

Papua New Guinea outlawed the practice in 2022.

The forum culminated in the compilation and signing of a resolution on its closing day, witnessed by officials.

Sorcery has long been an issue in PNG.

Those accused of sorcery are frequently beaten, tortured, and murdered, and anyone who manage to survive the attacks are banished from their communities.

Saved mother rejected
In April, a mother-of-four was was reportedly rejected by her own family after she was saved by a social justice advocacy group.

In August last year, an advocate told people in Aotearoa – where she was raising awareness – that Papua New Guinea desperately needed stronger laws to protect innocents and deliver justice for victims of sorcery related violence.

In October 2023, Papua New Guinea MPs were told that gender-based and sorcery violence was widespread and much higher than reported.

In November 2020, two men in the Bana district were hacked to death by members of a rival clan, who claimed the men used sorcery against them.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

A United Nations committee is being urged to act over human rights violations committed by illegal loggers in Papua New Guinea.

Watchdog groups Act Now! and Jubilee Australia have filed a formal request to the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination to consider action at its next meeting in August.

“We have stressed with the UN that there is pervasive, ongoing and irreparable harm to customary resource owners whose forests are being stolen by logging companies,” Act Now! campaign manager Eddie Tanago said.

• READ MORE: Other PNG logging reports

He said these abuses were systematic, institutionalised, and sanctioned by the PNG government through two specific tools: Special Agriculture and Business Leases (SABLs) and Forest Clearing Authorities (FCAs) — a type of logging licence.

“For over a decade since the Commission of Inquiry into SABLs, successive PNG governments have rubber stamped the large-scale theft of customary resource owners’ forests by upholding the morally bankrupt SABL scheme and expanding the use of FCAs,” Tanago said.

He said the government had failed to revoke SABLs that were acquired fraudulently, with disregard to the law or without landowner consent.

“Meanwhile, logging companies have made hundreds of millions, if not billions, in ill-gotten gains by effectively stealing forests from customary resource owners using FCAs.”

Abuses hard to challenge
The complaint also highlights that the abuses are hard to challenge because PNG lacks even a basic registry of SABLs or FCAs, and customary resource owners are denied access to information to the information they need, such as:

• The existence of an SABL or FCA over their forest;
• A map of the boundaries of any lease or logging licence;
• Information about proposed agricultural projects used to justify the SABL or FCA;
• The monetary value of logs taken from forests; and
• The beneficial ownership of logging companies — to identify who ultimately profits from illegal logging.

“The only reason why foreign companies engage in illegal logging in PNG is to make money,” he said, adding that “it’s profitable because importing companies and countries are willing to accept illegally logged timber into their markets and supply chains.”

“If they refused to take any more timber from SABL and FCA areas and demanded a public audit of the logging permits — the money would dry up.”

Act Now! and Jubilee Australia are hoping that this UN attention will urge the international community to see this is not an issue of “less-than-perfect forest law enforcement”.

“This is a system, honed over decades, that is perpetrating irreparable harm on indigenous peoples across PNG through the wholesale violation of their rights and destroying their forests.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Funding for New Zealand’s Ministry for Pacific Peoples (MPP) is set to be reduced by almost $36 million in Budget 2025.

This follows a cut of nearly $26 million in the 2024 budget.

As part of these budgetary savings, the Tauola Business Fund will be closed. But, $6.3 million a year will remain to support Pacific economic and business development through the Pacific Business Trust and Pacific Business Village.

• READ MORE: Budget 2025 at a glance: The big changes, winners and losers
• Govt should defuse NZ’s social timebomb – but won’t
• Budget 2025: Pasifika community braces for impact

The Budget cuts also affect the Tupu Aotearoa programme, which supports Pacific people in finding employment and training, alongside the Ministry of Social Development’s employment initiatives.

While $5.25 million a year will still fund the programme, a total of $22 million a year has been cut over the last four years.

The ministry will save almost $1 million by returning funding allocated for the Dawn Raids reconciliation programme from 2027/28 onwards.

There are two years of limited funding left to complete the ministry Dawn Raids programmes, which support the Crown’s reconciliation efforts.

Funding for Pasifika Wardens
Despite these reductions, a new initiative providing funding for Pasifika Wardens will introduce $1 million of new spending over the next four years.

The initiative will improve services to Pacific communities through capacity building, volunteer training, transportation, and enhanced administrative support.

Funding for the National Fale Malae has ceased, as only $2.7 million of the allocated $10 million has been spent since funding was granted in Budget 2020.

The remaining $6.6 million will be reprioritised over the next two years to address other priorities within the Arts, Culture and Heritage portfolio, including the National Music Centre.

Foreign Affairs funding for the International Development Cooperation (IDC) projects, particularly focussed on the Pacific, is also affected. The IDC received an $800 million commitment in 2021 from the Labour government.

The funding was time-limited, leading to a $200 million annual fiscal cliff starting in January 2026.

Budget 2025 aims to mitigate this impact by providing ongoing, baselined funding of $100 million a year to cover half of the shortfall. An additional $5 million will address a $10 million annual shortfall in departmental funding.

Support for IDC projects
The new funding will support IDC projects, emphasising the Pacific region without being exclusively aimed at climate finance objectives. Overall, $367.5 million will be allocated to the IDC over four years.

Finance Minister Nicola Willis said the Budget addressed a prominent fiscal cliff, especially concerning climate finance.

“The Budget addresses this, at least in part, through ongoing, baselined funding of $100 million a year, focused on the Pacific,” she said in her Budget speech.

“Members will not be surprised to know that the Minister of Foreign Affairs has made a case for more funding, and this will be looked at in future Budgets.”

More funding has been allocated for new homework and tutoring services for learners in Years nine and 10 at schools with at least 50 percent Pacific students to meet the requirements for the National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA).

About 50 schools across New Zealand are expected to benefit from the initiative, which will receive nearly $7 million over the next four years, having been reprioritised from funding for the Pacific Education Programme.

As a result, funding will be stopped for three programmes aimed at supporting Tu’u Mālohi, Pacific Reading Together and Developing Mathematical Inquiry Communities.

Republished from Pacific Media Network News with permission.

There are calls for greater transparency about what the HMNZS Manawanui was doing before it sank in Samoa last October — including whether the New Zealand warship was performing specific security for King Charles and Queen Camilla.

The Manawanui grounded on the reef off the south coast of Upolu in bad weather on 5 October 2024 before catching fire and sinking. Its 75 crew and passengers were safely rescued.

The Court of Inquiry’s final report released on 4 April 2025 found human error and a long list of “deficiencies” grounded the $100 million vessel on the Tafitoala Reef, south of Upolu, where it caught fire and sank.

• READ MORE: Other RNZ Navy reports

Equipment including weapons and ammunition continue to be removed from the vessel as its future hangs in the balance.

The Court of Inquiry’s report explains the Royal New Zealand Navy was asked by “CHOGM Command” to conduct “a hydrographic survey of the area in the vicinity of Sinalei whilst en route to Samoa”.

When it grounded on the Tafitoala Reef, the ship was following orders received from Headquarters Joint Forces New Zealand. The report incorrectly calls it the “Sinalei Reef”.

Sinalei is the name of the resort which hosted King Charles and Queen Camilla for CHOGM — the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting — which began in Samoa 19 days after the Manawanui sank from 25-26 October 2024. The Royals arrived two days before CHOGM began.

Support of CHOGM
Speaking at the release of the court’s final report, Chief of Navy Rear Admiral Garin Golding described the Manawanui’s activity on the south coast of Upolu.

“So the operation was done in support of CHOGM — a very high-profile security activity on behalf of a nation, so it wasn’t just a peacetime operation,” he said.

“It was done in what we call rapid environmental assessment so we were going in and undertaking something that we had to do a quick turnaround of that information so it wasn’t a deliberate high grade survey. It was a rapid environmental assessment so it does come with additional complexity and it did have an operational outcome. It’s just, um you know, we we are operating in complex environments.

“It doesn’t say that we did everything right and that’s what the report indicates and we just need to get after fixing those mistakes and improving.”

The report explained the Manawanui was tasked with “conducting the Sinalei survey task” “to survey a defined area of uncharted waters.” But Pacific security fellow at Victoria University’s Centre for Strategic Studies at Victoria University Iati Iati questions what is meant by “in support of the upcoming CHOGM”.

“All we’ve been told in the report is that it was to support CHOGM. What that means is unclear. I think that needs to be explained. I think it also needs to be explained to the Samoan people, who initiated this.

“Whether it was just a New Zealand initiative. Whether it was done for CHOGM by the CHOGM committee or whether it was something that involved the Samoa government,” Iati said.

What-for questions
“So a lot of the, you know, who was behind this and the what-for questions haven’t been answered.”

Iati said CHOGM’s organising committee included representatives from Samoa as well as New Zealand.

“But who exactly initiated that additional task which I think is on paragraph 37 of the report after the ship had sailed, the extra task was then confirmed. Who initiated that I’m not sure and I think that needs to be explained. Why it was confirmed after the sailing that also needs to be explained.

“In terms of security, I guess the closest we can come to is the fact that you know King Charles was staying on that side and Sinalei Reef. It may have something to do with that but this is just really unclear at the moment and I think all those questions need to be addressed.”

The wreck of the Manawanui lies 2.1 nautical miles — 3.89km — from the white sandy beach of the presidential suite at Sinalei Resort where King Charles and Queen Camilla stayed during CHOGM.

Just over the fence from the Royals’ island residence, Royal New Zealand Navy divers were coming and going from the sunken vessel in the early days of their recovery operation, and now salvors and the navy continue to work from there.

AUT Law School professor Paul Myburgh said the nature of the work the Manawanui was carrying out when it ran aground on the reef has implications for determining compensation for people impacted by its sinking.

Sovereign immunity
“Historically, if it was a naval vessel that was the end of the story. You could never be sued in normal courts about anything that happened on board a naval vessel. But nowadays, of course, governmental vessels are often involved in commercial activity as well,” he said.

“So we now have what we call the restrictive theory of sovereign immunity which states that if you are involved in commercial or ordinary activity that is non-governmental you are subject to the jurisdiction of the courts, so this is why I’ve been wanting to get to the bottom of exactly what they were doing.

“Who instructed whom and that sort of thing. And it seems to me that in line with the findings of the report all of this seems to have been done on a very adhoc basis.”

RNZ first asked the New Zealand Defence Force detailed questions on Friday, April 11, but it declined to respond.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

A series of violent incidents and confrontations over the weekend in New Caledonia’s capital Nouméa and its surroundings, causing clashes with law enforcement agencies and several injuries.

On Saturday night, in a bar and night-club in downtown Nouméa, a “Ladies Night” event dedicated to International Women’s Day degenerated into an all-out brawl, involving mostly young customers.

The event was scheduled to end at 2am, but bar owners decided to close at 1am, prompting violent reactions from the young patrons, who started to throw glasses at the DJ, then ransacked the bar.

• READ MORE: Other Kanaky New Caledonia reports

The incident was recorded and later broadcast on social networks.

“We should have closed at 2am, but shortly after midnight, we felt the pressure was mounting and most of the people were already quite inebriated”, the 1881 establishment owner told local media.

“So we decided to close earlier to avoid people getting more drunk. We stopped the music, that’s when they started to throw glasses to the bar”.

Public brawl outside
Outside, in a parking lot, an estimated “300 to 400 hundred” customers began a public brawl.

Law enforcement units were called and later described themselves as finding “a dangerous situation” — confronted with “hostile” individuals, and having to resort to teargas and stun-balls.

The French High Commission reported during a press conference yesterday that seven people had been injured, including one gendarme and a police officer, in the face of people throwing “bottles, stones and even concrete blocks”.

The situation came back under control at around 2:30 am, officials said.

The High Commission said that at this stage no one had been arrested, but an investigation was underway that could lead to the bar and night club being closed down.

“This is a serious incident . . .  but we are not back to the insurrection situation last year”, the French High Commission’s chief-of-staff, Anaïs Aït Mansour, told reporters.

She said a meeting had been called with all of Nouméa’s bar and nightclub owners and managers.

After months of prohibition on the sale of alcoholic beverages, following the violent unrest that started in May 2024, the restrictions were finally lifted only a few weeks ago.

A re-introduction of the restrictive measure was now “under consideration”, Aït Mansour said.

The incident has also prompted political reactions as parties were preparing for the return of French Minister for Overseas Manuel Valls in less than two weeks to try to bring political talks to another level on New Caledonia’s political future.

Politicians warned not to amalgamate
The incidents, widely condemned by the pro-France political groups, were also labelled as “unacceptable” by the major pro-independence Union Calédonienne (UC)-FLNKS party.

In a media statement, UC said these “acts of vandalism and violence committed by inebriated youths” had “nothing to do with the political claims from 13 May 2024, or with the Kanak people’s struggle”.

However, the pro-independence party warned against any attempt to “turn these youths into scapegoats for all of our society’s harms”.

UC said this behaviour could be explained by “a profound ill-being” among “a certain part” of the young Kanak population who felt disenfranchised.

Violent clashes on highway
The weekend was also marred by another violent confrontation with law enforcement services on the territorial road RT1 between the capital Nouméa and the La Tontouta International Airport where motorists were targeted by people throwing stones at them.

The incidents took place early Sunday morning near the Saint-Laurent village, in an area usually referred to as Col de La Pirogue, close to the small town of Païta.

The Gendarmerie Commander, General Nicolas Matthéos, said those actions were from a group of up to 30 individuals under the influence of alcohol.

He said his services were now attempting to talk to traditional chiefs in the area so they could persuade those responsible for these “very aggressive” acts to surrender and be “brought to justice”.

He said four gendarmes had been slightly injured after being hit by stones.

“We had to use stun grenades and during those operations we had to stop all traffic on the RT1″,” he said.

Traffic was interrupted for almost one hour and a squadron of gendarmes remained in place to secure the area.

A judicial inquiry is also underway.

Sandalwood oil factory goes up in flames
Also at the weekend, a sandalwood oil factory went up in flames late on Sunday evening on the island of Maré in the Loyalty Islands group.

Local firemen could not stop the destruction of the small factory’ production and refinery unit.

Another investigation is now underway from Nouméa-based gendarmerie investigators to determine the cause of the fire and whether it was accidental or criminal.

The locally-managed unit was created in 2010.

It is believed to be the world’s third largest producer of high-quality sandalwood essential oil, with international perfume and cosmetics clients such as Dior, Guerlain and Chanel.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Papua New Guineans have launched an outpouring of grief and appreciation for the life of one of their national founding fathers — Sir Julius Chan.

Sir Julius, 85, died in his home province of New Ireland just after midday yesterday, marking an end to a long political career spanning half a century.

Papua New Guineans dubbed him the “Last Man Standing,” as he was last of the founding members of Parliament from the Independence era.

• READ MORE: PM Marape declares week of national mourning for Late Sir Julius Chan
• Other tributes to Sir Julius Chan

Papua New Guinea’s Prime Minister James Marape informed members of cabinet of Sir Julius Chan’s passing.

“It is with great sadness that I announce the passing of the Last Man Standing. While Sir Michael Somare was the father of our country, the late Sir Julius was the father of our modern economy,” he said.

“He conceived the kina and toea. He was our country’s first finance minister and our second Prime Minister.”

Marape has declared a week of national mourning to honour the life and legacy Sir Julius Chan, and announced plans for a state funeral and low key celebrations for the country’s 50th independence anniversary in September.

In the annals of Papua New Guinea’s political history, few figures loom as large — or as controversially — as Sir Julius Chan. A statesman whose career spans five decades, his legacy is etched with bold decisions that sparked both admiration and outrage.

From deploying troops to a Pacific neighbour to facing global criticism for being the Prime Minister who hired foreign mercenaries in a bid to end a civil war, his leadership tested the boundaries of convention and reshaped the nation’s trajectory.

Start of a long political career
He entered politics in the twilight of colonial rule. He was elected to the House of Assembly in 1968. By 1976, as PNG’s first finance minister, he navigated the economic turbulence of independence, advocating for foreign investment and resource development.

Within PNG politics, Sir Julius was seen as a tactician, weaving through the complexities of tribal and national politics and seizing opportunities when available.

In 1980, he initiated the first-ever vote of no confidence motion against close friend and Prime Minister Michael Somare, ousting him on the floor of Parliament.

His first term as prime minister from 1980 to 1982, solidified his reputation as a pragmatist.

Facing fiscal strain, he championed austerity, infrastructure projects and devalued the PNG currency.

But it was a foreign policy move that drew regional attention.

A Tok Piksa tribute to Sir Julius Chan.  Video: EMTV

Vanuatu 1980: A controversial intervention
In 1980, he authorised the deployment of PNG troops on its first international deployment: Vanuatu.

The mission was aimed at quelling a rebellion against Vanuatu’s newly independent government.

In Parliament, he argued that the deployment was necessary for regional stability and stamped PNG’s role as an important player in the Pacific.

Critics called it overreach as PNG was not even past its first decade as an independent country. However, the deployment earned PNG the respect from Vanuatu and its Pacific neighbours — for the first time in a young nation’s budding history, that standing up for a Pacific brother when no one else would, was enough for a new regional respect for PNG.

The operation ended swiftly, but the precedent set by PNG’s military would reverberate for decades.

The Bougainville crisis and the mercenary gamble
His second term as prime minister from 1994 to 1997, collided with PNG’s most protracted conflict: the Bougainville Civil War.

By 1996, the crisis had claimed 20,000 lives, crippled the economy, and exposed the PNG Defence Force’s limitations.

Desperate to break the stalemate, his government signed a secretive $36 million contract with Sandline International, a UK-based private mercenary group, to crush the Bougainville Revolutionary Army (BRA).

When the deal leaked in 1997, public fury erupted.

The PNGDF, led by Brigadier-General Jerry Singirok, arrested the mercenaries and demanded Chan’s resignation.

Sir Julius stood defiant. Critics, however, saw betrayal with many saying hiring outsiders was an affront to sovereignty.

Under pressure, he stepped aside pending an inquiry. Though exonerated of corruption, his political capital evaporated. The Sandline Affair became a cautionary tale of desperation and overreach.

Resilience and redemption
His career, however, refused to end in scandal. After a decade in the political wilderness, he returned as New Ireland Governor in 2007, championing provincial autonomy and education reforms.

In 2015, he published his memoir, confronting the Sandline chapter head-on.

His peers acknowledged his tenacity with founding Prime Minister Sir Michael Somare, before his passing, pointing out how both men had separated politics from their personal friendship for over 50 years.

Culture as foundation
Despite rising to political leadership at the national level, and having a strong hand in the formation of our country’s economic and financial stability, and using its young military force to nurture Pacific solidarity, Sir Julius will always be remembered for his respect of culture and tradition.

His elevation and acknowledgment of the MaiMai, New Ireland’s Chieftan System as a recognised decision-making body within the New Ireland Provincial Government and the Provincial Assembly, was testament to Sir Julius’ own devotion and respect for traditional New Ireland culture.

His creation of a pension for the wisened population of his home province, not only assured him continuous support from New Ireland’s older population at every election, but it set an example of the importance of traditional systems of governance and decision-making.

To the world, he was a new country’s financial whiz kid, growing up in an environment rooted in traditional culture, and navigating a young Papua New Guinea as a mixed race leader saw him become one of PNG’s finest leaders.

To the country, he will always be remembered as the “Last Man Standing”.

But to his people of New Ireland, he will, over the coming weeks, be accorded the highest of traditional and customary acknowledgements that only the people of New Ireland will be able to bestow on such a Great Man. A Great Chief. A Great Leader.

They will say for one last time: ‘Lapun i go nau. Wok bilong em i pinis.’ (The old man has left, his work here is done).

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Four months ago, a group of lawyers in Aotearoa New Zealand called for a little reported inquiry into New Zealand spy agencies over whether there has been possible assistance for Israel’s war in Gaza.

In a letter to the chief of intelligence and security (IGIS) on 12 September 2024, three lawyers argued that the country was in danger of aiding international war crimes, reported RNZ News.

Inspector-General Brendan Horsley, who had previously indicated he would look into conflict-related spying this year, confirmed he would consider the request, according to the report.

• READ MORE: Behind settler colonial NZ’s paranoia about dissident ‘persons of interest’
• Other SIS security reports

At least one of the lawyers had been confident of a positive response, said the news report.

“I’m actually very optimistic,” noted University of Auckland associate professor Treasa Dunworth in the media interview about their argument that New Zealand’s Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) and Security Intelligence Service (NZSIS) intelligence might be making its way to Israel via the US, “because our request is very, detailed, backed up with credible evidence, [and] is very careful.”

But she got a disappointing result. The following month, on October 9 — just seven weeks before the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued arrest warrants against Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and former Foreign Minister Yoav Gallant for war crimes and crimes against humanity — Inspector-General Horsley ruled out an inquiry at this time.

He said in a statement he did not want to “stop the clock” and tie up his office’s “modest resources to a deeper review of activity I have already been monitoring” while armed conflicts in the Middle East and Ukraine were currently “active and dynamic”.

Rapid deterioration
Yet rapidly the 15-month Israeli war has deteriorated since then with President-elect Donald Trump due to take office in Israel’s main backer the United States later this month on January 20.

As the humanitarian situation in Gaza worsens with intensified attacks on hospitals and civilians, a breakdown of law and order at the border, and more than 50 complaints filed against Israel soldiers for war crimes in multiple countries, UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese has urged medical professionals worldwide to sever all ties with the pariah state.

I urge medical professionals worldwide to pursue the severance of all ties with Israel as a concrete way to forcefully denounce Israel’s full destruction of the Palestinian healthcare system in Gaza, a critical tool of its ongoing genocide.#FreeDrHussanAbuSafiya https://t.co/qzZ7CqufI6

— Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur oPt (@FranceskAlbs) December 30, 2024

Ironically, the New Zealand intelligence “debate” has coincided with the publication of a new book that has debunked the view that the SIS and GCSB have been working in the interests of New Zealand. The reality, argues social justice movement historian and activist Maire Leadbeater in The Enemy Within: The Human Cost of the State Surveillance in Aotearoa/New Zealand is that these agencies have been working in the interests of the so-called “Five Eyes” partners, including the United States.

Her essential argument in this robust and comprehensive 427-page book is that New Zealand’s state surveillance has been part of a structure of state control that “serves to undermine movements for social change and marginalise or punish those who challenge the established order. It had a deeply destructive impact on democracy.”

As she states, her primary focus is on the work of New Zealand’s main intelligence agencies, the SIS and the Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) “and their forerunners, the political police”.

The author explains that she is not concerned with the “socially useful work of the contemporary police in the detection of criminal activity, including politically motivated crime”. She notes also that unlike the domestic spies, police detection work is subject to detailed warrants, there is due process over arrests, and the process is open to public scrutiny.

Leadbeater points out that while New Zealand experience with terrorism has been limited, neither of the country’s two main intelligence agencies were much help in investigating the three notorious examples — the unsolved 1984 Wellington Trades Hall bombing that killed one, the 1985 bombing of the Greenpeace environmental flagship Rainbow Warrior in Auckland that also killed one (but the casualties could easily have been higher), and the 2019 Christchurch mosque shootings that murdered 51.

The regular police were the key investigators in all three cases.

Also, there is the failure of the SIS to discover Mossad agents operating in NZ on fake passports.

Working for ‘Five Eyes’ interests
Instead of working for the benefit of New Zealand, the intelligence agencies were set up to work closely with the country’s traditional allies and the so-called “Five Eyes” network — Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States.

An example of this was Algerian professor and parliamentarian Ahmed Zaoui who arrived in New Zealand in 2002 as an asylum seeker after a military coup against the elected government in his home country. Within nine days of arriving, his confidentiality was breached and he was falsely branded by The New Zealand Herald as an “international terrorism suspect”.

He was jailed for two years without charge (part of that time held in solitary confinement) because of an SIS-imposed National Security Risk certificate and this could have have led to “deportation of this honourable man” but for the tireless work of his lawyers and a well-informed public campaign, as told by Leadbeater in this book, and also by journalist Selwyn Manning in his 2004 book I Almost Forgot about the Moon: The Disinformation Campaign Against Ahmed Zaoui.

Set free and granted asylum, he later became a New Zealand citizen in 2014. (However, on a visit to Algeria in 2023 he was arrested at gunpoint in a house in Médéa and charged with “subversion”).

Leadbeater says a strong case could be made that New Zealand’s democracy “would be stronger and more viable without the repressive laws that currently support the secretive operations of the SIS and the GCSB”. The author laments that the resources and focus of the intelligence agencies have focused too much, and wastefully, on ordinary people who are perceived to be “dissenters”.

“Dissent is the lifeblood of democracy but SIS operations targeted many of our brightest and best, damaging their personal and professional lives in the process,” Leadbeater says.

Among those who have been targeted have been the author herself, and others in her “left-wing family milieu” — including her late brother longtime Green Party foreign affairs spokesperson Keith Locke, as well as her parents Elsie and Jack, originally Communist Party activists prior to 1956.

The core of the book is based on primary sources, including declassified police records held in the National Archives and the declassified records of the SIS which have been released to individual activists – including her and she discovered she had been spied on since the age of 10 due to state paranoia.

At the launch of her book in Auckland last November, guest speaker and retired First Union general secretary Robert Reid — whose file also features in the book — said what a fitting way the narrative begins by outlining the important role the Locke family have played in Aotearoa over the many years.

The final chapter is devoted to another “Person of interest: Keith Locke” – “Maire’s much-loved friend and comrade.”

“In between these pages is a treasure trove of commentary and stories of the development of the surveillance state in the settler colony of NZ and the impact that this has had on the lives of ordinary — no, extra-ordinary — people within this country,” Reid said.

“The book could almost be described as a political romp from the settler colonisation of New Zealand through the growth of the workers movement and socialist and communist ideology from the late 1800s until today.”

Surveillance stories and files
Among others whose surveillance stories and files have been featured are trade unionist and former Socialist Action League activist Mike Treen; Halt All Racist Tours founder Trevor Richards; economics lecturer Dr Wolfgang Rosenberg’s sons George and Bill; Campaign Against Foreign Control of Aotearoa (CAFCA) organiser Murray Horton; antiwar activist and Peace Movement research Owen Wilkes; investigative journalist Nicky Hager; Dr Bill Sutch, who was tried and acquitted on a charge laid under the Official Secrets Act in 1975; and internet entrepreneur and political activist Kim Dotcom.

State paranoia in New Zealand was driven by issues of peace, anti-conscription, anti-nuclear, decolonisation, unemployed workers and left trade unionism and socialist and communist thought.

Leadbeater reflects that she had never accepted that “anyone in my family ever threatened state security. Moreover, the solidarity, antinuclear and anti-apartheid organisations that I took part in should not have been spied on. Such groups were and are a vital part of a healthy democracy.”

At one stage when many activists were seeking copies of their surveillance files in the mid-2000s through OIA requests or later under the Privacy Act, I also applied due to my association with several of the protagonists in this book and my involvement as a writer on decolonisation and environmental justice issues.

I merely received a “neither confirm or deny” form letter on the existence of a file, and never bothered to reapply later when information became more readily available.

But I have had my own brushes with surveillance and threatened arrest as a journalist in global settings such as New Caledonia, including when I was detained by soldiers in January 1987 for taking photographs of French military camps for a planned report about the systematic intimidation of pro-independence Kanak villagers.

This was perfectly legal, of course, and the attempt by authorities to silence me did not work; my articles appeared on the front page of the New Zealand Sunday Times the following weekend and featured on the cover of Fiji’s Islands Business news magazine.

Watched become the watchers
The structure of The Enemy Within is in three parts. As the author explains, the first part focuses on the period from 920 to the end of the First World War, and the second on the impact of the Cold War and the Western anti-communist hysteria between 1945 and 1955.

The final part covers the period from 1955 to the present, when the intelligence and security services have been under greater public scrutiny and faced campaigns for their reform or abolition.

As Leadbeater notes, “the watched, to some extent, have become the watchers”.

Because of my Asia-Pacific and decolonisation interests, I found a chapter on “colonial repression in Samoa” and the Black Saturday massacre of the Mau resistance of particular interest and a shameful stain on NZ history.

As Leadbeater notes, it was an “unexpected find in the Archives New Zealand” to stumble across a record of the surveillance of the “citizens who mounted an opposition to the New Zealand government’s colonial rule in Samoa”.

She pays tribute to the “vibrant solidarity movement” in the late 1920s and early 1930s, inspired by the peaceful Mau movement and its motto “Samoa mo Samoa” — Samoa for the Samoans — in their resistance to New Zealand’s colonial project.

This solidarity movement was in the face of a “prevailing attitude of white settlement” and its leaders were influenced by the Parihaka resistance of the 1880s.

Leadbeater is critical of New Zealand media, such as The New Zealand Herald, for siding with the colonial establishment and becoming “positively hostile to the Mau movement”.

New Zealand administrators under the League of Mandate to govern Samoa following German rule were arrogant and regarded Samoans as “inferior” and were “aghast” at Samoan and European leaders collaborating in resistance.

Black Saturday massacre
On 28 December 1929, what became dubbed the “Black Saturday massacre” happened in Apia. A peaceful Mau procession marches to the Apia wharf to welcome home exiled trader Alfred Smyth.

Police tried to arrest the Mau secretary, Mata’ūtia Karaunu, but the marchers protected him. More police were despatched to “assert colonial authority”, shots were fired at the crowd and in the upheaval a police constable was clubbed to death.

A police sergeant the fired a Lewis machine gun from the police station over the heads of the crowd, while other police fired directly into the crowd with their rifles.

Paramount chief Tupua Tamasese Lealofi III, dressed in white and calling for peace, was mortally wounded and at least eight other marchers were also killed. The massacre was chronicled in journalist Michael Field’s books Mau and later Black Saturday: New Zealand’s Tragic Blunders in Samoa.

Protests followed and the Mau Movement was declared a “seditious organisation” and the wearing of Mau outfits or badges became illegal.

A crackdown ensued on Mau activists with heavy surveillance and harassment and in New Zealand public figures and community leaders called for an “independent inquiry into Samoan affairs”.

Eventually, the Labour Party victory in the 1935 elections changed the dynamic and the following year the Mau was recognised as a legitimate political movement.

After the Second World War, New Zealand became committed to self-government in Western Samoa with indigenous custom and tradition “as an important foundation”. However, full independence did not come until 1962.

Four decades later, in 2002, Prime Minister Helen Clark formally apologised to the people of Samoa for the “inept and incompetent early administration of Samoa by New Zealand”.

She cited officials allowing the “influenza” ship Talune to dock in Apia in 1918, and the Black Saturday massacre as key examples of this incompetence.

However, Leadbeater notes that the “saga of surveillance and sedition charges” outlined in her book could well be added to the list. She adds that Samoans remember the Mau Movement and its martyrs with “pride and gratitude”.

“For New Zealanders, this chapter in our colonial history is one of shame that should be far better known and understood. The New Zealand Samoa Defence League was ahead of its time, and thankfully so.”

Behind settler colonial #NZ’s paranoia about dissident ‘persons of interest’ | #AsiaPacificReport #MaireLeadbeater #progressivebooks #RobertReid @miketreen #statesurveillance #dissidents #statespying @JohnJohnminto https://t.co/B9qws9s1La pic.twitter.com/5ELHTIDv4l

— David Robie (@DavidRobie) November 9, 2024

Looking for ‘subversives’ in wrong places
Leadbeater notes in her book that the SIS budget alone in 2021 was about $100 million with about 400 staff. Yet the intelligence services have been spending this sport of money for more than a century looking for “subversives and terrorists” — but in the wrong places.

This book is an excellent tribute to the many activists and dissidents who have had their lives disrupted and hounded by state spies, and is essential reading for all those committed to transparent democracy.

Following her section on more contemporary events and massive surveillance failures and wrongs, such as the 2007 Tūhoe raids, Leadbeater calls for a massive rethink on New Zealand’s approach to security.

“It is time to leave crime, including terrorist crime, to the country’s police and court system, with their built-in accountability procedures,” she concludes.

“It is time for the state to stop spying on society’s critics.”

• The Enemy Within: The Human Cost of State Surveillance in Aotearoa/New Zealand, by Maire Leadbeater. Potton & Burton, 2024. 427 pages.

Fiji’s Office of the President has confirmed that the Tribunal’s report on allegations of misconduct against suspended Director of Public Prosecutions Christopher Pryde does not need to be made public at this stage.

The tribunal, chaired by Justice Anare Tuilevuka with Justices Chaitanya Lakshman and Samuela Qica, has completed its inquiry and submitted its findings to the President, Ratu Naiqama Lalabalavu.

The President will review the report, conduct consultations, and seek necessary advice before releasing it.

• READ MORE: Suspended Fiji chief prosecutor demands release of findings

Due to holiday leave, this process will continue in the New Year.

“It is acknowledged that the Report does not need to be made public as required in section 112(6) of the Constitution, and His Excellency will do so as soon as he has properly considered it.”

New Zealander Pryde had formally written to the Office of the President, requesting that a copy of the report be made available to him.

Position and pay ‘in limbo’
An earlier Fiji Times report by Shal Devi said Pryde had written to the Office of the President to request an urgent conclusion of the matter that had left his position and pay in limbo.

Pryde was suspended in April 2023 because of allegations of misbehaviour, which were linked to him being photographed with former attorney-general Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum — who was under investigation at the time — at a diplomatic gathering.

Earlier this week, Pryde made public the letter he had written to the Office of the President.

“I have been informed that the tribunal report into allegations of misbehaviour against me was provided to His Excellency, the President, on Monday the 23rd December 2024,” he wrote.

“I have written to the tribunal for a copy of the report, and they have advised me to contact the President’s office directly. I am therefore formally requesting that a copy of the report is provided to me.”

Pryde cited section 112 (6) of the Constitution, which states that the report shall be made public. Pryde said this was a mandatory provision and was not subject to discretion.

“I also note that section 112 (3) (c) of the Constitution provides that the President must act on the advice of the tribunal and that section 112 (5) provides that the suspension shall cease if the President determines that the judicial officer should not be removed.

“In other words, if the report advises that there is insufficient evidence of misbehaviour, then the suspension should be lifted immediately and I should be reinstated to my position as the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP).”

Pryde said it had been close to 21 months since he was suspended as the DPP, and nearly six months since his salary was suspended, which had caused him great financial hardship.

“It is a matter of urgency that this matter is brought to a final conclusion since the tribunal has now completed its task.

“I am therefore kindly requesting that His Excellency (i) advise me of the outcome of the report, (ii) provide me a copy of the report and allow it to be published, and (iii), if there is no evidence or insufficient evidence to support the allegations of misbehaviour, lift my suspension as is required under the Constitution and immediately reinstate my salary and entitlements.”

Republished from The Fiji Times with permission.

Pro-independence Kanak leader Christian Téin will remain in a mainland French jail for the time being, a Court of Appeal has ruled in Nouméa.

This followed an earlier ruling on October 22 from the Court of Cassation, which is tasked to rule on possible procedural mistakes in earlier judgments.

The Court of Cassation found some flaws in the procedure that justified the case being heard again by a Court of Appeal.

• READ MORE:  Kanak leader Christian Tein’s jailing in France overturned in new legal twist
• Tjibaou’s party unveils plan for New Caledonia’s future ‘independence’
• Mixed reactions to Tjibaou’s election to key Kanak pro-independence party
• Other Kanaky New Caledonia reports

Téin’s lawyer, Pierre Ortet, confirmed his client’s detention in a mainland prison (Mulhouse jail, north-eastern France) has been maintained as a result of the latest Court of Appeal hearing behind closed doors in Nouméa on Friday.

But he also told local media he now intends to bring the case to the European Court of Human Rights, as well as United Nations’ human rights mechanisms — especially on the circumstances that surrounded Téin’s transfer to France on 23 June 2024 on board a specially-chartered plane four days after his arrest in Nouméa on June 19.

Nouméa Public Prosecutor Yves Dupas told local media in an interview on Friday that in this case the next step should happen “some time in January”, when a criminal chamber of the Court of Cassation is expected to deliver another ruling.

Reacting to recent comments made by pro-independence party Union Calédonienne, which maintains Téin is a political prisoner, Dupas said Téin and others facing similar charges “are still presumed innocent”, but “are not political prisoners, they have not been held in relation to a political motive”.

Alleged crimes
The alleged crimes, he said, were “crimes and delicts related to organised crime”.

The seven charges include complicity as part of murder attempts, theft involving the use of weapons and conspiracy in view of the preparation of acts of organised crimes.

Téin’s defence maintains it was never his client’s intention to commit such crimes.

Christian Téin is the head of a “Field Action Coordinating Cell” (CCAT), a group created late in 2023 by the largest and oldest pro-independence party Union Calédonienne.

From October 2023 onward, the CCAT organised marches and demonstrations that later degenerated — starting May 13 — into insurrectional riots, arson and looting, causing 13 deaths and an estimated 2.2 billion euros (NZ$3.9 billion) in material damage, mainly in the Greater Nouméa area.

“The judicial inquiry aims at establishing every responsibility, especially at the level of ‘order givers’,” Dupas told local Radio Rythme Bleu on Friday.

He confirmed six persons were still being detained in several jails of mainland France, including Téin.

3 released under ‘judicial control’
Three others have been released under judiciary control with an obligation to remain in mainland France.

“You see, the manifestation of truth requires time. Justice requires serenity, it’s very important”, he commented.

Late August, Téin was also chosen as president of the pro-independence umbrella FLNKS at its congress.

The August 2024 Congress was also marked by the non-attendance of two other main pillars of the movement, UPM and PALIKA, which have since confirmed their intention to distance themselves from FLNKS.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

New Caledonia’s Great Chief William Boarat has been found dead and police have arrested a 24-year-old man as investigations continue.

Great Chief Boarat was found dead in the early hours of yesterday in circumstances described as involuntary homicide.

Public prosecutor Yves Dupas said in a statement that initial findings on the crime scene in the village of Ouaco pointed to an initial assault from a 24-year-old man on a woman he was in a de facto relationship with.

Chief Boarat, 66, who was present at the scene, reportedly tried to stop the man from hitting his partner in their village residence.

The young man, believed to be under the influence of alcohol, is then reported to have grabbed a wooden post and hit the chief on the head.

A medical team later found the old chief unconscious, with severe head wounds.

Attempts to revive him proved unsuccessful.

The suspect has been taken into custody, and investigations are ongoing.

He faces charges of murder and assault against his de facto partner.

Witnesses are also being questioned as part of the inquiry.

A post-mortem has been ordered to further establish the exact cause of death.

The Boarat clan is the main chiefly entity of the Koumac area, which itself belongs to the chiefly area of Hoot ma Waap (one of the eight chiefly areas represented in New Caledonia’s Customary Senate).

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Fiji’s Home Affairs and Immigration Minister Pio Tikoduadua has ordered an inquiry into the “possible unauthorised issuance of passports” by immigration staff and “offered to step aside temporarily from role”.

In a statement on Thursday night, Tikoduadua said the passports in question were issued to the children of the South Korean Christian doomsday cult Grace Road Church, which is associated with human rights allegations.

This week, The Fiji Times reported that a Grace Road employee claimed she and others were physically abused and she was kept from seeing her children.

• READ MORE: Grace Road operations in Fiji have ‘breaches’ – Minister Agni Deo Singh
• Other Grace Road cult reports

State broadcaster FBC reported that Grace Road had refuted the claims.

The group said in a statement on Thursday that it was a family dispute within the Grace Road community, which was exploited by the media.

Grace Road said it had stayed out of the issue, allowing the family to address their differences privately, but was disappointed when the media chose to sensationalise the matter and place undue focus on the Grace Road Church.

Tikoduadua said the passports were issued without his knowledge or the knowledge of his permanent secretary and senior management of the immigration department.

“If confirmed, this constitutes a significant breach of our protocols and raises serious concerns about the internal oversight mechanisms within the [Immigration] department,” he said.

Immediate investigation
“I have directed an immediate and thorough investigation to determine how the lapse occurred and to hold accountable those responsible,” he said.

The minister said stepping down was necessary to ensure the inquiry is conducted impartially and without any perception of undue influence from his office.

He has also informed Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka of his decision.

Tikoduadua assured that he would fully cooperate with the investigation and work towards restoring trust.

Meanwhile, opposition MP Jone Usamate has called for a “full-scale investigation into the allegations of human rights abuse”.

Fiji police have told local media that an investigation is already underway.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Survivors of abuse in care arrived at Parliament today to hear the formal apology from the state which oversaw and inflicted harm on children.

Public sector leaders from Oranga Tamariki, the Ministry of Health, New Zealand Police, and Ministry of Education also apologised, as did the public service commissioner and the solicitor-general, at an event preceding Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s national apology in the House.

By the afternoon, many survivors were still trying to absorb what had been said and what it meant, with some saying it was a “PR stunt,” some calling the speeches “hollow” and others not willing to believe the words until they saw action.

• READ MORE: ‘You deserved so much better’ – PM Luxon apologises to survivors of abuse in care
• NZ Speaker reverses journalist bar from abuse apology at Parliament
• Sorry means you don’t do it again — Aaron Smale
  
• Royal Commission of Inquiry into abuse in state care – state response

Abuse in state care — survivor reactions.   Video: RNZ

During his apology, Prime Minister Christopher Luxon said many survivors did not want to engage with the current compensation process — but more than 3500 were — and he signalled there would be an extra $32 million funnelled into that system “while we work on the new redress system”.

Opposition leader Chris Hipkins said he formally joined with the government in its apology, saying the day was a significant step forward.

“Today is a hugely important day for all of you, to finally hear what the Crown has failed to give you for all of these years, an apology.”

Ken Clearwater, a long-time advocate for survivors, was at the event, saying he heard some great words but it was about “what action needs to go with it”.

“Everyone’s saying the right things, but if you look at the policies and stuff we have at the moment, that’s not helping our children.”

He believed National, leader of the coalition government, was going to have to change a lot of their policies.

“So we’re apologising for what happened in the past, but the policies are still in place that are making it no different than when we were in the past.

‘Hollow words .. . dangerous’
“To have hollow words at this stage would be, would be pretty dangerous.”

He said there had to be a belief the government would look into things, “but there’s got to be a survivor voice”.

He mentioned Tu Chapman, a survivor who spoke at the event, who pointed out only having five minutes to speak as a survivor at an apology for survivors.

“So once again, the survivor voice is not forefront, and I think that that’s what they’re going to have to look at, is how they get more more of the survivor voice in whatever policies they look at.”

Another survivor, Reihana Tahau, who had been in state care in the 1980s, agreed, saying he found it ironic there was an apology on one hand while the government goes through the process of appealing Section 7AA of the Oranga Tamariki Act.

For him, he said, “that’s the opposite, that’s counterintuitive” because 7AA was helping to stop bringing children into care.

“I can’t understand why they would appeal something that is actually working.

‘Mistrust, systematic trauma’
“And for me, my mistrust and systematic trauma, I can’t help but feeling that they’re not genuine in that, because if they were genuine, they wouldn’t be taking a thing which would potentially set up another generation for trauma.”

He acknowledged the apology was a step in the right direction, but “it still feels like a PR thing”.

“I do find it hard to trust people that read off a paper, because I talk from my heart.”

He said the speech from the prime minister was “part of his job” and he did not know how “authentic that is”.

Another survivor, Nicky, also said it was a “PR stunt”, and would not provide closure.

“This is a PR stunt for the prime minister to look good.”

Ardern thanked
She acknowledged Dame Jacinda Ardern for initiating the apology.

“We’d like to thank her for starting it, but they’ve sat on things, you know, for a quarter of a century we’ve been battling.

“We’re old, we’re broken but we’re still fighting.”

She called specifically for Salvation Army orphanages to be investigated and for their charitable status to be investigated.

“The government paid them to abuse me. We want that money.

“Where did that money go? It didn’t go in our care, it didn’t go in our food, and they worked us like child labour, just like Gloriavale [a small and isolated Christian community located on the West Coast of the South Island].”

Survivors in the room muttered or called out during the speeches, reacting — but saved their strongest reaction for Solicitor-General Una Jagose.

Boos, cries of ‘shame’
As she rose to speak, she was met with boos, and cries of “shame” and “disgrace”. One woman stood and turned her back. Another shouted: “You wanted us dead.”

Another survivor, who listened quietly and intently throughout the proceedings with tears streaming at times, said he wanted to hear what the public sector leaders had to say.

He said what Jagose said needed to be said.

“I’m disappointed, because I’m a lawyer, I’m disappointed that she was howled down and I couldn’t hear all that she said.”

He said he thought Jagose would be used by the government as a scapegoat.

“Us lawyers have to speak for the people we represent, whether they’re good or bad.

“And we shouldn’t be hung drawn and quartered because we’ve been instructed to say something or do something or fight something.”

Clearwater said he could not believe she was there.

‘Nobody wanted her there’
“By the noise there, nobody wanted her there, and so that was a bad choice on the government’s part.”

Tu Chapman spoke on behalf of survivors at the event, and did not think the chief executives should have been at the event apologising.

“It’s like putting the cart before the horse so to speak.”

Chapman was angry the prime minister left before hearing some speeches, saying it was “tokenistic”.

“I think he should have been there to listen to us, so that he could actually, authentically and genuinely apologise to us in the House this afternoon or early this morning.

“And it might have been a little bit more meaningful, because quite right now, it just feels tokenistic.”

Another survivor said the speeches today were “very empty, hollow”.

‘Carbon copy’ speech
He said the prime minister’s speech seemed to be a “carbon copy” of when he had been there for the tabling of the report.

In regards to the solicitor-general, he acknowledged “she was able to take what was getting handed to her and listen to it”.

“She actually took it on and then spoke when she could.”

He said the others seemed to want to get over with the speech fast, “that’s not how you do apologies”.

“You take what’s coming, surely they knew there was going to be some heckling going on.”

His message to the prime minister was not to wait, “take action now”.

Survivors representing mothers and adopted children said they felt they had been missed out of the equation.

More about abuse victims
One acknowledged today was more about abuse victims, but there could be a separate apology for mothers and their children that were “taken from them unlawfully and unwilling”.

“We would like the history of losing our children told in this country.

“I’ve flown from Australia for this and for the few words that were said, I really thought it was pretty poor.”

They want a full inquiry into what happened and an apology.

Another said in regards to the apologies, there were “some people who probably needed a brandy after getting up and speaking and apologising for the departments they worked for”.

“There was one in particular who shouldn’t have been there at all, who shouldn’t represent anybody, let alone the Crown.”

Healing process
Piiata Tiakitai Turi-Heenan said today was needed as part of the healing process for survivors, “this is a start”.

She also did not think the speeches were authentic.

“The words that were authentic came from the survivors themselves.”

She said if the government was looking for answers, they will come from “sitting down with the survivors and sorting everything out with them, rather than around a table with people who have had no experience of surviving”.

On the disruption of the speeches, she said “those were emotions”.

“The focus was on silencing those emotions, but that’s exactly why we are where we are today, because they were silenced in the first place.

“You have permission to not be silent anymore.”

Heart ‘on sleeve’
Another survivor said his heart was “on his sleeve at the moment”.

He had been speaking to various MPs after the event who assured him there was support across the House to make changes.

“I believe they’re sincere, but I’m still, I’m still thinking that I might get let down, but I’m hoping I’m wrong. I’m hoping that it does go ahead.

“Where to for me from here is that I’m gonna keep on doing what I do, until further notice, until I know for a fact, well, this is real.”

Chapman added the journey was only just beginning again for the survivor community.

“Another mechanism for us now is to actually encourage our survivor community to be more intentional about their engagement with the Crown, with ministers, and hold them to account.”

The new redress scheme
The minister in charge of the government response, Erica Stanford, told RNZ Checkpoint the current redress system was not perfect but the announced $32 million of funding to increase capacity and get through claims faster would help.

While some survivors queried why redress could not be addressed sooner, Stanford said nobody expected the government would be able to “turn on a dime” and deliver something straight away.

“We will have something up and running next year,” Stanford said, but she could not commit to an exact date.

Outbursts from survivors during the apology had been expected, Stanford said, due to the amount of “raw emotion” in the room.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

An investigative journalist who was barred from attending New Zealand’s national apology to survivors of abuse in care has now been granted accreditation.

Parliament’s Speaker has now granted temporary Press Gallery accreditation to journalist Aaron Smale for tomorrow’s apology for abuse in care. He must, however, be accompanied by a Newsroom reporter at all times.

It follows a significant backlash from survivors and advocates to the initial decision.

• READ MORE:  Speaker lifts ban on Newsroom journalist ahead of Crown apology
• Sorry means you don’t do it again — Aaron Smale
  
• Royal Commission of Inquiry into abuse in state care – state response

Smale has covered abuse in care, and the Royal Commission of Inquiry into the abuse, for eight years. His work has appeared in multiple publications and websites, including Newsroom, Newshub, The Listener, The Spinoff and RNZ.

Last week, speaker Gerry Brownlee declined an application from Newsroom for Smale to report on the apology.

Parliament’s Press Gallery had asked for an explanation, as a refusal was quite rare, especially when a reporter met the gallery’s criteria for accreditation.

It was told the application was declined, with the Speaker citing Smale’s conduct on a prior occasion.

This afternoon, the Press Gallery wrote to the Speaker, requesting a more fulsome explanation.

Speaker’s about-turn
In an about-turn, the Speaker approved the application.

The initial decision to decline Smale’s application was met with backlash by survivor groups and advocates, as well as politicians and Newsroom itself.

At a media conference at Parliament in July, Smale and the Prime Minister had an exchange over the government’s law and order policies, and whether the Prime Minister would acknowledge the link between abuse and gang membership.

According to Newsroom, Smale had also attended a media event at a youth justice facility in Palmerston North, and pressed Children’s Minister Karen Chhour over whether it had been appropriate to associate the memory of the Māori Battalion with the new youth justice programme.

“The Beehive was in touch with us to say they believed he had been too forceful and too rude, in their view, in those two occasions,” Newsroom’s co-editor Tim Murphy told RNZ’s Nine to Noon programme.

Murphy said that Smale had conceded he had pushed the children’s minister “a bit far”.

“But the one in Parliament, he was asking specific questions and kept asking them of the Prime Minister and I think that became irritating to the Prime Minister,” Murphy said.

‘Most informed’ of journalists
Describing Smale as “the most informed, possibly, probably of all New Zealand journalists” on the issue of abuse in state care institutions, Murphy said political discomfort should not be a reason to exclude Smale, and the ban should not stand.

“He should be there, and he should be asking questions, because he’ll know more than virtually everybody else who could be,” he said.

Murphy said Smale’s intention for his coverage of the apology itself was to write an observational piece through the eyes of survivors, and he was not intending to “get into a grilling.”

The Royal Commission Forum, an advisory group to the commission, said denying Smale accreditation was “profoundly concerning” and a damaging decision in the lead-up to the apology.

The Green Party said it was alarmed by the move, and said it set a dangerous precedent.

“As a society that values the role of the Fourth Estate, we should value the work of journalists like Aaron, because it helps us take a critical look at where we have gone wrong and how we may move forward,” said the Green Party’s media and communications spokesperson Hūhana Lyndon.

“Barring a leading journalist from an important event like this speaks to this government’s lack of accountability. It is something we might expect in Putin’s Russia, not 21st century Aotearoa New Zealand.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

New Zealand Prime Minister Christopher Luxon’s security detail has cut a media briefing short over protesters in Auckland.

He was holding a press conference yesterday after a walkabout with police to discuss concerns with businesses in the CBD.

Luxon was talking with media when one of his security officers could be seen coming into the business, actively looking around, before placing a hand on the Prime Minister’s shoulder and informing him they had to leave now.

• READ MORE: Other Luxon policy reports

An RNZ journalist at the briefing said he understood protesters were en route to the location, but the prime minister left before they had arrived.

According to The New Zealand Herald, they were pro-Palestine protesters.

Police beat teams
He was also joined by Police Minister Mark Mitchell, and Associate Police Minister Casey Costello and Retail Crime Ministerial Advisory Group head Sunny Kaushal after police added another 21 officers to their CBD beat teams this month, bringing the team to 51.

It is part of a drive to expand the number of police visible on city streets, with the Auckland team expected to increase to 63, another 17 officers joining the Wellington team, and 18 more in Christchurch.

Luxon said the expanded teams was a “great start, and more than a great start … it’s a collaborative effort and what you’re seeing here is that there’s really good join-up.”

He said with cruise ships coming back to New Zealand, it was important to do better and it was important for people to feel safe.

Patrolling Auckland was a collaborative effort, which was seen yesterday with numerous council and Heart of the City security staff also on the beat.

“Police are obviously at the heart of the whole issue, but they are working really constructively with the security officers from the different retail complexes, with the city council . . . ”

Prime Minister Luxon’s press conference cut short.   Video: RNZ News

Beat policing makes difference
Some business people Luxon had spoken to told him they had seen a difference when it came to on the beat policing.

Mitchell said it was also about having all the govenrment and community agencies working together. He said the briefing he had seen from police showed crime was starting to trend down.

“It’s only early signs, it’s green shoots . . .  I don’t have the numbers that I can give to you today but it’s numbers that police have been working on.”

Coster said it was a long-term thing that needed to be seen having a continued effect.

He said the deployment in the CBD was significant.

“Not just our beat staff, but also our public safety units, our community policing staff, and we have a tactical crime unit focused on the central city as well.”

“That’s a very big deployment, on a regular basis.”

Luxon walked through town, stopping to chat with security officers.

“It’s been really good, an announcement and then quick implementation, and you guys joined up together and you’ve been acting more as a tighter eco-system, is even better,” he said to one Britomart security officer.

He also greeted pedestrians as he made his way up Queen Street, some shouting expletive expressions of shock at seeing him.

Murray from Queen’s Arcade on Queen Street said the situation had improved.

“It’s nice to see the police around the lower city CBD,” he said.

“We’re all working together, it’s going to be difficult. We kind of expect the council to do their part in this too with some of the projects, perhaps, homeless people that cause us a little bit of grief, and are a nuisance to themselves and the public,” he said.

He said rough sleepers were still an issue, and that pedestrians felt intimidated by them.

‘We expect churches to face up’
Earlier, speaking to reporters, the prime minister said churches behind the faith-based care institutions needed to be “fully responsible and accountable”, and destruction of records “doesn’t sound right”.

Yesterday’s standup followed the release of the Royal Commission’s report into abuse in care this week, a massive 16-volume report still being digested by the survivors and the public.

“We expect the churches to face up to their responsibility,” Luxon said.

The report noted the president of the Law Society had advised the head of Presbyterian Support Otago to destroy records of children in its care to protect the organisation’s reputation.

Frazer Barton told RNZ Morning Report yesterday he had advised Gillian Bremner to “destroy them at an appropriate time — that’s not ‘go ahead and destroy them now'”. The files were destroyed in 2017 and 2018.

Luxon said he had not been briefed on that but the government wanted to ensure records were available – including being available to survivors.

“I haven’t seen what he’s particularly briefed or asked,” Luxon said. “All I’m focused on is actually responding to the recommendations, working with the survivors, making sure that churches are held responsible for the abuse that they’ve caused as well.”

Asked to comment on his reaction to hearing that records had been destroyed, he said “it doesn’t sound good, it doesn’t sound right, it doesn’t sound what we’re asking churches to do.”

He said the churches should front up and be held accountable.

“We’re asking for them to be fully responsible and accountable.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

ADDRESS: By Professor Vijay Naidu

I have been given the honour of launching the 30th anniversary edition of the Pacific Journalism Review (PJR) at this highly significant gathering of media professionals and scholars from the Asia Pacific region.

I join our chief quests and others to commend and congratulate Dr Shailendra Singh, the head of USP Journalism, and his team for the organisation of the 2024 Pacific International Media Conference.

This evening, we are also gathered to celebrate the 30th birthday of Pacific Journalism Review/Te Koakoa.

• READ MORE: Other Pacific Media Conference reports

At the outset, I would like to warmly congratulate and thank PJR designer Del Abcede for the cover design of 30th anniversary issue as well as the striking photoessay she has done with David Robie.

Hearty congratulations too to founding editor Dr David Robie and current editor Dr Philip Cass for compiling the edition.

The publicity blurb about the launch states:

“USP Journalism is proud to celebrate this milestone with a journal that has been a beacon of media excellence and a crucial partner in fostering journalistic integrity in the Pacific.”

This is a most apt description of the journal, and what it has fostered over three decades.

Dr Lee Duffield and others have written comprehensively on the editorials and articles covered by the Pacific Journalism Review.

I will just list some of the diverse subject matter covered over the past 10 years:

• PJR edition celebrating the journal’s existence for 20 years with the coverage of political journalism in the Asia Pacific — a book edition (2015);
• Documentary Practice in the South Pacific (2015);
• Endangered Journalists (2016);
• Journalism Education in the Pacific (2016);
• Climate Change in Asia-Pacific (2017);
• Journalism Education in Asia-Pacific (2017);
• Disasters, Cyclones and Communication (2018);
• Journalism Under Duress (2018);
• Terrorism Dilemmas and Democracy (2019);
• Media Freedom in Melanesia (2020);
• Climate Crisis and Corona Virus: Rethinking the social world (2020);
• Pacific Crises: Covid, Climate Emergency and West Papua (2021);
• Media Change, Adaptation and Culture (2022);
• Governance, Disinformation and Training (2023); and
• Gaza, genocide and media — PJR 30 years on, another special double edition (2024)

The editorial in the 30th anniversary double edition manifests this focus — “Will journalism survive?”, by David Robie

Unfolding genocide
Mainstream media, except for Al Jazeera, have collectively failed to provide honest accounts of the unfolding genocide in Gaza, as well as settler violence, and killings in the West Bank. International media stand condemned for its complicity in the gross human rights violations in Palestine.

The media have been caught out by the scores of reports directly sent from Gaza of the bombings, maiming and murder of mainly women, children and babies, and the turning into rubble of the world’s largest open-air prison.

The widespread protests the world over by ordinary citizens and university students clearly show that the media is not trusted.

Can the media survive? Indeed!

These are not the best of times for the media.

“At the time when we celebrated the second decade of the journal’s critical inquiry at Auckland University of Technology with a conference in 2014, our theme was ‘Political journalism in the Asia Pacific’, and our mood about the mediascape in the region was far more positive than it is today,” writes David.

“Three years later, we marked the 10th anniversary of the Pacific Media Centre, with a conference and a rather gloomier ‘Journalism under duress’ slogan.”

The editorial continues:

“Gaza has become not just a metaphor for a terrible state of dystopia in parts of in the world, it has also become an existential test for journalists — do we stand up for peace and justice and the right of a people to survive under the threat of ethnic cleansing and against genocide, or do we do nothing and remain silent in the face of genocide being carried out with impunity in front of our very eyes? The answer is simple surely.

“And it is about saving journalism, our credibility and our humanity as journalists.” (emphasis added).

Contemporary issues
Besides the editorial, the 30th anniversary edition continues the PJR tradition of addressing contemporary issues head on with 11 research articles, 2 commentaries, 7 book reviews, a photo-essay, 2 obituaries of Australia’s John Pilger and West Papua’s Arnold Ap, and 4 frontline pieces. A truly substantial double issue of the journal.

The USP notice on this 30th anniversary launch says “30 years and going strong”. Sounds like the Johnny Walker whisky advertisement, “still going strong”. This is an admirable achievement as well as in PJR’s future.

It is in contrast to the NZ Journalism Review (University of Canterbury), for example, which survived only for nine years.

Founded at the University of Papua New Guinea in 1994 by David Robie, PJR was published there for four years and at the University of the South Pacific for a further four years, then at Auckland University of Technology for 18 years before finally being hosted since 2021 at its present home, Asia Pacific Media Network.

According to Dr Robie, Pacific Journalism Review has received many good wishes for its birthday. Some of these are published in this journal. For a final message in the editorial, he recalled AUT’s senior journalism lecturer Greg Treadwell who wrote in 2020:

“‘Many Aotearoa New Zealand researchers found their publishing feet because PJR was dedicated to the region and interested in their work. PJR is central to journalism studies, and so to journalism and journalism education, in this country and further abroad. Long may that continue’.

“In answer to our editorial title: Yes, journalism will survive, and it will thrive through new and innovative niche forms, if democracy is to survive.

“Ra whānau Pacific Journalism Review!

Steadfast commitment
I have two quick remaining things to do: Professor Wadan Narsey’s congratulatory message, and a book presentation.

Professor Narsey pays tribute to David Robie for his steadfast commitment to Pacific journalism and congratulates him for the New Zealand honour bestowed on him in the King’s Birthday honours. He is very thankful that David published 37 of his articles on a range of issues during the dark days of censorship in Fiji under the Bainimarama and Sayeed-Khaiyum dictatorship.

I wish to present a copy of the recently published Epeli Hau’ofa: His Life and Legacy to Professor David Robie and Del Abcede to express Claire Slatter and my profound appreciation of the massive amount of work they have done to keep PJR alive and well.

It is my pleasure to launch the 30th anniversary edition of PJR.

‘Far more than a research journal’
In response, Dr Robie noted that PJR had published more than 1100 research articles over its three decades and it was the largest single Pacific media research repository but it had always been “far more than a research journal”.

“As an independent publication, it has given strong support to investigative journalism, sociopolitical journalism, political economy of the media, photojournalism and political cartooning — they have all been strongly reflected in the character of the journal,” he said.

“It has also been a champion of journalism practice-as-research methodologies and strategies, as reflected especially in its Frontline section, pioneered by retired Australian professor and investigative journalist Wendy Bacon.

“Keeping to our tradition of cutting edge and contemporary content, this anniversary edition raises several challenging issues such as Julian Assange and Gaza.”

He thanked current editor Philip Cass for his efforts — “he was among the earliest contributors when we began in Papua New Guinea” — and the current team, assistant editor Khairiah A. Rahman, Nicole Gooch, extraordinary mentors Wendy Bacon and Chris Nash, APMN chair Heather Devere, Adam Brown, Nik Naidu and Gavin Ellis.

He also paid tribute to many who have contributed to the journal through peer reviewing and the editorial board over many years — such as Dr Lee Duffield and professor Mark Pearson of Griffith University, who was also editor of Australian Journalism Review for many years and was an inspiration to PJR — “and he is right here with us at the conference.”

Among others have been the Fiji conference convenor, USP’s associate professor Shailendra Singh, and professor Trevor Cullen of Edith Cowan University, who is chair of next year’s World Journalism Education Association conference in Perth.

Dr Robie also singled out designer Del Abcede for special tribute for her hard work carrying the load of producing the journal for many years “and keeping me sane — the question is am I keeping her sane? Anyway, neither I nor Philip would be standing here without her input.”

New Caledonia’s security forces have arrested eight people believed to be involved in the organisation of pro-independence-related riots that broke out in the French Pacific territory last month.

The eight include leaders of the so-called Field Action Coordinating Cell (CCAT), a group that was set up by the Union Calédonienne (UC), one of the more radical and largest party making up the FLNKS (Kanak and Socialist National Liberation Front) platform.

The large-scale dawn operation yesterday, mainly conducted by gendarmes at CCAT’s headquarters in downtown Nouméa’s Magenta district, as well as suburban Mont-Dore, is said to be part of a judicial preliminary inquiry into the events of May 13 involving the French anti-terrorist division.

• READ MORE: New Caledonia police arrest pro-independence leader among 11 people over deadly protests – Al Jazeera
• French police raid pro-independence Kanak party HQ, arrest eight in crackdown
• Nouméa’s Tontouta International Airport reopened after civil unrest
• Other New Caledonia unrest reports

The whole area had been cordoned off for the duration of the operation.

Public Prosecutor Yves Dupas said in a media release this inquiry had been launched on May 17.

“It includes potential charges of conspiracy in order to prepare the commission of a crime; organised destruction of goods and property by arson; complicity by way of incitement of crimes and murders or murder attempts on officers entrusted with public authority; and participation in a grouping formed with the aim of preparing acts of violence on persons and property.”

Dupas said that because some of the charges included organised crime, the arrested individuals could be kept in custody for up to 96 hours.

Téin among 8 arrested
CCAT leader Christian Téin was one of the eight arrested leaders.

Dupas said the arrested men had been notified of their fundamental rights, including the right to be assisted by a lawyer, the right to undergo a medical examination, and the right to remain silent during subsequent interviews.

“Investigators and the public prosecution intend to conduct this phase of the inquiry with all the necessary objectivity and impartiality — with the essential objective being seeking truth,” Dupas said.

Dupas pointed out other similar operations were also carried out on Wednesday, including at the headquarters of USTKE union, one of the major components of CCAT.

The arrests come five weeks after pro-independence protests — against a proposed change to the rules of eligibility of voters at local elections — degenerated into violence, looting and arson.

Current estimates are that more than 600 businesses, and about 200 private residences were destroyed, causing more than 7000 employees to lose their jobs for a total cost of more than 1 billion euros (NZ$1.8 billion).

Nine people have been killed during the unrest, mostly Kanaks.

The unrest is believed to be the worst since a quasi civil war erupted in New Caledonia during the second half of the 1980s.

‘Stay calm’ call by the UC
Pro-independence party Union Calédonienne swiftly reacted to the arrests on Wednesday by calling on “all of CCAT’s relays and our young people to stay calm and not to respond to provocation, whether on the ground or on social networks”.

UC, in a media release, said it “denounces” the “abusive arrests” of the CCAT leaders.

“The French State is persisting in its intimidation manoeuvres. Those arrests were predictable,” UC said, and also demanded “immediate explanations”.

UC president Daniel Goa is also calling on the removal of the French representative in New Caledonia, High Commissioner Louis Le Franc.

The Pro-France Loyalistes party leader and New Caledonia’s Southern province President, Sonia Backès, also reacted, but praised the arrests, saying “about time” on social networks.

Another pro-France politician from the same party, Nicolas Metzdorf, recalled that those arrests were needed before “a resumption of talks regarding the future of New Caledonia”.

“But all is not settled; the restoration of law and order, even though it now seems feasible, must continue to intensify.”

At the weekend, a Congress of the FLNKS was postponed, due to persisting differences between the pro-independence umbrella’s components, and the fact that UC had brought several hundred CCAT members to the conference, which local organisers and moderate FLNKS parties perceived as a “security risk”.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Three Nouméa municipal policemen are now facing a prosecution after a disturbing video was posted in a Facebook neighbourhood watch group, allegedly implicating them in acts of severe violence against a Kanak man they had just arrested.

The municipal police officers are not part of the French security forces that have been sent to restore law and order, RNZ Pacific understands.

Initial investigations established that the violence took place on at 6th Kilometre, on the night of May 25-26, and that it “followed the arrest of several persons suspected of a theft attempt”, Nouméa Public Prosecutor Yves Dupas said in a statement yesterday.

• READ MORE: Footage of French forces officer kicking Kanak man in head surfaces online
• Other Kanaky New Caledonia reports

The incident was captured in a brief video, later posted on social networks, being shared hundreds of times and going viral.

“It is the management of municipal police themselves who have signalled this to us”, Dupas said.

The Public Prosecutor’s Office said it had verified the authenticity of the short footage which depicted a “representative of the security forces striking a violent foot kick to the head of a person sitting on the ground after he was arrested”.

On the same video, the other two officers, all equipped with riot gear, are seen to be standing by, surrounding the victim.

Dupas said a formal inquiry was now underway against the three municipal police officers who were now facing charges of “violence from a person entrusted with public authority and failure to assist a person in peril”.

“This case will be treated with every expected severity, being related to presumed facts of illegitimate violence on the part of officers entrusted with a mission of administrative and judicial police”, the statement said.

It added that “this is the first case being treated for this type of act since the beginning of civil unrest in New Caledonia” and further stressed that law enforcement agencies deployed on the ground have displayed “professionalism” in the “difficult management of the law enforcement operations carried out”.

“The victim remains to be approached by investigators in order to undergo medical examination and assess his current health condition.”

The announcement was made as part of the French High Commissioner Louis Le Franc during his daily update on the situation.

“As a follow-up to the end of the state of emergency since Tuesday, 28 May, 2024, the ban on the platform TikTok has been lifted,” a statement said.

The ban was announced on May 15 in what was then described as an attempt to block contacts between rioting groups in the French Pacific territory.

It had since then been widely contested as a breach of human rights.

Doubts had also been expressed on how effective the measure could have been, with other platforms (such as Facebook, WhatsApp or Viber) remaining accessible and the fact that the ban on Tiktok could be easily dodged with VPN tools.

World Cup 1998 winner Karembeu ‘in mourning’
Earlier this week, former footballer and 1998 World Cup champion Christian Karembeu made a surprise revelation saying two members of his family had been shot dead during the riots.

Speaking to French radio Europe 1 on Monday, Karembeu said: “I have lost members of my family, that’s why I remained silent (until now), because I am in mourning.”

“Two members of my family have been shot with a bullet in the head. These are snipers. The word is strong but they have been assassinated and we hope investigations will be made on these murders”, the Kanak footballer said, adding the victims were his nephew and his niece.

Karembeu’s career involves 53 tests for the French national football team, one world cup victory (1998), playing for prestigious European clubs such as Nantes, Sampdoria, and Real Madrid (where he won two Champions League titles), Olympiakos, Servette, and Bastia.

He is now a strategic advisor and ambassador for Greek club Olympiakos.

Reacting to Karembeu’s announcements, Chief Prosecutor Dupas told public broadcaster NC la Première on Tuesday he believed Karembeu was referring to the two Kanak people who were killed earlier this month in Nouméa’s industrial zone of Ducos.

“I do not know what his family kinship relation is with those two victims who were assassinated in Ducos,” he said.

“But concerning these facts, an investigation is underway, it has gotten pretty far already, one (European) company manager has been arrested and remains in custody. The Justice is processing all the facts, crimes, committed.”

“We have, among the civilian victims, four persons of the Kanak community and it is a possibility that some of those could be related to Christian Karembeu”, he said.

Asked on a possibly higher number of fatalities, he stressed the death toll so far remained at seven.

“We have not received any other complaint regarding people shooting civilians”, he maintained, while encouraging members of the public who would be aware of other fatal incidents to come forward and contact his office.

“We arrived in our car, I saw the roadblock, I barely had time to reverse and go back and they started to shoot. About 10 times,” the unidentified witness said, showing two bullet holes on his car.

“I have lodged a complaint for murder attempt and now the investigation is ongoing,” he said.

Two other Kanaks said the following day, on May 16, while in the streets of their neighbourhood, they were shot at by balaclava-clad passengers of two driving by pick-up trucks.

“We started to run and that’s when we heard the first gunshots. My little brother managed to take shelter at a neighbour’s home, and I went on running with the 4WD behind me. When I arrived at my family’s home, I jumped into the garden and that’s when I heard a second gunshot”, he told La Première.

“We never thought this would happen to us”.

Dupas said another, wider investigation, was underway since May 17 in order to identify “those who are pulling the ropes and who led the “planning and committing of attacks that have hit New Caledonia”.

“This means anyone, whatever his/her level of implication, whether order-givers or just actors”.

Latest update
The state of emergency was lifted on Tuesday in New Caledonia following an announcement from French President Emmanuel Macron, who was in New Caledonia on a 17-hour visit last Thursday.

The end of the state of emergency was described by Macron as being part of the “commitments” he made while meeting representatives of New Caledonia’s pro-independence movement last week and to allow leaders to spread the message to people to lift roadblocks and barricades and “loosen the grip”.

However, a dusk-to-dawn (6pm to 6am) curfew remains in place, including a ban on public meetings, the sale of alcohol and the possession and transportation of firearms and ammunition, French High Commissioner Louis Le France said yesterday.

An estimated 3500 security forces (police, gendarmes and special riot squads) remain on the ground.

Taxis have announced they were now resuming service, but bus services remain closed because “too many roads remain impracticable”.

High Commissioner Le Franc said that since the unrest began on May 13, a total of 535 people had been arrested, 136 security forces (police and gendarmes) had been injured and the death toll remained at seven (including two gendarmes, four indigenous Kanaks and one person of European ascent).

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

COMMENTARY: By Angelina Hurley

After the trauma of completing a PhD on decolonising Australian humour, I needed a well-deserved break.

I always avoid places with throngs of patriotic Aussies, so I chose Nouméa, in New Caledonia, over Bali, settling on a small outer island.

One night, a smoke alarm jolted me awake. I went to the balcony and smelled smoke, seeing fires and smoke clouds from the mainland. The next morning, I learned from the only English-speaking news channel that riots had erupted there.

• READ MORE: Media fuss over stranded tourists, but Kanaks face existential struggle
• ‘France lost the plot’ – journalist David Robie on Kanaky New Caledonia riots
• EXPLAINER: Why are Indigenous Kanak people protesting in New Caledonia?
• Hello, I’m white (and privileged) – 10 things you should know
• Other Kanaky New Caledonia reports

Protests against French control of New Caledonia have resulted in seven dead — five Kanaks, and two police officers (one by accodent) — and a state of emergency

I woke to a fleet of sailboats, houseboats, and catamarans anchoring near the island, ready to offer a quick escape for the rich (funny how the privileged are always the first to leave before things are handed back to them on return).

Travelling from hotel to hotel, I reached a quiet and desolate Nouméa in the late afternoon. Finding transport was difficult, but a kind French taxi driver picked me up, and we bypassed barricaded streets.

At the hotel, an atmosphere of anxiety and confusion lingered among tourists and staff, although I felt safe.

The staff worked tirelessly, maintaining normalcy while locals lined up for food outside supermarkets. With reports of deaths, I constantly scanned the internet for news from both French and Kanak perspectives. As days passed, the Aussie tourist twang grew louder and more restless.

Amusing, strange, disappointing: the reactions of the privileged
The airport closed, and flights were cancelled indefinitely, fuelling frustration among Australians (and New Zealanders) who couldn’t access the consulate.

Australian government representatives eventually arrived to update us on the situation, leading to a surge of complaints.

Despite concerns about being stuck, I didn’t feel significantly inconvenienced beyond travel delays and added expenses. We were being well taken care of.

Not everyone agreed. Some found the answers insufficient.

The reactions of the privileged are amusing, strange, and disappointing: while anxiety about the unknown is understandable, some people need to get a grip.

Complaints poured in about the lack of access to information from Australia, despite the State of Emergency. There were debates and demands for updates via text (sorry, Gill Scott Heron, this revolution will be broadcast on WhatsApp).

It was amusing to hear people discussing social media information sharing while claiming lack of access, despite the readily available internet, English news on TV, and information from hotel staff.

As I listened, I humorously observed the gradual rise of White Aussie Privilege.

Their perception of disadvantage was very different to mine: an elderly migaloo woman requested daily personal phone updates to her room, while boomers threw tantrums over not being called on quickly enough.

There’s always the outspoken sheila, interrupting whenever she feels like it, and the experts proclaiming knowledge exceeding that of all the officials.

A rude collective sigh followed a man’s inquiry about the wellbeing of those handling the crisis outside, with someone retorting, ‘It’s their bloody job.’

The highlight was GI Joe informing the French, as if they didn’t know, of the presence of a helicopter pad attached to the hotel, angrily suggesting Chinook helicopters from Townsville should evacuate everyone.

What?! I burst out laughing, but no one seemed to find it as hilarious as I did.

The irony eluded him: the helicopters, named after the Chinook people, a Native American tribe Indigenous to the Pacific Northwest USA, would have First Nations saviours flying in to rescue the Straylians.

Despite the severity of the emergency situation, white travellers still found cause to complain about a lack of WhatsApp updates.

The Australian consulate rep patiently reminded everyone of the serious State of Emergency, with lives lost and the focus on safety and unblocking roads, making our evacuation less of a priority for the French at that time.

When crises hit, White people often react uncomfortably towards the only Black person in the room (which I was, besides an African couple).

They either look at you suspiciously, avoid eye contact, ignore you, or become overly ally-friendly.

The White Aussie Privilege resembled narcissistic behaviour — the selfishness, lack of empathy, and entitlement was gross.

The First Nations struggle around the world
Sitting safely in the hotel, the juxtaposition as an Indigenous person felt bizarre.

This isn’t my first such travel experience; I’ve been the bystander before in North America, Mexico, Belize, South America, South Africa, and India.

As a First Nations traveller, I’m always aware of the First Nations situation wherever I go.

Recently, the French National Assembly adopted a bill expanding voting rights for newer residents of Kanaky (New Caledonia), primarily French nationals.

It’s a move likely to further disenfranchise the Kanak people, impacting local political representation and future decolonisation discussions.

At least at home, we have representation in the government.

There are currently no representatives from Kanaky New Caledonia sitting in the French National Assembly.

No consultation with the First Nations people took place (sounds familiar).

In 1998, the Nouméa Accord was established between French authorities and the local government to transition towards greater independence and self-governance while respecting Kanak Indigenous rights.

Since 2018, three referendums on independence have been held, with the latest in 2021 boycotted by Indigenous voters due to the covid-19 pandemic’s impact on Kanaks.

With the Accord now lapsed, there is no clear process for continuing the decolonisation efforts.

As stated by Amnesty International (Schuetze, 2024), “The response must be understood through the lens of a stalled decolonisation process, racial inequality, and the longstanding, peacefully expressed demands of the Indigenous Kanak people for self-determination.”

An all-too familiar story
Relaying the story back to mob in Australia, conversations often turn to the behaviour of the colonisers.

We compare our predominantly passive and conciliatory approach as Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander people, offering the hand of reconciliation only to be slapped away.

Despite not promoting violence, we note the irony of colonisers condoning violence as retaliation, considering it was their primary tactic during invasion.

As my cousin aptly put it, “French hypocrisy. So much for a nation that modelled itself on a revolution against an oppressive monarchy, now undermining local democracy and self-determination for First Nations people.”

After the overwhelming “No” vote denying an Indigenous Voice to Parliament in Australia, following decades of tireless campaigning by Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples, I deeply sympathise with the Kanak people’s frustration, fear, and anger at being outvoted and dismissed.

In French Polynesia, there are both movements for and against decolonisation.

As I sit amid this beautiful place, observing locals on the beaches and tourists enjoying their luxuries, I know things will return to the settler norm of control — and First Nations people are told they should be grateful.

Angelina Hurley is a Gooreng Gooreng, Mununjali, Birriah, and Gamilaraay writer from Meanjin Brisbane, a Fulbright Scholar and recent PhD graduate from Griffith University’s Film School. This article was first published by NITV (National Indigenous Television).

Te Kuaka, an independent foreign policy advocacy group with a strong focus on the Pacific, has called for urgent changes to the law governing New Zealand’s security agency.

“Pacific countries will be asking legitimate questions about whether . . . spying in the Pacific was happening out of NZ,” it said today.

This follows revelations that a secret foreign spy operation run out of NZ’s Government Communications Security Bureau (GCSB) for seven years without the knowledge or approval of the government or Parliament.

• READ MORE: Foreign agency ran spy operation out of NZ’s GCSB for years
• NZ spy agency slammed for hosting foreign spying without telling minister or cabinet
• Other Te Kuaka reports

RNZ News reports today that the former minister responsible for the GCSB, Andrew Little, has admitted that it may never be known whether the foreign spy operation was supporting military action against another country.

New Zealand’s intelligence watchdog the Inspector-General of Intelligence and Security revealed its existence on Thursday, noting that the system operated from 2013-2020 and had the potential to be used to support military action against targets.

The operation was used to intercept military communications and identify targets in the GCSB’s area of operation, which centres on the Pacific.

In 2012, the GCSB signed up to the agreement without telling the then director-general and let the system operate without safeguards including adequate training, record-keeping or auditing.

When Little found out about it he supported it being referred to the Inspector-General for investigation.

Refused to name country
But he refused to say if he believed the covert operation was run by the United States although it was likely to be one of New Zealand’s Five Eyes partners, reports RNZ.

Te Kuaka said in a statement today the inquiry should prompt immediate law reform and widespread concern.

“This should be of major concern to all New Zealanders because we are not in control here”, said Te Kuaka member and constitutional lawyer Fuimaono Dylan Asafo.

“The inquiry reveals that our policies and laws are not fit for purpose, and that they do not cover the operation of foreign agencies within New Zealand.”

It appeared from the inquiry that even GCSB itself had lost track of the system and did not know its full purpose, Te Kuaka said.

It was “rediscovered” following concerns about another partner system hosted by GCSB.

While there have been suggestions the system was established under previously lax legislation, its operation continued through several agency and legislative reviews.

Ultimately, the inquiry found “that the Bureau could not be sure [its operation] was always in accordance with government intelligence requirements, New Zealand law and the provisions of the [Memorandum of Understanding establishing it]”.

‘Unknowingly complicit’
“We do not know what military activities were undertaken using New Zealand’s equipment and base, and this could make us unknowingly complicit in serious breaches of international law”, Fuimaono said.

“The law needs changing to explicitly prohibit what has occurred here.”

The foreign policy group has also raised the alarm that New Zealand’s involvement in the AUKUS security pact could compound problems raised by this inquiry.

AUKUS is a trilateral security pact between Australia, the UK and the US that aims to contain China.

Pillar Two’s objective is to win the next generation arms race being shaped by new autonomous weapons platforms, electronic warfare systems, and hypersonic missiles.

It also involves intelligence sharing with AI-driven targeting systems and nuclear-capable assets.

‘Pacific questions’
“Pacific countries will be asking legitimate questions about whether this revelation indicates that spying in the Pacific was happening out of NZ, without any knowledge of ministers”, said Te Kuaka co-director Marco de Jong.

“New Zealand’s involvement in AUKUS Pillar II could further threaten the trust that we have built with Pacific countries, and others may ask whether involvement in that pact — with closer ties to the US — will increase the risk that our intelligence agencies will become entangled in other countries’ operations, and other people’s wars, without proper oversight.”

Te Kuaka has previously spoken out about concerns over AUKUS Pillar II.

“We understand that there is some sensitivity in this matter, but the security and intelligence agencies should front up to ministers here in a public setting to explain how this was allowed to happen,” De Jong said.

He added that the agencies needed to assure the public that serious military or other operations were not conducted from NZ soil without democratic oversight.”

Fiji’s Women and Children’s Minister Lynda Tabuya says Pacific island countries need to “strengthen our laws” on online harassment.

Tabuya spoke to RNZ Pacific on the sidelines of the Pacific Women in Power forum taking place in Auckland this week.

She said the issue that she was dealing with — which is allegations of a sex and drug scandal between her and former cabinet minister Aseri Radrodro — was currently with the police.

• READ MORE: Other online bullying reports

“[Police] are investigating it,” she said.

“And it just so happens that a person who was causing this harassment online lives in Sydney,” she said.

She said she was able to get the assistance of Australia’s online safety watchdog to issue the notice to the person to take down the content — images — because it is a crime in Australia.

“If you put up content that is or appears to be the person, so then the person [who published it] needs to take the content down otherwise they can face prosecution,” she said.

‘Grateful for swift action’
“That was the process I followed and I’m grateful to the Safety Commissioner of Australia for the swift action.”

However, she said the situation she found herself in was not exclusive to her.

“It’s me today, it could be someone else tomorrow. It doesn’t have to be a minister or public figure.

“But if you have women in Fiji or across the Pacific who are facing this, and they’re being attacked — especially for populations where there are more people outside of the country than in [the] country.

Tabuya said therefore there was a need for strong policies, not just in Fiji, but across the region.

“You get more attacks from people who live overseas. Women MPs need to reach out to those countries where those people are attacking them live because the laws are much stronger.

“But it’s also a lesson for us within to strengthen our laws so that we can stand up against online bullying.

“The world is unfair and being a woman in politics, we face a lot of unfairness and injustices. But I think it also makes us so much more determined to stand up and be heard,” she added.

Meanwhile, Tabuya is currently the subject of an inquiry by her political party following the sex and drug allegation, the outcome of which has yet to be released.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

When it comes to grappling with the Treaty of Waitangi/Te Tiriti o Waitangi, one of the commonest responses is that it is a matter of interpretation. It seems to be a perfectly fair reaction, except that historical interpretation generally requires adherence to rules of evidence.

It is not a licence to make any claims whatsoever about the Treaty, and then to assert their truth by appealing to the authority of personal interpretation.

Yet since the 1970s New Zealanders have been faced with the paradoxical situation of a growing body of Treaty scholarship that has led to less consensus about its meaning and purpose.

• READ MORE: History and myth: why the Treaty of Waitangi remains such a ‘bloody difficult subject’
• Learning to live with the ‘messy, complicated history’ of how Aotearoa New Zealand was colonised
• Explainer: the significance of the Treaty of Waitangi

It is therefore worthwhile to investigate some of the more common misconceptions about the Treaty that have accrued over recent decades.

This will not lead to a definitive interpretation of the Treaty. But it might remove a few obstacles currently in the way of understanding it better.

The government has been warned to “be careful” with its policies affecting Māori at the National Iwi Chairs Forum (NICF) on Friday.https://t.co/8SskRWTxGo

— RNZ Te Ao Māori (@RNZTeAoMaori) February 2, 2024

1. The Treaty or Te Tiriti?
A common view persists that the English and Māori versions of the Treaty are fundamentally at odds with each other, especially over the central issue of sovereignty.

But research over the past two decades on British colonial policy prior to 1840 has revealed that Britain wanted a treaty to enable it to extend its jurisdiction to its subjects living in New Zealand.

It had no intention to govern Māori or usurp Māori sovereignty. On this critical point, the two versions are essentially in agreement.

2. The Treaty is not a contract
The principle of contra proferentem — appropriated from contract law — refers to ambiguous provisions that can be interpreted in a way that works against the drafter of the contract.

However, there are several problems in applying this principle to the Treaty. Firstly, treaties are different legal instruments from contracts. This explains why there are correspondingly few examples of this principle being used in international law for interpreting treaties.

Secondly, as there are no major material differences between the English and Māori versions of the Treaty when it comes to Māori retaining sovereignty, there is no need to apply such a principle.

And thirdly, under international law, treaties are not to be interpreted in an adversarial manner, but in good faith (the principle of pacta sunt servanda). Thus, rather than the parties fighting over the Treaty’s meaning, the requirement is for them to work with rather than against each other.

Nearly 400 people have marched down the main street of Kaitāia in a show of support for Te Tiriti o Waitangi.https://t.co/3BGtm8BMbw

— RNZ Te Ao Māori (@RNZTeAoMaori) February 2, 2024

3. Relationships evolve over time
No rangatira (chief) ceded sovereignty over their own people through the Treaty. Nor was that Britain’s intention — hence Britain’s recognition in August 1839 of hapū (kinship group) sovereignty and the guarantee in the Treaty that rangatiratanga (the powers of the chiefs) would be protected.

Britain simply wanted jurisdiction over its own subjects in the colony. This is what is known as an “originalist” interpretation — one that follows the Treaty’s meaning as it was understood in 1840.

This has several limitations: it precludes the emergence of Treaty principles; it wrongly presumes that all involved at the time of the Treaty’s signing had an identical view on its meaning; and, crucially, it ignores all subsequent historical developments.

Treaty relationships evolve over time in numerous ways. Originalist interpretations fail to take that into account.

4. Questions of motive
British motives for the Treaty were made explicit in 1839, yet in the following 185 years false motives have entered into the historical bloodstream, where they have continued circulating.

What Britain wanted was the right to apply its laws to its people living in New Zealand. It also intended to “civilise” Māori (through creating the short-lived Office of Protector of Aborigines) and protect Māori land from unethical purchases (the pre-emption provision in Article Two of the Treaty).

And Britain wanted to afford Māori the same rights as British subjects in cases where one group’s actions impinged on the other’s (as in the 1842 Maketū case, involving the conviction for murder and execution of a young Māori man).

The Treaty was not a response to a French threat to New Zealand. And it was not an attempt to conquer Māori, nor to deceive them through subterfuge.

5. Myths of a ‘real’ Treaty and 4th article
Over the past two decades, some have alleged there is a “real” Treaty — the so-called “Littlewood Treaty” – that has been concealed because it contains a different set of provisions. Such conspiratorial claims are easily dispelled.

The text of the Littlewood Treaty is known and it is merely a handwritten copy of the actual Treaty. And, most obviously, it cannot be regarded as a treaty on the basis that no one signed it.

Another popular myth is that there is a fourth article of the Treaty, which purportedly guarantees religious freedom. This article does not appear in either the Māori or English texts of the Treaty, and there is no evidence the signatories regarded it as a provision of the agreement.

It is a suggestion that emerged in the 1990s, but lacks any evidential or legal basis.

Finally, there is the argument that the Treaty supports the democratic process. In fact, the Treaty ushered in a non-representative regime in the colony. It was the 1852 New Zealand Constitution Act that gave the country a democratic government – a statute that incidentally made no reference to the Treaty’s provisions.

This list is not exhaustive. But in dispensing with areas of poor interpretation, we can improve the chances of a more informed and productive discussion about the Treaty.

Dr Paul Moon is professor of history, Auckland University of Technology. This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article.

Papua New Guinea’s Police Commissioner David Manning has been reinstated after being stood down following riots and looting on January 10.

That rioting — branded as Black Wednesday — was sparked by a police protest after unannounced deductions from their wages, which the government blamed on a glitch.

The protest led to a riot causing the deaths of more than 20 people, widespread looting and hundreds of millions of dollars of damage to businesses.

• READ MORE: Long term plan needed for underlying PNG problems, says academic

Amnesty International called on authorities to protect human rights in response to the riots.

The 14-day state of emergency following the violence has now ended.

The National newspaper reported Prime Minister James Marape announced Manning’s reinstatement, and that of Taies Sansan as the Department of Personnel Management Secretary, after administrative preliminary investigations concluded.

However, Treasury Secretary Andrew Oake and Finance Secretary Samuel Penias remained suspended “due to their failure to update the salary system, which led to the events of Jan 10”, Marape said.

Marape also said Deputy Police Commissioner Dr Philip Mina was being suspended.

A commission of inquiry will be appointed to look into the police force.

“The commission of inquiry will be headed by a judge from the Supreme Court and National Court, and will be concluded as soon as possible, to look into the structure, the operation, and their ethics of conduct,” Marape said.

“The country deserves to have a police force that is effective and efficient. We will leave no stone unturned as we recover, reboot and restore.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Civil society groups wanting to see an end to destructive logging practices by foreign companies in Papua New Guinea, say these companies are being given forest clearance authorities and then misusing them.

The PNG advocacy group, Act Now!, and Jubilee Australia said the forest clearance authorities (FCAs) are intended to allow limited pockets of forest to be cleared for agricultural or other use.

Eddie Tanago of Act Now! said a case study they conducted into West Sepik’s Wammy Rural Development Project, which is run by Malaysian logging company Global Elite Ltd, was meant to result in the planting of palm oil and rubber trees.

• LISTEN TO RNZ PACIFIC WAVES: Large scale logging continues in PNG despite Govt opposition
• READ MORE: Other PNG illegal logging reports

“Instead, it used it as a front. And we’ve seen hundreds of thousands of cubic meters of round logs being exported. Now, this particular operation has been going on for almost 10 years, and this company has sold more than US$31 million worth of round logs,” he said.

Tanago said there was no sign of any attempt to rehabilitate the land for other use.

ACT Now! said the Wammy project was also breaking other laws because the land was subject to the SABL (Special Agricultural Business Leases) Commission of Inquiry in 2013 and it was evident then that the landowners’ free, prior and informed consent had never been given, so there should not have been any logging on it.

Tanago said Wammy was just one of about 24 logging operations making use of an FCA licence, resulting in huge quantities of logs being exported.

“Together this activity exploiting FCAs covers about 61,800 hectares of forest, and that’s equivalent to about 11,000 football fields. So that’s really, really massive,” he said.

Act Now is “calling on the Forest Board and the PNG Forest Authority to extend the current moratorium on the new FCAs”.

“There was one that was announced in the beginning of this year that says that they were not going to issue any new FCAs. We want that to extend. We want logging in all the existing FCAs to be also suspended. And there should be a comprehensive public review of these projects.”

The PNG government has previously stated it wanted to end round log exports by 2025, but Act Now! points out that in the first six months of the current year exports have totalled 1.1 million cubic metres.

“The export log volumes now are currently very high. And the PNG Forest Authority is really failing to meet the reduction targets as set down in the medium term plan,” he sid.

“This is in breach of the targets that are set out by the government, plus, all the promises that we’ve seen, like the recent one bill made by Prime Minister [James] Marape when the French President was around.”

On the visit to PNG, President Emmanuel Macron and Marape visited a lookout in the Varirata National Park picnic area, renaming it the Emmanuel Jean-Michel Frederic Macron lookout point.

The Pacific Islands News Association (PINA) reports that the walk through the lush national park was underlined by the signing of a new environment initiative — backed by French and European Union financing — that will reward countries that preserve their rainforests.

Marape said the country’s rainforest was the third largest and undisturbed tropical rainforest in the world and preserving its integrity was of the utmost importance.

Act Now! would agree, saying PNG has to be looking to preserve the rainforest and reduce deforestation, but the current signs are not good.

RNZ Pacific contacted Global Elite Ltd for comment on this story but there was no response.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ. The audio was first broadcast on Friday, 15 September 2023.

A Pacific leader in New Zealand’s South Island wants the future government to prioritise bridging the Pacific pay-gap.

Reverend Alofa Lale said her church community in Dunedin struggled to afford basic needs and said people needed higher wages to survive.

“There is a big Pacific pay gap that needs to be bridged and bring wages up to parity with non-Pacific.”

• LISTEN TO RNZ PACIFIC WAVES: Bridging the Pacific pay gap
• Other Pacific pay gap reports

A Pacific Pay Gap Inquiry found that in 2021, for every dollar earned by a Pākehā man, Pacific men were paid 81 cents and Pacific women 75 cents, making them the lowest on the pay scale.

The call for better working conditions and equal pay for Pacific workers dates back to the 1970s, led by the Polynesian Panthers, and still continues today.

The demand comes as Pacific community leaders in the South Island have weighed in on the political debate as New Zealand heads for an election on October 14.

The South Island has one of the fastest-growing Pacific populations in the country.

Thriving Pacific community
The town of Oamaru has a thriving Pacific community, which makes up 20 percent of the town’s population of 14,000.

The largest town in the Waitaki District boasts a large Tongan community followed by the second largest Tuvalu and then Fijian and Samoan.

Hana Halalele, Waitaki District’s first Pasifika deputy mayor, said the Oamaru Pacific Island Community Group is the go-to hub for many Pasifika there.

Many of those families have come from Auckland for work, with many taking up jobs in the dairy and horticulture sector.

Halalele said people were asking for a government that could provide meaningful relief to address the cost of living crisis.

“Groceries are really expensive… there’s increases with interest rates and rental payments are more for a lot of families.”

She said it was also a challenging time for RSE workers especially during the current off season.

Away from families
Many Pacific workers were away from their families and were “not eligible for any support from Work and Income.”

In Christchurch, many young Pasifika faced their own set of challenges. Twelve years on, many were still dealing with long-term impacts and trauma from the February 2011, Christchurch earthquakes.

The University of Canterbury director of Māori, Pacific and Rainbow Student Services, Riki Welsh, said future governments must “prioritise more Pacific-based research” and focus on the “mental health impacts of the Christchurch earthquakes.”

He said, overall, the Ministry of Pacific Peoples (MPP) under Labour had been fruitful for Pasifika in the South Island.

He was pleased about the introduction of language weeks and the benefit of Pacific celebrations which reinforced cultural identity and united communities.

The ACT party which could form a government with the National Party, planned to disestablish MPP, something Welsh said would be harmful for Pacific progress.

“I do worry about a government that may remove some of the agencies that have helped increase cultural identity . . . I think the South Island would suffer worse than the North Island because there are fewer of us here.”

‘Still have faith’ in Labour
Reverend Alofa Lale said people had a lot to consider come this election, but usually “align themselves with Labour”.

Although people “still have faith” in the party, people questioned whether it was still the best choice.

“It is the party that looks after you but I think people are lacking a bit of confidence.”

Unlike Auckland and Wellington, people living in rural South Island and small towns experienced their own set of health challenges.

Invercargill-based surgeon Dr George Ngai was concerned about the government’s debt and ability to focus on people’s health needs.

He said, he felt let down that “many of the government policies had not turned into action”.

Accessibility to GPs and hospitals was a major barrier, Dr Ngai said.

“The main need is to have medical care. This is a widespread problem but it is more acute with more serious problems in the Pasifika community.”

Pacific community leaders will be visiting hotspots around the South Island in the coming weeks to provide civic education for eligible voters ahead of the October poll.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

A scene examination is continuing at a construction site in central Auckland after a fatal shooting there shocked the city yesterday morning.

The gunman, 24-year-old Matu Tangi Matua Reid, was on home detention but allowed to work at the construction site.

He died at the scene in a shoot-out with police after killing two civilians with a pump-action shotgun. Six others were wounded, including two police officers.

• LISTEN TO RNZ MORNING REPORT: ‘A sad tinge’ – Auckland Mayor Wayne Brown
• ‘I don’t think that anyone benefits from politicians speculating in a vacuum of facts’ – Auckland Central MP Chlöe Swarbrick
• READ MORE:  ‘Deep sorrow’ – PM on Auckland shooting deaths, says no national security risk
• Three dead in Auckland CBD shooting, including gunman, police confirm
• Fatal Auckland shooting: How it unfolded

The horror unfolded on the opening day of the FIFA Women’s Football World Cup in Auckland and a minute’s silence for the shooting victims was held at the first game at Eden Park last night when New Zealand defeated Norway 1-0.

Police officers in high-vis vests have today re-entered the high-rise building on the corner of Queen and Quay streets and at least seven police cars are at the cordoned off site.

A man working on the repairs at nearby Queen’s Wharf told RNZ the rules had been tightened at their site and people entering were being checked.

A commuter said there appeared to be extra security at Britomart Station transit hub this morning but he felt safe.

“It was every emotion yesterday,” he said, but he thought the city had coped well in the aftermath of the ‘shock and horror’ of the morning’s events.”

Brown said he supported Ngāti Whātua Ōrākei’s decision to call for a rahui in the CBD area, and the FIFA fan zone on Quay Street had been closed.

Ngāti Whātua has said this morning that no rahui is in place.

“[The] fan zone was right hard up against the dreadful event and it just didn’t seem to be right to be having a night of celebration right next door to something that had been so horrible,” he said.

“Ngāti Whātua called for, and I supported, a rahui on the area down there so we shut the fan zone and people, with a sad tinge, did go to the game at Eden Park, but with respect.

“They had the one minute’s silence, which was part of our culture and the correct thing to do, and then there was a wonderful game afterwards so, I think … the city took it well.”

‘Good end to dreadful day’
Brown said he had spoken to Prime Minister Chris Hipkins after last night’s match between New Zealand and Norway and they had agreed it was “a very good end to a dreadful day”.

He said FIFA officials had been “very sympathetic” about the shooting.

“They were very understanding, they were very concerned about the impact on the tournament, but also deeply respectful of the losses of — almost innocence — of the people here in Auckland CBD, plus of course the dreadful loss of life from this shocking experience.”

While he had been one of the people raising concerns about ongoing crime issues such as ram raids in Auckland, Brown said he was not thinking about anything on the scale of what occurred yesterday.

“It’s something out of the ordinary and I think this is one random person … and we shouldn’t possibly extrapolate that across the district, but crime on the streets with the ram raids is something which has got to be dealt with.”

Brown had praise for both the police and members of the public regarding how they responded to the unfolding crisis on Thursday morning.

“The police were wonderful, they responded bravely and promptly,” he said.

“People behaved very well considering what an appalling thing had happened.”

Violence like this has no place in city, says Swarbrick
There would be a time for political debate and discussions about how to prevent incidents like yesterday’s shooting, Auckland Central MP Chlöe Swarbrick told Morning Report, but that time was not right now.

“I very, very strongly want the message to be here that this violence has absolutely no place in our city or in our country, and we utterly reject it,” she said.

Swarbrick said her thoughts were with the whānau and friends of those who had died as well as those who had been injured, emergency service staff, and the workers who had experienced the traumatic event.

She said questions had been put to police officials at a briefing she attended yesterday, including about how the shooter had obtained a gun without a licence and while he was on home detention.

Swarbrick expected those questions would be answered “in due course” but said it was important the facts were “crystal clear” first.

“I don’t think that anyone benefits from politicians speculating in a vacuum of facts.”

The briefing had made it “very clear that this was a tragic but isolated incident connected to the workplace and that there is no outstanding associated risk”, she said.

Asked whether she believed a broader inquiry was needed to look into the use of home detention, Swarbrick said a number of reports commissioned by successive governments had identified evidence-based policies to address what was a complex issue, but that evidence was often “politically unpalatable”.

The rhetoric and debate around law and order was often reduced to “soundbyte-solutions”, she said, “things that politicians know will not work and oftentimes are contrary to evidence”.

She said New Zealanders deserved evidence-based interventions when it came to tackling crime.

“It is really clear what we have to resource in terms of evidence-based policy but it is the crunchy and the hard stuff which looks meaningfully at prevention, it’s not this knee-jerk ‘tough-on-crime’ nonsense.”

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Recently, there was a serious revelation that some wire service reports were edited, without attribution, by an individual employee of our national broadcaster, RNZ.

Now, let’s examine the way I composed the above sentence.

I included the word “serious” to signal to readers that this news is of significant importance. The reason is that I believe there is already extensive frustration at media coverage of news — and therefore anything that erodes trust in our major media should be taken seriously.

• READ MORE: Mediawatch: Further fallout as RNZ takes out the ‘Kremlin garbage’
• Other RNZ inquiry reports
• Other Palestine reports

Later in the sentence, I used the word “edited”. Initially, I had used the word “altered” but I made a conscious decision to change it to “edited”. I did this because I thought the word “altered” might suggest a higher type of wrongdoing — one that could be linked to fraud and criminality, such as being paid by a foreign agent to alter documents.

There is no evidence that this was the case at RNZ. The word “edited” suggests the use of some sort of journalistic judgment which, in this particular case, regardless of the factuality or falsehood of the edits, were clearly unethical because they were unauthorised and undeclared.

The reference to “an individual employee” was to ensure that other journalists at RNZ, and the organisation as a whole, were not implicated in the revelation. If I had thought RNZ was systematically biased in its reporting, I probably would have just written that RNZ had been found to be altering wire service news.

So my choice of words to form the first sentence of this column was informed by my personal perspectives, as well as the impression I hoped to create in the minds of those reading it.

The subject of this column isn’t about what happened at RNZ. We will be informed of this, in time, when the result of the ongoing inquiry is made public.

Unbiased reporting?
The question I intend to explore here is if there is such a thing as unbiased reporting.

I went back to university later in life to study journalism because it was important to me to understand how the news was produced. My course placed a lot of emphasis on the importance of objectivity and impartiality as ideal standards of news reporting, without much discussion about the limits of achieving such unrealistic standards.

News is produced by reporters and shaped by editors who cannot help but inject their own perspectives and personal experiences into the final product. Even when reporting live from the scene, journalists often have to form a judgment as to what is newsworthy, and so depending on who is reporting the story, the information we receive may alter.

In general, the idea of “unbiased”, “objective” or “neutral” reporting cannot be entirely divorced from the editorial guides journalists use to determine what information to report, and also what they believe is the truth.

Omitting context or the decision to exclude some key words can, in some instances, produce a misleading report.

For instance, my interest in the Palestinian cause has meant that I notice the journalistic language used in reporting on Palestine. I consider that Gaza and the West Bank (including East Jerusalem) should always be referred to as “occupied Gaza” and “occupied West Bank” because this is their legal status under international law.

But in many articles about Palestine, the word “occupied” is often dropped even though its use matters because it gives relevant context to reporting of political and military events there.

#Mediawatch: Further #fallout as #RNZ takes out the ‘Kremlin garbage’ #CafePacific #AsiaPacificReport #rnznews #PacificMediaWatch #rnzinquiry #kremlingarbage #RussiaUkraineWar #media #mediacredibility #newsedits @USPWansolwara https://t.co/waIGzEUdwE pic.twitter.com/wfzDEFZjdi

— David Robie (@DavidRobie) June 18, 2023

Impartial presentation
Some journalistic codes refer to “balanced” and “fair” reporting. The idea here is that, where there is controversy, there should be an impartial presentation of all facts as well as all substantial opinions relating to it.

A fair report, it is said, should avoid giving equal footing to truths and mistruths and should provide factual context to any inaccurate or misleading public statement.

In recent years, The New York Times has used a series of articles known as Explainers to, as they describe it, “demystify thorny topics”.

Stuff’s Explained follows a similar format to help deconstruct topics that are complex and challenging to understand.

The notion of bias in news writing has become the most common criticism of the media.

Ultimately, the solution to increasing trust in journalism lies in transparency and disclosure of the standards, judgments and systems used to produce and edit news. It is therefore right that RNZ has announced an external review of its processes for the editing of online stories.

But there should also be a mind shift in our understanding of the notions of unbiased and objective reporting — namely that these notions have always existed and continue to operate within power dynamics that give privilege to certain perspectives.

The best approach, therefore, is to always allow for an element of doubt — and only believe something to be true just so long as our active efforts to disprove it have been unsuccessful.

Donna Miles-Mojab is an Iranian New Zealander interested in justice and human rights issues. She lives in Christchurch and works as a freelance journalist and a columnist for The Press. This article is republished with the author’s permission.

MEDIAWATCH: By Colin Peacock, RNZ Mediawatch presenter

The comedians on 7 Days had a few laughs at RNZ’s expense against a backdrop of the Kremlin on TV Three this week.

“A Radio New Zealand digital journalist has been stood down after it emerged they’d been editing news stories on the broadcaster’s website to give them a pro-Russian slant, which is kind of disgusting,” host Jeremy Corbett said.

“You’d never get infiltration like that on 7 Days. Our security is too strong. Strong like a bear. Strong like the glorious Russian state and its leader Putin,” he said.

• LISTEN TO RNZ MEDIAWATCH: The RNZ editing fallout
• RNZ appoints panel to investigate inappropriate editing of online stories
• ‘I think it’s really important that we preserve the editorial independence of an institution like RNZ’ – PM Chris Hipkins
• Prime Minister responds to questions on RNZ investigation into pro-Russian editing
• Other RNZ inquiry reports

“I love this Russian strategy: ‘First, we take New Zealand’s fourth best and fourth most popular news site — then the world!” said Melanie Bracewell, who said she had not kept up with the news.

Just a joke, obviously, but this week some people have been asking if Kremlin campaigns played a role in the inappropriate editing of online world news.

It was on June 9 that the revelation of it kicked off a media frenzy about propaganda, misinformation, Russia, Ukraine, truth, trust and editorial standards that has been no laughing matter at RNZ.

The story went up a notch last weekend when TVNZ’s Thomas Mead revealed Ukrainian New Zealander Michael Lidski — along with 20 others — had complained about a story written by the journalist in May 2022, which RNZ had re-edited on the day to add alternative perspectives after prompting from an RNZ journalist who considered it sub-standard.

The next day on RNZ’s Checkpoint, presenter Lisa Owen said the suspended RNZ web journalist had told her he edited reports “in that way for five years” — and nobody had ever queried it or told him to stop.

RNZ chief executive Paul Thompson, who is also editor-in-chief, then told Checkpoint he did not consider what he had called “pro-Kremlin garbage” a resignation-worthy issue.

“I think this is a time for us actually working together to fix the problem,” he said.

RNZ had already begun taking out the trash in public by listing the corrupted (and now corrected) stories on the RNZ.co.nz homepage as they are discovered.

Thompson said the problem was “confined to a small area of what RNZ does” but by the following day,  RNZ found six more stories — supplied originally by the reputable news agency Reuters — had also been edited in terms more favourable to the ruling regimes.

“RNZ has come out with a statement that said: ‘In our defence, we didn’t actually realise anyone was reading our stories’,” said 7 Days’ Jeremy Corbett.

That was just a gag — but it did actually explain just how it took so long for the dodgy edits to come to light and become newsworthy.

Where the problem lay
Last Wednesday’s cartoon in the Stuff papers — featuring an RNZ radio newsreader with a Pinocchio-length nose didn’t raise any laughs there either — because none of the slanted stories in question ever went out in the news on the air.

They were only to be found online — and this was a significant distinction as it turned out, because the checks and balances are not quite the same or made by the same staff.

“In radio, a reporter writes a story and sends it to a sub-editor who will then check it. And then a news reader has to read it so there’s a couple of stages. Maybe even a chief reporter would have checked it as well,” Corin Dann told RNZ Morning Report listeners last Monday.

“What I’m trying to establish is what sort of checks and balances were there to ensure that that world story was properly vetted,” he said.

That question — and others — will now be asked by the external experts appointed this week to run the rule of RNZ’s online publishing procedures for a review that will be made public.

On Thursday a former RNZer Brent Edwards made a similar point in the National Business Review where he’ is now the political editor.

“For a couple of years, I was the director of news gathering. I had a large responsibility for RNZ’s news coverage but technically I had no responsibility whatsoever for what went on the web,” he said.

“Done properly the RNZ review panel could do all news media a favour by providing a template for how online news should be curated. It should reinforce the importance of quality, ethical journalism,” Edwards added.

His NBR colleague Dita di Boni said “there but for the grace of God go other outlets” which have “gone digital” in news.

“I worked at TVNZ and there was a rush to digital as well with lots of resources going in but little oversight from the main newsroom.”

Calls for political action
Prime Minister Chris Hipkins has made it clear he doesn’t want the government involved in RNZ’s editorial affairs.

David Seymour of the ACT party wanted an inquiry — and NZ First leader Winston Peters called for a Royal Commission into the media bias and manipulation.

Former National MP Nathan Guy told Newshub Nation this weekend “heads need to roll” at RNZ.

“If I was the broadcasting minister, I would want the chair in my office and to hold RNZ to account. I want timeframes. I want accountability because we just can’t afford to have our public broadcaster tell unfortunate mistruths to the public,” he said.

In the same discussion, Newsroom’s co-editor Mark Jennings reminded Guy that RNZ’s low-budget digital news transition happened under his National-led government which froze RNZ’s funding for almost a decade.

“This is what happens when you underfund an organisation for so long,” he said.

Jennings also said “trust in RNZ has been hammered by this” — and criticised RNZ chairman Dr Jim Mather for declining to be interviewed on Newshub Nation.

Earlier — under the headline Media shooting itself in the foot — Jennings said surveys have picked up a decline and trust and news media here.

“And the road back for the media just had a major speed bump,” he concluded.

How deep is the damage to trust?

While the breach of editorial standards is clear, has there been an over-reaction to what may be the actions of just one employee, which took years to come to light?

Last week the think-tank Koi Tū: The Centre for Informed Futures at Auckland University hosted a timely “disinformation and media manipulation” workshop attended by executives and editors from most major media outlets.

It was arranged long before RNZs problems arose — but those ended up dominating discussion on this theme.

Among the participants was media consultant and commentator Peter Bale, who has previously worked overseas for Reuters, as well as The Financial Times and CNN.

“I really feel for RNZ in this, for the chief executive and everybody else there who does generally a great job. The issue of trust here is in this person’s relationship with their employer and their relationship with the facts.”

Bale is also the newsroom initiative leader at the International News Media Association, which promotes best practice in news and journalism publishing.

The exposure of the “inappropriate editing” undetected for so long has created the impression a lot of content is published online with no checking. That is sometimes the case when speed is a priority, but the vast majority of stuff does go past at least two eyes before publication.

“I think it is true also that editing has been diminished as a skill. But I don’t think it’s necessarily a failure of editing here but a failure of this person’s understanding of what their job is,” Bale told Mediawatch.

“You shouldn’t necessarily need to have a second or third pair of eyes when processing a Reuters story that’s already gone through multiple editors. The critical issue for RNZ is whether they took the initial complaints seriously enough,” he said.

‘Pro-Kremlin garbage’?

There have been many reports in recent years about Russia seeding misinformation and disinformation abroad.

Last Tuesday, security and technology consultant Paul Buchanan told Morning Report that RNZ should be better prepared for authoritarian states seeking to mess with its news.

“This incident that prompted this investigation may or may not be just one individual who has certain opinions about the war between Russia and Ukraine. But it is possible that . . . stories were manipulated from abroad,” he said.

Back in March the acting Director-General of the SIS told Parliament: “States are trying, in a coercive disruptive and a covert way, to influence the behaviors of people in New Zealand and influencing their decision making”.

John Mackey named no nations at the time, but his GCSB counterpart Andrew Hampton told MPs research had shown Russia was the source of misinformation many Kiwis were consuming.

Is it really likely the Kremlin or its proxies are pushing propaganda into the news here? And if so, to what end?

“I think there’s been a little bit of ‘too florid’ language used about this. This person has inserted what are in some people’s views genuine talking points from those who . . . want to have expressed what the Russian view is. But it was very ham-fisted,” said Bale.

“There are ways to do this. You could have inserted the Russian perspective to highlight the fact that there is a different view about things like the Orange Revolution when the pro-Kremlin leader in Kyiv was overthrown,” he said.

Not necessarily ‘propaganda’
“I don’t think it is necessarily ‘Kremlin propaganda’ as it’s been described. It was just a misguided attempt to bring another perspective, I suspect, but it still represents a tremendous breach of trust,” he said.

“I write a weekly newsletter for The Spinoff about international news, and I try sometimes to show . . . there are other perspectives on these stories. Those things are legitimate to address — but not just surreptitiously squeeze into a story in some sort of perceived balance.

“I don’t think in this particular case that it is to do with the spread of disinformation or misinformation by Russia. I think this is a different set of problems. But I agree (there’s a) threat from the kind of chaos-driving techniques that Russia is particularly brilliant at. They’re very skilled at twisting stories . . . and I think we need to be ready for it,” he said.

The guest speaker at that Koi Tū event last Wednesday was Dr Joan Donovan, the research director of the Shorenstein center on Media and Politics at Harvard University in the US, where she researches and tracks the sources of misrepresentation and misinformation in the media, and the impact they have on public trust in media — and also how media can prepare for it.

At the point where 15 supplied news stories had been found to be “inappropriately edited” by RNZ, she took to Twitter to say: “This is wild. Fake news has reached new heights.”

Set against what we’ve seen in US politics — and about Russia and Ukraine — is it really that bad?

“Usually what you see is the spoofing of a website or a URL in order to look like you’re a certain outlet and distribute disinformation that way. It’s very unlikely that someone would go in and work a job and be editing articles without proper oversight,” said Donovan  — who is also the co-author of recently published book, Meme Wars, The Untold Story of the Online Battles Upending Democracy. 

“I think when it comes to one country, wanting to insert their views into another country — even though New Zealand is very small — it does track that this would be a way to influence a large group of people.

“But I don’t think if any of us know the degree to which this could be an international operation or not,” she told Mediawatch.

“What you learn is that their pattern is that they happen over and over and over again until a news agency or platform company figures out a mitigation tactic, whether it’s removing that link from search or writing critical press or debunking those stories.

“When I think about the fallout of it . . . using the legitimacy of RNZ in a parasitical kind of way and that legitimacy to spread propaganda is one of the most important pieces of this puzzle that we would need to explore more,” she said.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Own goals by two of our top news organisations last week raised a fundamental question: What has happened to their checking processes?

Both Radio New Zealand and NZME acknowledged serious failures in their internal processes that resulted in embarrassing apologies, corrections, and take-downs.

The episodes in both newsrooms suggest the “second pair of eyes” that traditionally acted as a final check before publication no longer exists or is so over-worked in a resource-starved environment that they are looking elsewhere.

The RNZ situation is the more serious of the two episodes. It relates to the insertion of pro-Russian content into news agency stories about the invasion of Ukraine that were carried on the RNZ website.

The original stories were sourced from Reuters and, in at least one case, from the BBC. By today 22 altered stories had been found, but the audit had only scratched the surface. The alleged perpetrator has disclosed they had been carrying out such edits for the past five years.

RNZ was alerted to the latest altered story by news watchers in New York and Paris on Friday. It investigated and found a further six, then a further seven, then another, and another. This only takes us back a short way.

A number of the stories were altered only by the inclusion of a few loaded terms such as “neo-Nazi” and “US-backed coup”, but others had material changes. Some are spelt out in the now-corrected stories on the site. Here are two examples of significant insertions into the original text:

An earlier edit to this story said: “Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine in February last year, claiming that a US-backed coup in 2014 with the help of neo-Nazis had created a threat to its borders and had ignited a civil war that saw Russian-speaking minorities persecuted.”

An earlier edit to this story said: “The Azov Battalion was widely regarded as an anti-Russian neo-Nazi military unit by observers and western media before the Russian invasion. Russian President Vladimir Putin has accused the nationalists of using Russian-speaking Ukrainians as human shields.”

Hot water with Reuters
The scale and nature of the inappropriate editing of the stories is likely to get RNZ into very hot water with Reuters. The agency has strict protocols over what forms of editing may take place with its copy and even the most cursory examination of the altered RNZ versions confirms that the protocols have been breached.

It is unsurprising that RNZ’s chief executive Paul Thompson has told staff he is “gutted” by what has occurred.

Both security analyst Dr Paul Buchanan and AUT journalism professor Dr Verica Ruper have cautioned against speculating on how the material came to be appear on the RNZ website and I agree that to do so is premature. Clearly, however, it amounts to much more than a careless editing mistake.

Paul Thompson has acted promptly in ordering an external independent enquiry into the matter and in standing down the individual who apparently handled the stories. It is likely that the government’s security services are also taking an interest in what has occurred.

What we can speculate on is the possibility that RNZ’s internal processes are deficient to the point that there is no post-production vetting of some stories before publication — that “second pair of eyes”.

We might also speculate that the problem is faced by The New Zealand Herald newsroom, following the publication of an eight-line correction at the top of page 3 of the Herald on Sunday, and carried equally sparingly on the Herald website.

“A story published last Sunday about a woman who triumphed over a difficult background to become a lawyer had elements that were false. In publishing the article, we fell short of the high standards and procedures we hold ourselves to.”

Puzzled by correction
Many readers would have been puzzled by the correction, which gave no details of the story concerned, nor did it identify those elements that were false.

There may have been legal reasons for omitting which details were incorrect, but not for leaving readers to puzzle over the story to which they referred.

It appears to relate to a three-page story in the Review section of the previous Sunday’s edition that was headed “From mob terror to high flyer”. The story related to the daughter of a woman jailed for selling methamphetamine. The daughter had gone on to a legal career in the United States.

I recall having some undefined concern about the story when I read it and still can’t quite put my finger on why the old alarm bell in the back of my head tinkled. Perhaps it was that — apart from previously published material — the story appeared to rely on a single interview. There also appeared to be a motive in telling the story to the Herald on Sunday — a forthcoming book.

The article seems to have been removed from the Herald website, but the short correction suggests that checks were missed. The same seems to have been the case with RNZ.

It is, of course, sheer coincidence that both RNZ and the Herald on Sunday should face such shortcomings in the same week. However, the likely root causes of their embarrassment are issues that all news media face.

First, the pressure on newsroom resources has increased the workload of all staff, from reporters in the field to duty editors. Time pressures are a daily, and nightly, reality and multi-tasking has become the norm.

Checking comes second
In such an environment, checking the work of other well-trained staff may come second to more pressing demands.

As an editor, I slept better knowing that each story had passed through the hands of a news editor, sub-editor and, finally, a check sub with a compulsive attention to detail who checked each completed page before it was transmitted to the printing plant. I fear our newsrooms are now too bare for that multi-layered system of checks.

If the demands of newspaper deadlines are tough, the pressures are manifestly greater in a digital environment where websites have become voracious beasts that cry out to be fed from dawn to midnight. New stories are added throughout the protracted news cycle, pushing older stories down the home page, then off it to subsidiary pages on the site tree.

The technology to satisfy the hunger has advanced to the point where reporters publish direct to the web using Twitter-like feeds. We saw it last week during the Auckland City budget debate when news websites were recording the jerk dancing minute by minute.

Clay Shirky, in his influential 2008 book Here Comes Everybody, popularised the term “publish, then filter”. It referred to a change from sifting the good from the mediocre before publication, to a digital environment in which users determined worth once it had been published.

However, increasingly, the phrase has taken on additional meaning. The burden of work created by digital appetites has seen mainstream media foreshortening the production process by removing some of the old checks and balances because they can always go back later and make changes on the website.

The abridgement may, for example, mean a pre-publication check is limited to headline, graphic, and the first couple of paragraphs. Or, in the case of “pre-edited” agency or syndication content, it may mean foregoing post-production text checks altogether (I hasten to add that I do not know whether this was the case with the RNZ stories).

Editorial based on trust
Editorial production has always been based on trust. It works both down and up. Editors trust those they rely on to carry out processes from content creation to post-production, and those responsible for one phase trust their work will subsequently be handled with care.

Individual shortcomings should not erode trust in the newsroom, but such episodes do point to a need to re-examine whether systems are fit for purpose.

Over a decade ago, Bill Kovach and Tom Rosenstiel wrote a book called Blur. It was about information overload. In it they state that, as journalism becomes more complicated, the role of the editor becomes more important, and verification is a bigger part of the editor’s role.

Incidents such as those that came to light last week reinforce that view. They also suggest that mainstream media organisations should leave Clay Shirky’s mantra to social media and bloggers. Instead, they should (thoroughly) filter, then publish.

Dr Gavin Ellis holds a PhD in political studies. He is a media consultant and researcher. A former editor-in-chief of The New Zealand Herald, he has a background in journalism and communications — covering both editorial and management roles — that spans more than half a century. Dr Ellis publishes the website knightlyviews.com where this commentary was first published and it is republished by Asia Pacific Report with permission.