FijiVillage of 10 September 2019

The Fiji Village of 10 September 2019 has reported that the Head of the Catholic Church of Fiji, Archbishop Peter Loy Chong, has condemned men who use Biblical texts to make women think and feel that they should be subservient to men, and force women to accept domestic violence.

He says Fiji has a patriarchal society where the existing culture contributes to domestic violence.

Is the Archbishop seriously suggesting the Catholic Church is not itself patriarchal? There are no women in positions of real authority in the Church! 

If that is not ‘patriarchal’, what is?

And what about the thousands of children, female and male, abused in Catholic institutions over many decades revealed recently in the Australian Royal Commission into Child Sexual Abuse? That has never happened in Fiji?

It is one thing to condemn abuse and domestic violence against women but quite another not to recognise the Church worldwide has demonstrated problems of its own.  The Catholic Church is in no position to lecture others.

FIJI SIGNED UP TO THE SECULAR UN COVENANT ON CIVIL AND POLITICAL RIGHTS IN 2018

Fiji ratified the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) in August 2018, and the covenant entered into force in November. 

The ICCPR is part of the International Bill of Human Rights, along with the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights  and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The ICCPR is monitored by the United Nations Human Rights Committee which is a separate body to the United Nations Human Rights Council which reviews regular reports of States parties on how the rights are being implemented. States must report initially one year after acceding to the Covenant and then whenever the Committee requests (usually every four years). The Fiji report would therefore be due in November 2019. The UN Committee normally meets in Geneva and normally holds three sessions per year.

MONEY MAKING EVANGELICALS INVADE FIJI ON A MISSION

Scores of young, naïve Australians, members of the Planetshakers evangelical Church in Melbourne, have invaded Suva, Fiji for conversion concerts.

The Australian newspaper of 2 May 2013 (‘Eyeing off God’s bounty)’ revealed that Planetshakers is a large, money spinning operation whose leading pastor claims to do faith healings.

Established in 2002 the tax-exempt church was reported to have amassed a fortune from the estimated $200,000 that rolls in every Sunday from the congregation.

It is estimated the leading pastors of the church each have annual incomes of $500,000. They travel extensively around the world living very well.  

One of these pastors tweeted his five favourite restaurants: the Shangri-la in Singapore, the five star Langham hotel in Melbourne, the Little Pasta Place in Rome, Angelinas in Paris and Mi Cocina in Dallas, Texas.

The money changers are back in the temple and doing very well. Just what they expect to get out of low-income Fijians remains to be seen.

The whole exercise could be read as a ruse to make the young Melbournians feel they are doing something: it helps to lock them into the church’s agenda. It is a standard tactic of many cults.

Generations ago, the famous evangelist Billy Graham toured Australia preaching to tens of thousands.

A few years after he left, his influence abated, and he was soon forgotten.

Fijians and other Pacific Islanders take note: they are not talking about climate change.

They want whatever money you have, and they want to convert you to their particular ‘theology’; watch out if any of these young Australians seek to hit on you in other ways.

Fa’afafine, fakaleitī, fakafifine — understanding the Pacific’s alternative gender expressions.

By Alan Weedon

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2019-08-31/understanding-the-pacifics-alternative-gender-expressions/11438770?utm_source=sfmc&utm_medium=email&utm_content=&utm_campaign=%5bnews_sfmc_newsmail_am_df_!n1%5d%3a8935&user_id=e0b29793305027430de11b70af33b87461bd30a130bc473ad47e9ac3b7daed25&WT.tsrc=email&WT.mc_id=Email%7c%5bnews_sfmc_newsmail_am_df_!n1%5d%7c8935ABCNewsmail_topstories_articlelink

HIGHLY RELIGIOUS PACIFIC ISLANDS HAVE OPERATED AS TAX HAVENS FOR DECADES

The use of tax havens in the Pacific first came to notice in New Zealand during the early 1990s with the case of the Cook Islands and the “Winebox” scandal—named after the container in which the documents were discovered. New Zealand corporations and financiers were found to have evaded their tax obligations by using bank accounts in the Cook Islands, a New Zealand dependency. Tax havens are a significant factor in deepening global inequality, both within and between countries. The impact of financial crime and tax evasion on the poorest countries is devastating. According to one estimate by the Global Financial Integrity group, $US1 trillion a year is diverted from public funds in developing countries. The Pacific island elites, which are generally based on systems of patronage, inherited title, seniority and family ties, look the other way, or benefit themselves, while all the time they support Christian Churches, mainly as a distraction for their poorly educated citizens. The leaked documents from Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca in 2016, which exposed the global network of tax havens used by rich individuals, politicians and companies to hide their wealth, implicated a number of Pacific countries, including New Zealand, Samoa, Niue and Vanuatu. According to the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), which obtained the documents, Niue and Samoa are Mossack Fonseca’s fifth and six most-used tax havens. The activities of Mossack Fonseca and its clients in the Pacific shed some light on the predatory nature of tax havens. The micro-states are targeted by financial sharks because of the impoverished Pacific islands’ desperate need for foreign “investment.” Their isolation and relative backwardness also make them useful for semi-legal and illegal dealings. Malakai Kolamatangi, Pacific director at New Zealand’s Massey University, told Radio NZ: “the problem we’ve got in the Pacific, is the lack of the ability to generate income” He said: this type of activity, offering dubious financial services, had been going on for a long time in Samoa, Niue, Vanuatu, Cook Islands, Tonga and Nauru. How do we reconcile this behind the scenes behaviour with island leaders’ often stated religious piety? (sources from WWS NEWS 2016)

FIJI METHODIST CHURCH MUST PAY ITS’ CHAPLAINS IN PUBLIC SCHOOLS

The government has no intention to remove Methodist Church chaplains from government’s schools, but the government will no longer pay for them.

Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama confirmed this while speaking on a talkback program “Noda PM” on FBC’s radio station Radio Fiji 1.

He says in the past they have been relying on government funding and this is unfair to other religious institutions. Prime Minister Bainimarama says he wants fairness across the board.

He says that in some schools, chaplains are provided with living quarters while teachers have to find their own place to stay.

Bainimarama said he felt the education of our children should remain a priority. That is why in all schools, teachers should be well looked after.

He adds that the Ministry of Education and the church will continue to discuss the matter and a mutual outcome is expected by the beginning of next year.

(Fiji Broadcasting News 23 July 2019)

PALAU’S LEADER BACKS SAME-SEX MARRIAGE

Palau President, Tommy Remengesau Jr, has expressed his support to striking down the constitutional ban on same-sex marriage in Palau, saying he believes in full equality.

Speaking to local reporters, he branded as discriminatory the constitutional provision that bans same-sex marriage: “Those who are different doesn’t mean that they should be outcast, second class citizens, or that they can’t contribute to the community. So, I want to make it clear that I don’t believe in the constitutional amendment that promotes discrimination.”

 

There is currently a citizens’ led drive to repeal the ban on same-sex marriage in the constitution.

In 2008, Palauan voters approved a constitutional amendment banning same-sex marriage.

 

“I want it to be on record that I support the rights of each individual, any Palauan, to be treated equally…Let us treat each other with respect and dignity,” Remengesau added.

 

The current constitutional ban stated in Article IV, Section 13 of the Constitution read as follows:

 

Section 13. The government shall provide for marital and related parental rights, privileges and responsibilities on the basis of equality between men and women, mutual consent and cooperation. All marriages contracted within the Republic of Palau shall be between a man and a woman. Parents or individuals acting in the capacity of parents shall be legally responsible for the support of and for the unlawful conduct of their minor children as prescribed by law.

 

Before the 2008 constitutional amendment, there was no prohibition of same sex in Palau nor specific statutes requiring marriage to be only between a man and a woman.

 

Remengesau said he wants Palau to be seen as an open and progressive nation, noting that even the leader of the Roman Catholic Church, Pope Francis, is making changes to in the church and has preached on welcoming all, regardless of sexual orientation.

 

The islands of Guam and the CNMI have recognized marriage between members of the same sex following the US Supreme Court ruling on June 15, 2015, which legalized same-sex marriage.

(Palau New 24 July 2019)

AUSTRALIA FACES POSSIBLE UN CENSURE

Meg Wallace

In May 2019 a group of eight Torres Strait Islanders, who are Australian citizens, with legal representation from Client Earth, submitted a claim to the UN Human Rights Committee (UNHRC). They allege that Australia is failing its legal human rights obligations to Torres Strait Islanders because it has failed to take adequate action to reduce emissions or to provide for proper adaptation measures on the islands.

The claim is legally significant for all Pacific islands, as it is the first lodged with the UNHRC by island inhabitants threatened by climate change.

The case was brought under the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) to which Australia is a party. Article 6 of the ICCPR requires State parties to respect and to ensure the right to life of everyone.

Implementation of the obligation to respect and ensure the right to life, and in particular life with dignity, depends on measures taken by States parties to preserve the environment and protect it against harm, pollution and climate change caused by public and private actors for all persons over whom the government exercises power or effective control. (UN Human Rights Committee, in General Comment 36 (2018)). This includes:

  • sustainable use of natural resources;
  • development and implementation of substantive environmental standards;
  • environmental impact assessments; and
  • consultation with relevant States about activities likely to have a significant impact on the environment.

International courts have held that a complaint can be lodged by anyone ‘already adversely affected in his or her enjoyment of such a right, or that such an effect is imminent’.

However, the Torres Strait Islanders’ claim is not fully provided for by the current processes for an application to the Committee.

Firstly, the UNHRC requires the claimant to have unsuccessfully petitioned domestic tribunals in Australia. But there are no relevant Australian courts or tribunals for hearing such matters.

Second, it may be difficult to assess the extent of harm specifically caused by Australia’s failure to protect the Islands from environmental degradation. Environmental harm may be caused by different, interdependent and varied factors, and the actions of multiple nations may be involved.

The nature and extent of causation in such cases may have to be revised. Even so, it could be argued that Torres Strait Islanders who have already sustained severe flooding and ocean inundation have been directly affected by Australia’s omission, and are entitled to bring a complaint.

If the Committee accepts the Islands’ contention, the decision could set boundaries and standards for determining the extent of legal obligations and protections by which other states ought to measure their compliance with international requirements to deal with climate change. Although UNHRC findings are unenforceable, they do serve to ‘name and shame’ offenders.

20th August, 2019

The Tweed Shire Council, located on the NSW and Queensland borders in Australia, facing the Pacific Ocean, has voted unanimously to reject a proposal from local evangelical and other Christian churches to place a statue of Jesus, supposedly to benefit homeless people, in a public park. The churches were intending the raise $35,000 amongst themselves for the project. Just how a statue of Jesus would benefit the homeless was not made clear. Better uses for the $35,000 such as dental and medical care, or paying for food and shelter expenses for the homeless, it seems, were not a priority of the churches.  Source: Gold Coast Bulletin 17 August 2019.