Reply to Gaunavinaka: matters

Delainavesi I am glad that the learned Timoci Gaunavinaka(TG) has responded to my letter on the above matter(FS 28/5/16).

Let me clarify myself that I did not attack the Fiji Sun unnecessarily as alleged. All I said was that I supported Freedom of the Press as long as it is conducted in a responsible spirit.

All that meant is that if this newspaper prints letters in criticism of iTaukei institution and its culture with a purpose of being helpful and not to persecute their culture and

Amenatave Yaconisau,

institution, in the name of Freedom of Expression then I have no quarrel with that kind of freedom. I further added that there were writers who criticise with the intent of prosecuting all that is

and are indifferent to the consequences of their words. If he thinks that he maybe included in that lot, then I’m not surprised. While putting words in my mouth, may I remind him that the late Rusiate Nayacakalou and more recently Paddy Nunn were tasked to solve social problems not because of their ethnicity and social background but ability, qualification and experience. The former presented a well articulated study iTaukei life from precontact time to modern situation in the process of change, external contact and economic development.

The latter is doing useful social anthropological research in a multi-disciplinary manner that may eventually challenge the traditional history of common origins from Nakauvadra (including other legends and myths) to the latest of which is Seseleka in Bua that claims a new hypothesis that people were already present in Fiji before the arrival of the Lapita people.

All these scientific findings by people whose insights are worthy of respect should be supported by authorities and authorities like Paul Geraghty. As a democracy, I am not here to stop people or influence them of their views in our national constituent.

That is their freedom of expression, that is, the electoral choice as to whom should lead them. There is no doubt that we can have ‘new left’ views here based on participatory democracy that is not forced on people based on ethnicity and ‘blood philosophers’.

I will not be involved in this pernicious discussion anymore.