The truth about Lal’s citizenship and Rabuka’s ‘tribute’
Historian Brij Lal was one of the few lucky Indo-Fijians who had the choice of either retaining or giving up their Fijian citizenship. Thousands of Indo-Fijians were forced to flee this country because they were told by Sitiveni Rabuka that this country was not theirs; they were not given a choice. They left behind a life they knew so that their children would not be told that Fiji is not for them.
The Historian Brij Lal:
Mr Lal held a Fijian passport till 29th June 1993. This was when his Fijian passport expired and not once did he apply for renewal, meaning he gave up his Fijian citizenship. Since 1993, he has been an American citizen. He became an Australian citizen in 1995.
On 10th April 2009, Fiji changed its policy on dual citizenship which meant people could be a Fijian citizen and also a citizen of another country. This was an opportunity for people like Mr Lal to apply for Fijian citizenship while he continued to hold either Australian or American citizenship. He chose his Australian and American citizenships.
It was five years later, in 2014 that Mr Lal was put on a travel watch list. But for decades before that he had already left Fiji, and had already become a citizen of America and Australia.
Others who fled Fiji:
Post Rabuka’s first coup of 1987, Fiji saw the biggest brain drain, the largest exodus of intellectuals, teachers, doctors, and many others. They left Fiji and found profound success in their respective fields overseas, our loss was our neighbouring countries’ gain.
Why are we not remembering these Fijians? Why are we not honouring their contribution? It was ironic for Rabuka to stand and speak at the memorial -cum- political rally held in honour of Mr Lal. He made a point of saying what his political party does. It was ironic that he was standing and honouring a man ‘whose kind’ was not wanted in Fiji by Rabuka and his thugs.
Those who could leave, but chose to stay:
We have people like Anirudh Singh who was brutally tortured by thugs inspired by Rabuka. He remained in Fiji.
We have people like Attorney-General Aiyaz SayedKhaiyum who when given the opportunity to take up Australian Citizenship, chose not to do so because it meant giving up Fijian citizenship. We have many others who did not have the means to leave the country and decided to make the best of their situation.
Rabuka should have been the last person to stand and speak in honour of Mr Lal. He chose that opportunity to market his Party.