Vanuatu and Fiji are asking Australia to significantly increase the amount of kava travellers can bring into the country.
Australia currently allows two kilograms per person, but the government is considering doubling that to four.
In submissions to Australia’s Office of Drug Control, Fiji’s government proposed a quota of 10 kilograms per person, while Vanuatu suggested 15.
The director general of Vanuatu’s foreign affairs department, Kalfau Kaloris, said he didn’t believe 4 kilograms was enough – particularly if it’s to be used at a large ceremony.
Australia’s restrictions on kava are driven by concerns about its misuse in remote communities.
But Vanuatu and Fiji have been trying to have them relaxed for years, saying the root plays an important role for South Pacific diasporas.
In a tweet, Vanuatu’s foreign minister Ralph Regenvanu said his country was looking for a “step-up,” a jibe at Australia’s so-called Pacific step up.
The continuous move by the Uniting Church in Australia to allow ministers the right to decide whether to marry same-sex couples will cause members to leave the church, said the congregation’s chair Reverend Hedley Fihaki.
Tongan born Rev. Fihaki made
his comments amidst growing unrest within the church as conservative factions
push for it to reverse its decision to allow ministers to perform same-sex
marriages.
Multiple conservative
movements have been gaining force since the church last year gave ministers the
right to perform the ceremonies, ABC News Online has reported.
Some are threatening to
take control of church property and finances — positioning themselves as
alternatives to the main Uniting Church in Australia assembly.
One of the movements is the
Assembly of Confessing Congregations.
“The main issue is an
issue of faith — what is the Gospel? Same-sex marriage is just one of those
issues,” the congregation’s chair Reverend Hedley Fihaki said.
“I think there’s a
division not just between the Assembly of Confessing Congregations and the
Uniting Church, but [also] … between evangelicals as a whole and the Uniting
Church.”
Dr Fihaki said the issue
had created an “irreparable rift”, causing members to leave the
church.
He said many ministers and
congregations had also decided to join the assembly, which was set up in 2006.
“The new decisions
that have been made by the [Uniting Church] seem to suggest that it can be
other lords, other sexual practices and still be okay,” he said.
“We are saying no,
that’s not right, according to our understanding of scripture and the basis of
union.”
In a statement in March,
the assembly encouraged its members to take ownership of matters of finance,
signage and anything else which advances their “unity, life and
witness”.
It also suggested members
develop their own relationship with other networks, denominational churches and
leaders.
In doing so, members claim they have felt the force of church leadership.
Dr Fihaki wrote to Uniting
Church in Australia president Deidre Palmer in February to request no further
attempt be made to “bully and ostracise” Assembly of Confessing
Congregations members and leaders.
“The Uniting Church
wants to assert its authority over us, when we’re simply trying our best to
maintain our integrity in the way we live and practise our Christian
faith,” he said.
“I think the church
is too quick to throw regulations at us, without actually sitting down and
trying to understand where we are coming from.”
Truly united?
The Uniting Church faces
pressure on the issue from multiple conservative factions.
Eight ministers last year
penned an open letter — entitled “Standing Firm by Stepping Aside” —
rejecting same-sex marriage and vowing to protest until the church reversed its
decision.
Some congregations, such
as the Gold Coast megachurch Newlife Church, have begun separating themselves
by removing the Uniting Church name from their signage.
Reverend Stuart Cameron
signed the letter.
He also oversees Newlife
and announced the creation of the “Propel Network” which holds
“similar priorities” to the Assembly of Confessing Congregations.
The open letter also
suggested the creation of a “non-geographic presbytery” which would
transcend formal Uniting Church governance to provide a “safe space”
for members to pursue their orthodox beliefs.
The creation of a
non-geographic presbytery in South Australia called “Generate” will
be decided at a meeting of the state synod and presbytery in June.
One entire South Australian congregation is considering returning to its Presbyterian roots.
Monash University sociology expert Gary Bouma said it was possible the groups could eventually split from the Uniting Church.
“When these divisions get to be very heated, there become those who organise themselves in different kinds of ways,” Professor Bouma said.
“Whether [the groups in question] are seeking to establish a new church by themselves, as sometimes happens, or just to have an organised group to represent their view, I’m not sure.
“Certainly, this appears to be a group stepping towards a separate organisation. And that’s happened many, many times before.”
Dr Hannah-Jones said she was proud of Uniting Church leadership for embracing a progressive standpoint.
“I think the leadership has a really difficult job to balance the different opinions … I would like it to be more proactive about issues of harassment, but I understand that’s an issue for them,” she said.
Dr Hannah-Jones said the discussion about same-sex marriage had been hurtful and she had been called “evil” and “unchristian”.
“It feels as though they’re arguing in some way that God made a mistake when someone like me was created … and that can be incredibly painful,” she said.
“They’re honestly seeking to do what God’s will is, which is what people like me are also doing.”
Meanwhile, conservative worshippers claim they are being disciplined and isolated for participating in networks like the Assembly of Confessing Congregations.
Members of the Campsie Uniting Church in New South Wales said they were barred from the church and left to worship on the footpath.
Others claim they had been unfairly undermined and micromanaged, with leadership requesting trip itineraries and details of their daily activities.
Reverend Fihaki claimed his efforts to meet with Uniting Church leadership to discuss tension and the issue of same-sex marriage had been denied.
What is the future of the church?
Professor Bouma said the Uniting Church had tried to move forward and adapt to contemporary society and it was not unusual for religious groups to face division on issues like gender, abortion, marriage and euthanasia.
“[The issues are] a kind of litmus test used by some to say, ‘Are you actually following scripture or are you not?'” he said.
Church councils also have the right to refuse to hold same-sex marriages on church property.
However, Professor Bouma said imposing a single view on an entire denomination could jeopardise religious freedom.
“The Uniting Church never sought to become uniform and that was part of its delight — it held difference in tension and respectfully,” he said.
“The tension is absolute and direct and has to be addressed … the issue fundamentally comes down to is it a difference that can be held within the church or is it one that has to be shoved down the throats [of those] who disagree?
“Can we have difference of opinion on this, or can we have a group demanding that its view be the one that prevails?”
The Uniting Church in Australia refused multiple requests by the ABC for interviews.
In a statement posted to its website, Uniting Church in Australia president Deidre Palmer said the comments provided to the ABC were “in no way authorised by the Uniting Church” and its leaders would “continue to work in good faith” across its “theological diversity”.
“The Uniting Church in Australia Assembly’s decision to recognise two statements of belief on marriage remains in place,” Dr Palmer said.
“This decision allows ministers and celebrants authorised by the Uniting Church the freedom to conduct or to refuse to conduct same-gender marriages.
“I want to reassure all members of the Uniting Church — your rights to follow your beliefs on marriage will continue to be respected and protected.”
Rugby league has firmly slammed the door shut on any chance of Israel Folau’s bid to return to the NRL following his sacking by Rugby Australia.
The chair of the Australian Rugby League Commission Peter Beattie had ruled out allowing the dual international back into the game which made him a star following his social media posts, in which he claimed homosexuals were going to “hell”.
Reports in Australia say Folau was willing to offer the NRL the chance to vet any religious social media posts in exchange for his return.
But Beattie has reiterated his position saying they would not register a contract with Folau in any circumstance.
“Our position on Israel Folau remains the same,” Beattie said.
“We are an inclusive game with respect for all. Israel has social media posts online that go against what our game stands for.
“As it stands, he will not be considered for registration. What Israel chooses to do in relation to his social media posts and his faith is a matter for him.”
ARL Commission chair Peter Beattie. Photo: Photosport
Rugby Australia tore up Folau’s $5 million, four-year contract after he refused to take down an Instagram post which quoted bible scripture and said homosexuals and other sinners were destined for hell.
Folau was reportedly willing to make concessions to revive his rugby league career but the NRL are steadfast he cannot be trusted as a repeat offender.
He had previously used social media to tell a follower God’s plan for homosexuals was: “Hell.. unless they repent of their sins and turn to God.”
It’s understood the NRL were also angered the story emerged on the day of the State of Origin series opener at Suncorp Stadium.
They also took a dim view after he walked out on the game at the end of 2010 to sign with the AFL.
Folau played 91 games for Melbourne and Brisbane and was one of the game’s biggest stars, making five Origin and eight Test appearances before defecting to rival codes.
The Supreme Court has given permission for the owners of a
private school charged with fraud after an inspection by the Auditor General’s
office to apply for a judicial review.
The review will look at the actions of the audit team and the
issuance by the Auditor General of a report in 2016.
As Kaniva news
reported last year, the Auditor General’s office said hundreds of students
supposedly attending the Unuaki ‘o Tonga Royal Institute could not be identified and that the
Institute should repay TP$553,800 to the Technical Vocational Education and Training fund
(TVET).
Police charged former cabinet minister Akosita Lavulavu and
her husband ‘Etuate with using forged documents to support an application by
the to obtain supplementary government funding to assist students at their
private school.
Police said the Lavulavus were charged after the Auditor
General’s office said hundreds of students supposedly attending their private
school could not be identified and that the Institute should repay TP$553,800
to the Technical Vocational Education
and Training fund (TVET).
Prime Minister ‘Akilisi Pōhiva dismissed Akosita Lavulavu
from cabinet in April 2018.
The auditor General’ office opposed the Lavulavu’s appeal for
a review on the ground that no leave has been applied for or granted by this
Court, and that even if it was applied for it was well out of time because it is more than three
months since the date of issue of the report on October 2016.
Judge Niu said the Lavulavu’ action was effectively an appeal
for a judicial review presented as an ordinary civil action without any leave
having applied for.
He said application for review had to be made within three
months unless the court found there were good reason for extending that period.
“It is true that the plaintiffs have not properly sought the leave of the Court to file its application for judicial review of the defendant Auditor General’s action and action of his audit team, but no disadvantage or prejudice has been suffered by the defendant because the plaintiffs immediately and continuously pursued their dissatisfaction with the report right up to filing of their claim in this Court in January of this year,” Judge Niu said.
“It is in the interests of
justice that the application of the plaintiffs for judicial review be heard by this Court
and that leave be granted for them to do so.”
“Leave is granted
to the plaintiffs to
apply for judicial review.”
The
main points
The
Supreme Court has given permission for the owners of a private school charged
with fraud after an inspection by the Auditor General’s office to apply for a
judicial review.
The
review will look at the actions of the audit team and the issuance by the
Auditor General of a report in 2018.
For
more information
PM Pōhiva sacks
Minister of Internal Affairs Akosita Lavulavu
The king may have received wrong information about government
matters because he has allegedly refused repeated requests from the Prime
Minister for a meeting, a reliable source within government has claimed.
It is understood the Prime Minister and the king have not met
for about 18 months. The constitution requires them to meet.
The source said king Tupou VI had been unavailable for
meetings with Hon. Pohiva since he dissolved Parliament in 2017. The government
was re-elected in a snap election.
Opportunities for cabinet ministers to farewell or welcome the
king back whenever he travelled or arrived from international or inter-islands
royal trips no longer happened.
That opportunity had now been taken over by members of the
nobility, the source said.
It is understood the Prime Minister regularly sent reports on
government affairs to the king, but when he asked for an audience, the palace office allegedly said
the king was unavailable.
Clause 50A (3) of the constitution says: “The Prime Minister
shall regularly and as required report to the King upon matters that have
arisen with the government and upon the state of the country.”
Hon. Pōhiva told Kaniva
news before the dissolution that he regularly met the king and discussed
with him reports on government matters.
The Palace Office could not be reached for comment. Hon.
Pohiva’s media spokesperson Lopeti Senituli declined to have a comment.
However, the government’s Chief Secretary, Edgar Cocker, who has
taken up the post in February did not deny that the Prime Minister’s requests
for an audience with the king had been turned down by the Palace.
Cocker claimed the king was happy with the government’s
performance and that anything His Majesty wanted the government to do had been
followed through.
He said the Prime Minister’s works for the country were noticeable such as the completion of the Teufaiva national sport stadium, improvements to the roads, and ensuring the country did not suffer a famine.
Because of these, according to Cocker, there was no need for
the king to meet with the Prime Minister.
The source, however, told Kaniva
news, the problems caused when the king refused to meet the Prime Minister
was that it may lead to the king being misinformed on government matters.
He said the king was surrounded most of the time by people
who were not in the government and he could meet with his nobles anytime he
wanted.
The source said the opportunity for some of the Ministers to
meet the king whenever he travelled or arrived from a trip outside Tongatapu,
was crucial to the king’s information, as that was the only opportunity for
them to update the king about their Ministries.
The
main point
The king may have received wrong
information about government matters because he has allegedly refused repeated
requests from the Prime Minister for a meeting, a reliable source within
government has claimed.
It is understood the Prime Minister and
the king have not met for about 18 months. The constitution requires them to
meet.
For
more information
Edwards wants king re-dissolve
Parliament; Taliai says people will re-elect same gov’t
A young father and his wife were shot several times during an execution-style killing along an Auckland street by three members of the Comanchero Motorcycle Club, a court has heard.
The trial of two of the gangsters, Fisilau Tapaevalu and Mesui Tufui, began today in the High Court at Auckland.
They are accused of murdering Epalahame Tu’uheava and attempting to murder his wife Yolanda (Mele) Tu’uheava, both of whom were shot multiple times on April 30 last year in Māngere.
Tu’uheava, who was a young father also known as Hame or Abraham, died within minutes from his wounds.
Yolanda, however, survived by “some miracle” after playing dead, the court heard.
Viliami Taani, a third Comanchero member described by Yolanda as the “main guy”, pleaded guilty last week to murder and attempted murder.
This morning, Crown prosecutor Claire Robertson told the jury Tu’uheava and his wife were lured into what they thought was a drug deal on Greenwood Rd with “some new guys”.
Tu’uheava and his wife’s life in the criminal world had developed after the pair moved from Auckland to Sydney in 2014, Robertson said.
The pair lived in Australia for three years, where Tu’uheava also became a patched member of the Nomads gang, a splinter group formed originally by Black Power members.
In 2017 the couple returned to New Zealand but during the following year Tu’uheava began selling methamphetamine and also developed a relationship with the Comancheros.
But, Robertson explained, his relationship with the gang soured.
It would lead to Tu’uheava being shot at least seven times, including three times in the head.
“They executed him,” Robertson said.
The trio also “did their best to kill his wife” who was shot at least four times, including twice in the head with a revolver, she said.
After attempting to run and hide from the three Comancheros, Yolanda came out with her hands on head and begged the trio to forgive her husband, the court heard.
But the trio showed no mercy, Robertson continued.
Yolanda only survived, the court heard, after she played dead while her husband was gunned down with a .22 calibre semi-automatic rifle.
The couple were later found by a passing motorist lying on the side of the road.
“By some miracle [Yolanda] was still alive,” Robertson said.
Surgeons, however, were unable to remove one of the bullets from her head because of the risk to damaging her brain.
Police later found the revolver and rifle during a raid on a Te Atatu property.
The court head the killing may have been ordered from Comanchero leadership in Australia.
The three gang members had been given the “green light to kill”, Robertson said.
She added: “It appears there was some bad blood between the Comancheros and Tu’uheava.”
It may have been fallout from a drug deal or robbery gone wrong, Robertson said, but the why is “not something we will get to the bottom of”.
In 2014 he told Matangi Tonga the government had introduced reforms to make the kingdom’s judicial system more democratic and in line with the Constitution.
The reforms which were passed by Parliament in August that year abolished the Lord Chancellor, and replaced the Judicial Appointments and Discipline Panel with a Judicial Services Commission.
When Parliament closed on 11 September, 2014, a total of 23 Bills, including those for the reforming of Tonga’s judicial system, and for the appointment of an Anti-corruption Commissioner that were passed by Parliament, were still awaiting the Royal consent.
Edwards’ statements in that article appear to show that he and the former Lord Tu’ivakano’s government believed there had to be changes to Tonga’s democratic system and its constitution after the reforms of 2010.
He said the Justice Ministry brought in constitutional expert,
Peter Pursglove to review the constitutional provisions relating to the
judicial structure of Tonga. The Ministry arranged to meet with the Law Lords,
but they did not turn up and had since tried to block the reform.
However, this is the same Clive Edwards, who has been a fierce political rival of Hon. Pōhiva for years, who told the people two weeks ago that the Pōhiva government was trying to remove the king’s powers.
He was referring to the six new Bills the government is trying to move through Parliament. However, Hon. Pōhiva says the six Bills stem from the initiatives of the Tu’ivakanō government when Edwards was the Justice Minister.
Hon. Pōhiva believes there is nothing sinister about the Bills, but his opponents still hold a grudge against him and regard the page of the new Bills as an opportunity to campaign against his government.
Traditionally it has been taboo in Tonga, for somebody like Hon. Pōhiva to call for changes that might challenge the traditional power of the king , the nobles and the system that supports them.
In 2014, Edward criticised the Law Lords, for standing in
the way of reform.
Yet just last year Edwards called for the king to dissolve
Parliament and set up an interim government.
Does the veteran politician still want reform and for Tonga to progress as a democratic nation?
Can he put aside whatever personal animosity he has for Hon.
Pohiva and work with him for the good of the country?
There are questions we can ask, but only Edwards can answer.
The
main points
Does Clive Edwards want change in Tonga or not?
In 2014 he told Matangi Tonga the government had
introduced reforms to make the kingdom’ judicial system system more democratic
and in line with the Constitution.
A man accused of trying to slit a fellow parishioner’s throat while she was eating in their East Palo Alto church’s dining hall pleaded not guilty to a handful of charges Wednesday, according to San Mateo news media.
The woman, 65, was eating dinner with others in the church hall at Penieli Church on Sunday (May 26) when Folauhola Fiefia, 29, walked up behind her, grabbed her hair and attempted to cut her throat with a steak knife, said Chief Deputy District Attorney Al Serrato.
Penieli Church, at 432 Bell St., is a Christian church with a largely Tongan congregation.
The woman was able to block the knife, but suffered from cuts to her hands, Serrato said.
Fiefia then allegedly kicked the woman in her face and neck before other event attendees subdued him.
The reason for the attack is unknown, said Serrato. Both Fiefia and the woman attend the same church, but don’t really know each other, Serrato said.
The woman is expected to recover from her injuries, but had to receive sutures as a result of the attack, Serrato said.
Fiefia faces charges of elder abuse and assault with a deadly weapon, Serrato said. If found guilty of those counts, Fiefia could face eight years in prison.
Fiefia is in jail in lieu of $125,000 bail and will be in court on June 10.
