The Pacific media watchdog, the Pacific Freedom Forum, is encouraging the Fiji prosecution office to pull back from charging staff at the Fiji Times with sedition.
The paper's publisher, Hanks Arts, the Times editor, Fred Wesley, the editor of Nai Lalakai Anare Ravula and columnist Josaia Waqabaca were charged in August of last year with inciting.
This came after an article in Nai Lalakai by Mr Waqabac accused Muslims of invading foreign lands, and killing, raping and abusing women and children.
The Fiji prosecutor's office is considering a more serious charge of sedition but the PFF's Jason Brown says this is not needed.
He spoke with Don Wiseman who asked him about the current charges the four people face.
The Fiji Times headquarters on Victoria Parade, Suva
Photo: RNZI / Sally Round
Transcript
JASON BROWN: Inciting community antagonism is the original charge and one that they are still facing, based on an opinion piece in the indigenous language newspaper, published by the Fiji Times, and that made some somewhat disparaging comments towards Muslims in Fiji.
DON WISEMAN: Now the Fiji prosecutor's considering upgrading these charges to sedition but the Pacific Freedom Forum is saying these are outdated charges.
JB: Yes indeed. From the information we have in Fiji they are based on laws inherited from the United Kingdom and [amendments] subsequent to that regard the whole area of free speech as being potentially seditious, and if you look at the Fiji law there are a number of sub-clauses where it seems to narrow down to any one community, which would seem to contradict the whole idea of sedition, which is at a country level.
DW: So if we accept that these comments were, at the very least, unfair, what should happen?
JB: Well i think it is time for both sides to take a step back, perhaps for the Fiji Times to pay closer attention to what's published in its indigenous language newspaper and for the government to take a step back and consider whether this really constitutes sedition. The best place to answer unfair opinion,, and this certainly seems unfair, is in the court of public opinion, not the actual courts themselves.
To embed this content on your own webpage, cut and paste the following:
See terms of use.
