Xanana informou Passos sobre suspeitas de corrupção na justiça de Timor

Bárbara Reis e Ana Henriques

08/11/2014 - 09:13

 

http://www.publico.pt/politica/noticia/xanana-informou-passos-coelho-sobre-suspeitas-de-corrupcao-na-justica-de-timor-1675573

 

Procuradora expulsa afirma que nem ela nem os restantes funcionários judiciais portugueses tiveram interferência nos processos das petrolíferas.

 

O primeiro-ministro timorense, Xanana Gusmão, informou o Parlamento timorense e o Governo português de que estava “preocupado” com “alguns indícios” de corrupção no sistema judicial de Timor Leste, envolvendo magistrados.

 

Numa carta de 11 páginas que enviou em Outubro aos 65 deputados timorenses, Xanana diz que “interesses privados contactaram o Conselho Superior da Magistratura no sentido de influenciar a nomeação de juízes” nos litígios judiciais entre o Estado de Timor e várias companhias petrolíferas internacionais que exploram os recursos do Mar de Timor.

 

Há dezenas de conflitos deste género nos tribunais timorenses. “O que é mais alarmante”, escreve Xanana na longa exposição que fez ao Parlamento de Timor a 22 de Outubro, “é que o Conselho Superior da Magistratura não informou o Estado desses contactos impróprios”. Estas preocupações, conclui o antigo líder guerrilheiro da resistência, “exigem uma investigação urgente”.

 

O PÚBLICO sabe que, uns dias depois, Xanana escreveu ao seu homólogo português, Pedro Passos Coelho, e que nessa carta não só aborda também o tema da corrupção como vai mais longe. Na missiva a Passos Coelho, Xanana nomeia a ConocoPhillips – um gigante norte-americano de exploração de minerais que Timor Leste processou por não ter pago milhões de euros de impostos petrolíferos – e acusa a empresa de ter contactado magistrados dos tribunais de Díli. Diz também que tem provas desses contactos. O primeiro-ministro timorense não se refere ao conteúdo desses alegados contactos, descrevendo-os apenas como “inadmissíveis”.

 

Em nenhum momento das cartas Xanana se refere expressamente aos magistrados portugueses que trabalham no território e que receberam ordens de expulsão nos dias entre as duas missivas. As críticas são transversais ao sistema judiciário do país e incluem uma lista de dez “erros” dos tribunais e quatro “erros” do Ministério Público. Em documentos oficiais do Governo timorense é também mencionado outro episódio sobre a alegada parcialidade da justiça, a favor das petrolíferas e contra o Estado. Houve um juiz, relata-se, que no Verão passado requereu a escusa de um processo. A petrolífera envolvida no litígio “teve conhecimento dessa escusa na noite desse mesmo dia, uma vez que se referiu em tribunal a esse facto” logo no dia seguinte, enquanto “o Estado apenas foi notificado desse facto” duas semanas mais tardes. Por outro lado, os tribunais não estão a notificar o Estado de todos os requerimentos apresentados pelas petrolíferas, referem também os mesmos documentos.

 

Na justiça timorense trabalhavam até agora cerca de três dezenas de portugueses, entre juízes, procuradores, oficiais de justiça e outros profissionais. Uma das magistradas expulsas por Dili, a procuradora Glória Alves, afirmou esta sexta-feira, à chegada a Portugal, que nem ela nem os restantes funcionários judiciais portugueses tiveram qualquer interferência nos processos das petrolíferas.

 

Os motivos de “força maior” e de “interesse nacional” invocados pelas autoridades timorenses para mandar embora os cooperantes versam sobre 51 processos judiciais no valor de 378 milhões de dólares de impostos.

“O procurador cabo-verdiano, que foi também expulso, teve uma interferência nos processos do petróleo apenas como parte acessória, o que quer dizer que a defesa do Estado foi entregue a advogados privados e, portanto, são esses a parte principal dos sucessos ou insucessos que o Governo terá, porque não há processo nenhum transitado em julgado”, acrescentou Glória Alves, que é procuradora há 24 anos.

 

 

A double standard view of Timor-Leste - responding to Ted McDonnell’s article “Timor-Leste lawless state not worthy of ASEAN entry”

*Cosme da Costa Araujo

 

Ted McDonnell, a professional, independent, and expert on Timor-Leste wrote a piece last week argues that Timor-Leste is not worthy of ASEAN entry. In addition to other academics and analysts who label Timor-Leste with colorful name-callings, McDonnell comes up with a new creative nickname for Timor-Leste – a lawless state.

 

He argues that by “sacking all foreign judges, introducing archaic media laws and detaining Mauk Moruk and his comrades”, Timor-Leste is a lawless state and therefore is not worthy of joining ASEAN. I find his argument similar to Susan Marx, Asia Foundation Country Representative, and Madhu Narasimha, whom Ramos Horta refers to as “an obscure and pseudo academic”.

 

I have the privilege of reading many of the author’s articles on Timor-Leste and I find most, to be biased, unbalanced, opinionated, and subjective and interest, which not reflects the characteristic of a professional journalist. His articles do not represent the professional standards or at least Timor-Leste Journalist Code of Ethics (Arts. 1 &5) he aspires to abide by. Reporting and not confirming the other side of the story simply shows his unfitness for that profession.

 

As in my response to Susan’s article two weeks ago, the issued resolution is within the boundary of the Constitution. The National Parliament acts within its constitutional power of making political decision. The issued resolution is a political decision to safeguard the national interest of the country. Dr. Benevides Correia Barros, spokesperson for Timor Lorosa’e Lawyer Association (TLLA), seconds the argument by stating “the State has constitutional power to safeguard the national interest of the country”.

 

The resolution is simply the presentation of evidence by the Parliament for the Superior Council of the Magistrate (SCM) to consider and decide on of whether the Parliament’s call for the termination of the contracts of international judges and advisers is justifiable. The Parliament calls for the termination of judges’ contract because of national interest, force majeure, and the judges’ “inadequate technical capacity” and indications of “committing various incidents of judicial irregularities”.

 

Days after the Parliament issued the resolution; the President of the High Court issued a communiqué urging all the judges to continue working, while waiting for decision from SCM. The SCM’s finally made its decision last week to terminate the contracts their contracts. I therefore see no interference from the Parliament with the competencies of the SCM.

 

Pedro Bacelar Vasconselor, a renowned Portuguese constitutional lawyer who helped with the work of annotated Constitution, argues that, “it is legal to carry out an audit of the Timorese system including the suspension of contract of international judges”. He stated the issued resolution is “a small concern of a bigger issue that leaders of the country preoccupy with”. He later asserts that, “matters of national interest should not be decided by foreigners, but the Timorese”.

 

According to Timor Lorosa’e Lawyer Association (TLLA), “the resolution is not in breach of the Constitution”. Dr. Benevides Correia Barros, spokesperson for TLLA, states that, “Timor-Leste adopts a relative, not absolute separation of power”. It is articulated in Article 69, which does not only talk about “separation of power” but also “interdependence” of sovereign bodies in exercising their powers. Therefore, he elaborates that, “under Article 118 (2), the Court is required, when exercising its function, to seek cooperation with other Sovereign Bodies, in particular to safeguard the national interest of the country”. He also argues that, “the resolution does not beach Article 121 (3), as it applies only to local, but not international judges”.

 

Reading through his article, I find the author to be inconsistent, contradictory and at worst hypocrite. In one hand, he staunchly supports and fights for the respect of Constitution, separation of power, rule of law, and principles of democracy, but on the other hand, he supports Mauk Moruk and his revolutionary movement.

 

I sympathize with Mauk Moruk’s revolutionary ideas (fight corruption and inefficiencies), but not the means he proposes to achieve them. Mauk Moruk calls for the abolition of the Constitution, dissolving democratically elected Parliament and Government, which are in essence against the Constitution, rule of law and principles of democracy. The Parliament issues a resolution to ban Mauk Moruk and his movement, which, they see posing a threat to the national security of this country. In the US, Mauk Moruk would have been charged and tried under “terrorist act”. McDonnell may be right and he knows better that Mauk Moruk initially comes with a good intention, but he may be hijacked, or “set up” and “manipulated” by foreign interest to destabilize this country.  

 

A professional journalist with an objective, balanced, and independent view of Timor-Leste would the find the author’s calling of Timor-Leste “lawless state” is unjustifiable and at best prejudice.

 

I also find the author’s argument that Timor-Leste is not worthy joining ASEAN to be inconsistent or to put nicely double standard. In one hand, he is so critical of Timor-Leste’s worthiness of joining ASEAN, while turning his blind eye on the developments in other countries like Thailand and Myanmar.

 

If the author tries a bit harder to research on what is going on with other ASEAN member countries, he will find that in Thailand, new military dictatorship detained members of political class, shutdown media, dissolved the senate, in charge of government ministries and assumed total control of the country and much worse wait to come. In Vietnam, recently two blogger soon to be charged for violating Penal Code Article 258 on “abusing freedom and democracy to infringe upon the interest of the State”.  Bloggers were detained for posting essays that “had the potential to tarnish the state apparatus’ prestige”. In Myanmar, since the court denied and annulled an election won by Aun Sha Su Chi, the country is haunted by the omnipresence of military junta and as a consequence of that, all the democratic institutions and processes, which the author fights so hard for, are non-existent.

 

If the author thinks Timor-Leste is not worthy of joining ASEAN, then my question is what makes these countries “worthier” to remain as members of the “respected Association”.

 

If the author follows closely the development in the region, “the credibility of the respected Association” had long been tarnished with the Indonesian invasion of Timor-Leste, systematic and massive abuses of human rights, Myanmar’s court denial of Aun San Su Kyi victorious election, and the subsequent omnipresence of military dictatorship in Myanmar, and the military’s overthrowing of two democratically elected governments in Thailand. If the author believes that there is such a thing as “credible Association”, then the United Nations have no credibility for allowing country like North Korea to join and similarly the prestigious English speaking countries association – Commonwealth, for allowing country like Zimbabwe and then apartheid-South Africa to join.

 

I also find the author’s remark of “PM Xanana’s anti-foreigner drive” is appalling. If the author had thoroughly done his research, he would find that the number of foreigners or “malae” working in the public institutions, not to mention private sector, had increased dramatically since PM Xanana come to office in 2007. In addition, Timor-Leste has every right to be befriend with Indonesian, that is what I hear experts call – pragmatism and real politic. It would be childish and naïve not to do so.

 

The suspension of contract of foreign judges has nothing to do with anti-malae. They are found to be “technically incompetent” and “committed various judicial irregularities”. You would expect this to happen in any normal work-related contract, when an employee would be dismissed if he/she is not performing according to the contractual arrangement or causing detriment to the employer. An anti-foreigner sentiment would be like “putting asylum seekers in detention center”, “riots in Coronal beach”, and subsequent “assaults on Indians” and “the recent assault on Chinese expats in Vietnam”.

 

Furthermore, leaders of this country including PM Xanana are elected not to appease any foreigners, but to serve the best interest of the Timorese people. I doubt the author, an outsider, knows better than PM Xanana, who sacrificed his whole life for this country, of what is the national interest of this country.

 

If Lee Kwan Yew of Singapore, leaders of Communist Party of the People Republic of China and founding fathers of South Korea in earlier years listen to the lecture by pundits on about how to run their countries, they would not have become of what are they are today.

 

To end, I would like to help the author with the lists of “criteria” for countries that fall under his famous term – lawless state.

 

A lawless state should include also countries that unilaterally invade and help to invade other countries, spy on its citizen, leaders and citizen of other countries, put asylum seekers or “boat people” in detention center (even they themselves were originally “convicts” or migrants from other countries), withdraw from international court for fearing of a “fair dinkum” trial, ban Muslim women from wearing burka in public place, allow people to own gun and shoot at anyone for self-defense, charge its citizen for whistleblowing, prevent its citizen and confiscate their passports from testifying against the state, enact legislation that authorize indefinite detentions of immigrants, allow police to search telephone, email and financial records without a court order and a state proclaims to serve its people, but in fact serves only the interest of big corporations.

 

With all these hypocrisies that happen in the world, one has no right to tell, lecture or even impose on others of what to do and not to do. Therefore, when I see a professional journalist calls for a regime change; it makes me doubt his credibility as a professional journalist and his fitness for that profession.

Mari Alkatiri pede liderança unida para lutar contra ataques a Timor-Leste

10 de Novembro de 2014, 09:14

 

http://noticias.sapo.tl/portugues/info/artigo/1421193.html

 

O ex-primeiro-ministro e secretário-geral da Frente Revolucionária do Timor-Leste Independente, Mari Alkatiri, apelou ontem à união da liderança do país para encontrar uma solução para as investidas que estão a ser feitas contra o Estado timorense, informou agência Lusa.  

"Declaro que não permitirei que se continue a politizar uma questão processual e apelo a toda a liderança timorense para se unir na procura de solução para todas as investidas contra o nosso país", afirmou, numa mensagem divulgada na sua página na rede social Facebook.

Na mensagem, Mari Alkatiri reafirma que não vai permitir que se "use um erro processual para se procurarem atingir a coesão nacional do Estado de Timor-Leste".

"Todo o ataque que tem sido feito contra figuras da liderança faz-me lembrar a crise de 2006. Na altura o diabo era eu", salientou.


O Governo de Timor-Leste ordenou segunda-feira a expulsão, no prazo de 48 horas, de oito funcionários judiciais, sete portugueses e um cabo-verdiano.

No dia 24 de outubro, o parlamento timorense tinha aprovado uma resolução a determinar uma auditoria ao sistema judicial do país e a suspender os contratos com funcionários judiciais internacionais "invocando motivos de força maior e a necessidade de proteger de forma intransigente o interesse nacional".

"Um parlamento irresponsável - Parlamento de Timor-Leste (de que sou membro) - adotou uma resolução de constitucionalidade duvidosa que acabou por politizar uma questão que podia ter sido fácil e corretamente tratada por via administrativa, técnica e legislativa", refere o antigo primeiro-ministro, sublinhando que era conhecido o mal-estar que se avolumava entre o Governo, tribunais e Ministério Público.

Para Mari Alkatiri, "só por milagre" um país acabado de nascer "ficaria ileso de problemas desta natureza".

"Em Timor-Leste também não é a primeira vez que isto acontece. Já durante a primeira legislatura o mesmo se verificou. Só que na altura o Governo optou por apoiar o sistema judiciário timorense a encontrar soluções no sentido de se introduzirem correções no sistema. E seria este o caminho certo que teria evitado a politização do assunto", acrescenta.
@Lusa

Timor - o "estado" da Justiça

31.10.2014

Pedro Bacelar de Vasconcelos

 

http://www.jn.pt/Opiniao/default.aspx?content_id=4211438&opiniao=Pedro%20Bacelar%20de%20Vasconcelos

 

A Comunicação Social portuguesa destacava ontem o relatório divulgado pelo Banco Mundial (Doing Business 2015) que coloca Portugal em 25.º lugar num ranking de 189 países ordenados segundo um critério complexo que procura apurar a maior ou menor facilidade da concretização de negócios entre privados, nos vários países considerados ("Económico", 29 de outubro de 2014). Mais do que a posição ocupada, salienta-se a melhoria obtida relativamente ao ano anterior. Portugal teria subido seis lugares, colocando-se agora à frente de outros países europeus como a Holanda, Bélgica, França, Polónia e até, na Ásia, acima do Japão. Segundo declarações colhidas no Ministério da Economia, este sucesso relativo teria ficado a dever-se à flexibilização das leis do trabalho, à aceleração das decisões judiciais, à facilitação do registo de propriedades e ao cumprimento das obrigações fiscais.

 

O mesmo relatório do Banco Mundial era também objeto de destaque em "Comunicado de Imprensa" do Conselho de Ministros de Timor-Leste. Embora colocado nesse ranking numa posição mais modesta, Timor-Leste é ali qualificado como a economia que mais progrediu na simplificação do processo de constituição de novas empresas (...) "através da conceção de um balcão único" - uma medida aprovada pelo Governo de Xanana Gusmão, em 2012 - "que reduziu o tempo necessário para abrir uma empresa, de 94 para apenas 10 dias". A simplificação administrativa e o melhoramento substancial do abastecimento da energia elétrica foram os fatores responsáveis pelo expressivo melhoramento do ambiente empresarial no território deste jovem parceiro da Comunidade dos Países de Língua Portuguesa.

 

Em Timor, o fator mais adverso reside, por uma lado, na dificuldade de validação dos títulos de propriedade - herança da ocupação estrangeira e das deslocações forçadas de populações inteiras durante a guerra de resistência - mas também nas fragilidades de um sistema judicial criado a partir do zero, depois da libertação, com juízes recrutados de emergência e amplo recurso à cooperação internacional, sobretudo, a magistrados e assessores jurídicos de língua portuguesa. Contudo, a consolidação de um poder judicial independente e democrático, constituindo um fator estimulante do dinamismo económico, é, acima de tudo, uma parte essencial da própria construção do Estado soberano. Numa atitude discrepante com a atenção e o interesse que as velhas potências coloniais europeias costumam dedicar aos povos que oprimiram e exploraram no passado, em Portugal, nem se valoriza os sucessos que alcançaram nem os problemas com que se confrontam.

 

De facto, os progressos significativos alcançados pelos timorenses na área da economia não transpareceram nos órgãos de Comunicação Social portugueses, nem a determinação expressa numa resolução aprovada no Parlamento Nacional em Díli, na passada sexta-feira, no sentido de um renovado empenhamento na consolidação da autonomia e da eficiência dos tribunais nacionais, obteve a atenção que indiscutivelmente merece. Uma indiferença incompreensível porque a Justiça é um setor fundamental onde a cooperação portuguesa se pode orgulhar da valiosa contribuição de inúmeros magistrados e assessores jurídicos. Contudo, a perpetuação da presença de funcionários internacionais, designadamente no exercício de funções jurisdicionais, a par dos juízes timorenses, é um fator de inevitável perturbação da transparência de um poder judicial independente que assume também relevantes atribuições jurídico-políticas, designadamente, em sede de controlo da constitucionalidade e da averiguação da responsabilidade criminal dos titulares de órgãos de soberania. Quando as multinacionais do petróleo procuram apoderar-se dos recursos naturais do povo timorense através de dezenas de processos instaurados nos tribunais de Timor, o mínimo que nos compete é esforço para compreender o que se passa e manifestar total solidariedade com o povo irmão e com os seus representantes legítimos!

Petróleo e corrupção de políticos: “Não é admissível serem estrangeiros a decidir”

Por Ana Henriques

03/11/2014 - 22:55

http://www.publico.pt/sociedade/noticia/petroleo-e-corrupcao-de-politicos-nao-e-admissivel-serem-estrangeiros-a-decidir-1675064

Pedro Bacelar Vasconcelos, que ajudou a redigir Constituição de Timor, recorda que já em 2005 se falava da necessidade de as decisões da justiça timorense serem tomadas pelos nacionais.
Apesar de “muito dura” e “de ser de alguma forma surpreendente”, a expulsão decidida pelo Governo de Timor é o culminar de um mal-estar que dura há mais de uma década.

Quem o diz é Pedro Bacelar Vasconcelos, o português que ajudou a redigir a Constituição timorense e que participou em duas avaliações internacionais da justiça daquele país, uma do Banco Mundial e outra do Programa das Nações Unidas para o Desenvolvimento. A conclusão foi sempre a mesma, recorda o constitucionalista: “Não é admissível serem estrangeiros a decidir” os casos da justiça timorense, em especial quando estão em causa questões tão melindrosas como o petróleo ou a corrupção dos governantes. Já então, em 2005, as avaliações internacionais davam conta da necessidade de depositar esta função de soberania exclusivamente nas mãos dos nacionais.

Daí que, na resolução em que expulsa os funcionários judiciários internacionais e respectivos assessores, o Governo timorense alegue que a sua presença constitui “uma ameaça aos interesses e à dignidade do país”, invocando mesmo a necessidade de garantir a segurança nacional, a ordem pública e os bons costumes – bem como de salvaguardar a soberania nacional. A resolução anuncia de resto uma auditoria à justiça timorense.

“Em Timor existe, ao nível da justiça, uma situação neo-colonial, que tem na sua origem constrangimentos difíceis de ultrapassar no curto prazo, próprios de um país jovem”, explica Pedro Bacelar Vasconcelos. Ainda assim, o jurista defende que aos funcionários judiciais internacionais só deve caber um papel de assessoria e formação dos magistrados timorenses – e não de tomada de decisão. Sob pena de ficar em causa a credibilidade da justiça do país, assinala.

É muito claro para Pedro Bacelar Vasconcelos que as repetidas condenações do Estado timorense nos litígios relacionados com o pagamento de taxas por parte das petrolíferas que têm concessões naquele país – e falta decidir ainda muitos casos – são vistas como lesivas dos interesses de Timor. Algumas dessas sentenças foram assinadas por juízes portugueses, tal como outras que sentenciaram altas figuras do Estado.

Por outro lado, parece-lhe no mínimo imprudente que os funcionários internacionais visados se tenham mantido em funções depois da publicação no Jornal da República da resolução do Governo, na semana passada. "Discordar ou discutir fundamentos tão poderosos como o interesse nacional ou a soberania é da exclusiva competência das instituições soberanas do Estado e dos cidadãos nacionais de Timor-Leste", observa o constitucionalista.

 

Responding to Susan Marx’s Article “Firing of Foreign Judges in Timor-Leste Threatens Justice System”

*Cosme da Costa Araujo

 

Edited version.

 

Susan Marx, Asia Foundation’s country representative, last week wrote an article and published it on the Asian Foundation’s website entitled “Firing of Foreign Judges in Timor-Leste Threatens Justice System”, in an apparent response to the Resolution No.11/2014.  

After a careful examination of all evidence available and follow up closely with the development of “the case”, I find the resolution is within the boundary of the Constitution and contrary to the claim made by the author, human rights NGOs and activists, it does not breach any articles of the Constitution. Parliament acted within its constitutional power of making political decision.

 

The resolution is simply the formal presentation of evidence by the Parliament for the Superior Council of the Magistrate (SCM) to consider and decide on of whether the call for termination of the contracts of international judges and advisers is justifiable. The ultimate decision still lies with the SCM. Days after Parliament enacted the resolution, President of the High Court issued a communiqué to the judges urging them to carry on with their work, while waiting for the decision from the SCM.

 

Thus far I see neither Parliament nor Government interfered with the competencies of the SCM (Art.121.3) and therefore I conclude that there had not been any breached the Constitution (Articles 69 and 119). In my view, the author and pundits had overacted and jumped into a premature conclusion that does not reflect the reality and latest development of the case.

Pedro Bacelar Vasconselor, a Portuguese constitutional lawyer, who helped with the work of annotated Constitution of RDTL, “considered it is legal to carry out a diagnostic auditing of the Timorese justice system including the suspension of contracts of international judges”. He added that “the resolution is a small concern of a bigger issue that leaders of the country preoccupy with”. Furthermore, Timor-Lorosa’e Lawyers Association fully supports the resolution as it is for the national interests. According to them, the resolution has no impact at all at the judicial system.

If one reads the entire Article 69, it does not only talk about “the separation of power”, but also “interdependence” of sovereign bodies in exercising their powers. I had no legal background, but I interpret “interdependence” to imply two things – firstly, the check and balance between sovereign bodies exercising their powers, and secondly, the cooperation among them to achieve the fundamental objectives of the State (Article 6) - the national interest of the country.

 

The Parliament or the Government could have pursued the easier alternative. Instead of issuing the resolution, they could have just invited all sovereign bodies of the State to discuss and come to a consensus decision similar to the resolution No.11/2014. President of the Dili Court, in fact, suggested this approach.

Furthermore, the author argued that the underlying reasons for the enactment of the resolution are (1) unfavorable outcomes of the court rulings, (2) saving face as outstanding tax allegation was made by Government’s own adviser recently arrested and (3) PM’s dissatisfaction with public prosecutors and KAK.

To set the record straight, Bobby Boye, a Nigerian born US citizen, whom the author allured to in point (2), was recruited by the Norwegian Ministry of Finance, under the Oil for Development Program, to help the tax department in the Timor-Leste Ministry of Finance. The Norwegian could have done better and exercise more careful due diligence. But you cannot guarantee your systems and procedures are hundred percent bulletproof when dealing with conman like Boye.  

 

What is more shocking, as Fairfax Media reported “at least dozen of people working for oil and gas industry new about Boye’s chequered past as early as December 2010”. The paper added that “oil companies made their inquiry and what they found about him was far more disturbing”. It was further revealed “senior staff at Conoco Philips kept their matter secret and decided not to pursue it with Timor-Lest authorities”. In any contractual arrangement, there is an implied term that the oil companies are expected to do what is reasonably necessary to inform the government of the Timor-Leste of the matter. But the oil companies “refused to share the information” which is “shocking and appalling”, said Pierre-Richard Prosper, a lawyer acting for Timor-Leste. We do not know of whether “they held this to be used as some kind of leverage; against whom and for what intended gain”.

 

In addition, a recent revelation by the Australian paper Sydney Morning Herald that Roger Maguire is suspected as a mole for oil companies while working at a tax adviser in the Timor-Leste Ministry of Finance.

Putting his criminal records aside, Boye’s tax assessments put oil companies in an uneasy position as he discovered that, by taking advantage of the limited capacity of the local staff working at the tax department, oil companies tried to avoid paying millions of taxes. Boye managed to “force oil companies cough up more than $350 million”.

While the proceeding in Singapore arbitration court is continuing, I am not surprised to see the unfavorable court rulings in Dili against the Government as the disputes of such complex cases were presided over by judges and advised by advisers that have “inadequate technical capacity” and found to have committed “various incidents of judicial irregularities”.

 

Reading through the article what I find so intriguing is that the author tried to link the recent arrest of foreigners with the termination of contract of international judges and advisers as “general dissatisfaction with expats or malae”. I read this paragraph with a smile on my face and amazed how one could come to such a shallow conclusion.

The author failed or may omit to mention the fact the poor Stacey Addison was not arbitrarily detained while traveling around the country on her mission to save the poor animals. She was found with other passengers in a car staffed with drugs. Prima facie of the circumstance, a reasonably person would assume her to be innocent, until the strong evidence proves to the contrary. But relying solely on her recollection of the events would not be enough. As in any other democratic countries, which the author is from and familiar with; the normal follow up process would be for her to go through investigations to gather more evidence to support her case.

Tiago Guerra is an interesting one as well. He was arrested for the suspicion of money laundering. How would you make of a person when a day before transferred $800,000 out of the country and the next day leaving the country with stash of cashes and credit cards? These events have nothing to with “dissatisfaction with expats or malae”. Compared to other countries, Timor-Leste is the one of the more tolerant countries in the world towards foreigners.

And for those who are unfairly dismissed, they may seek remedies under the Labor Law and Contract Law.  But the possibility of suing the Government under these Laws seems too remote as leading evidence indicates that the termination of the contracts is reasonably justifiable.

Furthermore the resolution has no impact at all in deterring investors from coming to Timor-Leste. The Government had showed their goodwill by working hard to ensure the national stability and create environment that is business friendly – by lowering tax, establishing one-stop-shop SERVE that reducing number of days for business registration, and promoting transparency in its budgeting, procurement, and international assistance. The Government had not interfered with any court decision as in past few years it had lost a number of court cases against local businessman on the land and property disputes.

The author also argued “the decision could threaten the government’s case for ASEA accession”. I see this line of argument to be similar to the one made by Madhu Narasimha, whom Ramos Horta refers to an obscure and pseudo Malaysian based academic. He argued Timor-Leste should not join ASEAN because all the negativities he listed out. If the author uses the issued resolution, which she claimed to interfere and undermine judicial independence, as benchmark for Timor-Leste accession to the ASEAN, then the existing member countries like Thailand and Myanmar should be disqualified. In Thailand military toppled two democratically elected governments and the ubiquities presence of military junta in Myanmar that dominates the country’s political and economic life, of which I consider as grave violations of “the principles of democracy” that warrant enough evidence to relinquish their ASEAN membership.

 

I conclude this response article by referring back to the first paragraph of the author’s article, which I find very interesting. The author wrote “in a dramatic challenge to the principles of democracy, on Friday night, the parliament of Timor-Leste decided in a closed session to fire all foreign judges and advisers in its justice system”. What I would like to highlight here is the term “principles of democracy”. As of today I still find this term to be confusing and discriminatory in its implementation.  

For a simple minded person like me, democracy means respecting other country’s sovereignty, but you can invade other countries as long as it is for national and security interest. Democracy means respecting people’s privacy, but for national and security interest you can spy on your citizen, other heads of states and citizen of other countries. Democracy means religious freedom and tolerance, but for national and security interest, you can ban Muslim women from wearing burga in public place. Democracy means in Western world you can sue media for false information, but in fragile countries like Timor-Leste such act is considered to kill media freedom. Democracy means no discrimination, but for national and security interest you can create immigration law that aims to stop “illegal aliens” crossing the borders. Democracy means everyone has the right to live, but for national and security interest you can detain and shoot anyone as long as they look or act like a terrorist suspect. Democracy means everyone is equal before the law and has a right to a fair trial, but for national and security interest you can detain and imprison people without trial. Democracy means you protect your citizen rights to live, but for national and security interest you detain and shoot them for self-defense.

Democracy means treat your neighboring countries with respect and fairness, but for national and security interest you can bully and patronize them. Democracy means giving money to others to do and give you favor is corruption, but lobbying government and lawmakers for concessions and favorable treatment is a democratic process. The list can go on forever, but I better stop here because I become more confused now with this term “principles of democracy”. Then I realize that Lee Kwan Yew of Singapore is right. Democracy is context-dependent. Principles of democracy are not universally applicable and cannot be imposed upon others. Principles of democracy must reflect the local values, and local culture.

How the least good foreign advisers ended up working in Timor-Leste?

*Cosme da Costa Araujo

 

When Timor-Leste rose up from the ruins left by the destruction of 1999’s crisis, it faced an acute shortage of qualified human resources. Twelve years went by, dozens of reports, mostly prepared by technical assistants funded by donors, reported that the very same problem still exists. To resolve the capacity gap, one of the solutions is to employ foreign advisers. The task of these highly caliber experts are to help their local counterparts in their day-to-day work until such time they can stand on their own feet. Broadly speaking, foreign advisers are contracted to perform one or all of the following functions – to provide technical/policy advice, capacity building and to undertake in-line-job, if no local Timorese cannot stand up to the task.  

A string of unfortunate events unfolded over the year in Timor-Leste has caught us all by surprise. The shocking surprises come from the fact that foreign advisers, not all, had ill intentions and committed fraudulent acts of enriching themselves by stealing from the poor country they suppose to help. A number of highly publicized cases including the arrest of Bobby Boye, a Nigerian born US citizen, and a World Bank employee of Portuguese citizen, and a revelation of Roger Maguire as an Australian mole for oil companies, and the sudden termination of contracts of all international advisers working in the judicial system make us all wonder of what actually went wrong.

In this article I tried to raise and provide answers to the following question – how the least good foreign advisers ended up working in Timor-Leste. I defined “the least good advisers” as those foreign advisers who are proven to be intellectually incompetent, had limited skills and experience, and had past bad records to be deservedly called advisers. I had to be clear from the start that not all advisers who had worked or are still working in Timor-Leste are bad. I have known and had a privilege to work with many of the best ones in my short-span of working life.

I identified five factors, that are in my opinion, are partially or wholly responsible the least good foreign advisers ended up working in Timor-Leste.

Recruitment process – an adverse selection

I blamed the recruitment process for its fault in not detecting and even letting what I called “inferior qualities” of the supposedly foreign advisers to slip through and get the job. In an inexperienced country like Timor-Leste, and compounded by the recent economic crisis that forced lot of people out work, a job opening in Timor-Leste would be swarmed by the least good candidates. With the pools of least good candidates applied, our recruitment process eventually ended up with recruiting “melons”. As amo Martinho said "todas as porcarias estao aqui". The end products of their work were ended up being criticized. The good example is media law, which attracted lot of criticisms including “the unconstitutionality in some of its articles” and the remark made by Mari Alkatiri that “the adviser who wrote it treated Timorese as children”.  In my opinion the least good advisers do not know what they do and advise on; therefore, every decision made, based on their advice, is controversial.  One good example is the ruling on taxation dispute between Timor-Leste’s governments versus Conoco Philips. For my simple mind in order for a judge to preside over such a hearing, he/she, at least, needs to have knowledge, and experience in commercial law, accounting, taxation – a mere mundane general law is not sufficient.  With melons, I am not surprised to see most of the rulings are in favor of oil companies.

Moral hazard – when more is less
Despite foreign advisers been paid ten and thousands of dollars, a zillion times higher than their local counterparts, not to mention better facilities they enjoy, they still want to have more. For them more is less. The more they have, greedier they become. They took advantage of their local counterparts to fulfill their greediness. Moral hazard occurred when with superior information, knowledge, skills and experience, compared to their local counterparts, enabled them to have intentions or to take actions to behave inappropriately.  With moral hazards, the interest of the agents and the principles are not aligned. Agent acts to maximize his/her interest, in detriment to his/her principal. Bobby Boye, a Nigerian born, US citizen, was a vivid example of moral hazards – principle and agent problem.  With his skills, he managed to scam $3.5 million dollar from Timor-Leste, while working as tax adviser in the Ministry of Finance, knowing fully that the systems and people at his department will not be able to detect his trail. In addition, the recent resolution issued by National Parliament to suspend the contracts of all foreign advisers working in judicial system was another good example to cite. The resolution read that “instead of providing capacity building to the technical staff”, these international judges and advisers, “taking advantage of local staff lacking of capacity to achieve their personal gains”.

Job phobia – fearing of job insecurity
An adviser is recruited for a definitive period to accomplish an established mission. Once he/she accomplished his/her mission, he/she is no longer needed. He/she is not here for permanent placement. What happened in Timor-Leste is what I call “job phobia”. Most foreign advisers, those I have seen and known of, want to stick to their jobs as long as they could. Because of fearing job insecurity, many advisers took ages to finish their jobs. Some are reluctant to transfers their knowledge and skills to their counterparts. Some once they know that the locals are starting to do the job, they remove them to other departments. How can a 12 year of capacity building have not yet enable Timorese judges to stand on their own feet. The simple answer is that either there was no real capacity building took place or Timorese are too dumb to learn.

Malae syndrome – appearance does matter
I used to hear this famous saying “don’t judge a book by its cover”. In the context of Timor-Leste, I could paraphrase it and say “you cannot underestimate the capacity of someone because he/she is a black Timorese”. But in Timor-Leste, people do judge others by looking at the cover – who you are. In years of dealing with fellow Timorese, they had what I called “malae syndrome”. The Timorese trust more “malae” than their fellow Timorese. For the Timorese, everything that is regurgitated by a malae adviser is blindly believed to be true and most likely to be implemented. The problem of “malae syndrome” is that foreign advisers owe loyalty to no one but him/herself. With the recent incidents, hopefully, had taught us all an important lesson learned that is don’t indeed judge a book by its cover.

We don’t know what we really want
Linking back to “malae syndrome”, the ubiquitous of foreign advisers in Timor-Leste simply show that we don’t know what we really want. I am not malae phobic, but evidence show that in some ministries, the ratio between adviser and staff is literally 2:1. I saw in some ministries malae taking minutes of meeting, setting up meetings, collecting timesheets, processing payments, acting as secretaries, drafting emails, itineraries, timing speech, and maybe even carrying begs of ministers, and DGs. In some ministries foreign advisers took over simple tasks that are ably done by local Timorese. Do we really foreign advisers to do all the things I have just mentioned about. Of course not.

My simple solutions
Having identified the five factors that, in my view, are responsible for having least good advisers working in Timor-Leste, the following are my simple suggested solution to address the issue - (1) identifying priorities areas that do need really foreign advisers support, (2) scaling back on foreign advisers through Timorisation process, and (3) reintroducing Capacity Development Coordination Unit to coordinate and monitor adviser’s effectiveness.