From Matangi Tonga Magazine Vol. 13, no. 14, December 1998.

By Pesi Fonua.

Interview with Hon. William Clive Edwards, the Minister of Police and Principal Immigration Officer. 

Tonga's passport scheme has earned about $40 million for government since it was launched a decade ago, but now they have had enough of the headaches that come with it.

Hon. William Clive Edwards was appointed by the King in January 1996 as Tonga’s Minister of Police, also responsible for Immigration, the Fire Brigade and the Prisons. A lawyer by profession, Clive has since introduced a number of amendments to the Tongan Immigration Act, and is now proposing to terminate Tonga’s controversial  Passport Scheme, despite the fact that it has been a lucrative source of income for government.

The Minister  explains his new immigration policy to the Matangi Tonga, and comments on the government’s policy of allowing Chinese immigration to Tonga.

Pesi Fonua:  Is Tonga going to terminate its passport scheme?

Clive Edwards: The National and the Protected Persons Passports scheme has been on hold for some time, they were no longer as popular as they were at the beginning. Because of the negative publicity about it, New Zealand, Australia, Canada and other countries refused to allow  transit for holders of these passports. Even Britain last year detained one passport holder. People then, were neither buying nor renewing their passports.

There was a proposal to reduce the price of the National Passport, which we rejected, and instead introduced the nationalisation scheme, which has been the practice since 1996.  For example, 92 people were naturalised on humantarian grounds since 1996, including some who applied direct and some who held Protected Persons and National Passports. Under this scheme once a naturalisation application is approved, they can apply for a normal Tongan passport, which costs $15.

We have been processing applications from people who have bought Protected Person Passports and paid $10,000 each. They were the majority of the people who applied for nationalisation.

Those who applied on humanitarian grounds but held neither a Tongan Protected Person Passports nor a National Passport had to pay $20,000, plus $300 for the processing of their application. That has been the procedure, and I have noticed that this scheme attracted better quality applicants.

You may have read in the Kalonikali about an American family, the vice president of General Motors and his family who became Tongan citizens, and it was a pleasure to hear of the reason why. They expressed their appreciation on the status of law and order in this country, and the degree of freedom that Tongans have, comparing with America, which they said is so over regulated, that you can’t breath. At the end of the day, they said that when they pass away, the death duty laws in the USA are so stiff that the government would take away most of their wealth, leaving very little for their children.

There is very heavy taxation at the moment in the USA, not only while you are living but also after you have died. Death duties start from 50% upward on whatever you leave behind. So many wealthy Americans are concerned that government may end up taking away about 80% of their wealth after they die, and even if they have formed trusts, under the American laws they can be traced to find what is taxable.

There are other very good business reasons that have been expressed in some of these applications, referring to the peace and security in this country, and their preference to live under the Tongan Crown, with a stable island state for their headquarters.

Approaches have also been made to me from the Middle East for the Tongan Protected Person Passport to be made available there. In some of these countries it is difficult to get passports from the central government. But we did not want to get involved because of the international problems that could be created. There are places that were suspected for Mafia operations, and money laundering. There were a number of approaches from these places to make Tongan passports available, but through our Interpol connection there were warnings and so we stayed away from those places. Even though we have leftover stock of the Tonga Protected Persons Passports, and there was a market for them, but we did not want to risk dealing with these areas.

The passport scheme has been very very good for government, something that it is not appreciated by a lot of people. It enabled us to maintain our Foreign Reserve at a satisfactory level. At present with the economic situation deteriorating very quickly because of the international situation that we are suseptible to, we are going down pretty quickly. If it was not for the passport money we would now be in a very difficult position.

The government is very concerned, and we are looking at other means of earnings to help our Foreign Reserve, because we are importing too much, and are exporting very little. It is a dangerous situation, but two things that have helped offset this are firstly the overseas remittances from Tongans to help their families, and secondly our foreign earnings from the passport scheme. We could have gone out and promoted the passport to increase the sales, but there has been too much anti-passport propaganda from here and overseas, trying to defeat the  objective of the government, which is to do something for the country.

You know it has been repeatedly stated overseas that the passport scheme is only for the chiefs and the rich people of Tonga, and that there is no accountability.  This kind of information has been published year after year. This is despite the fact that there is legislation, a Trust, Trustees, an account, and government is accountable. I don’t know where they get their information from, but they are trying to destroy this country.

We are not doing it for our own pockets. We are so desperate to find a source of overseas earnings to sustain the economy of this tiny country, and this is one of those sources, but now we have got to the point when it will be terminated, because we have had enough. We are earning revenue from it but we have had enough of the criticism and the lies about this scheme.

The government wants to suspend the scheme, and I want to emphasise that I support that approach, because there is nothing there for us except headaches. We are doing a lot of work to make sure that things are done properly, but the way it has been explained—as if an applicant can just walk in, throw his money on the table and be issued with a passport—is a joke.

There seems to be a change in the kind of people who are applying for a Tongan passport during the past few years?

There was a need and there is still a big need in the East where there are masses of people looking for travel documents, there are millions, and they are prepared to pay for it.

We should also know that the countries that have been criticising us, are now competing in the market. Even New Zealand is in the market, Australia is in the market, these big countries, and also small countries like Samoa, all these little island states, they are in the business. So our niche market is all over, and that was why we introduced the naturalisation scheme, but politically we have had enough. One thing that the people should know is that the negative criticism of the passport scheme was very destructive. It was intended to show that the government is bad, so that the project would be withheld, driving the country into hardship which will in turn make people dislike government. This is the essence of today’s politics, to project a negative image of government. Politics today are very destructive.

So now it is definite that the passport scheme will be terminated?

At the moment the plan is to end it in December. At the moment the scheme is being phased out and we will go back to the traditional method of naturalisation. Personally it is fine by me despite its economic repercussions.

The newly established Immigration Committee. What is their basic role?

Their basic role is to advise me on immigration matters, on the people who are coming in and leaving the country. There are more and more foreigners living in Tonga.

The government’s policy is to promote tourism, but at the same time, some people come here for a visit then they want to live in Tonga and do business, because there are still a few business opportunities here. These are people of different races, but the Chinese are more visible, and it so happens that it is easier for them to deal with the Tongan people. I will give you an example. There are 38 fale koloas (small shops) that have been registered in Tongatapu, and are operated by Chinese. Out of that, 26 are owned by Tongans, and licensed under a Tongan, because a Chinese would not have been able to get the licence. But the Tongans brought the Chinese in because they have made some business deal. There are also a few Chinese who have been naturalised and are living here permanently.

The problem that I am facing here is the Tongans. When there are visa problems with Chinese, Indians and other foreigners, generally I am confronted by Tongans. They come in here arguing, why am I destroying their businesses by deporting this person with whom he or she had made some business arrangement, and so on.

This new committee will have a look at that situation, because really government wants to tighten it up. There is a need for an outside view on how we are carrying out our duties, and this Consultative Advisory Group will have a chance to look, and to advise me, because my officers have been accused numerous of times about all sorts of illegal practices.

They will look at the way passports are handled, the procedures and other related matters. Within the Ministry they have a very important role. They are more or less an internal auditor. Members of this committee will be selected for three year-term.

Can you comment about a Bill that was passed by the House last year to amend the Immigration Act, making it no longer a requirement for the Solicitor General and the Minister of Police to endorse the arrest of a foreigner?

No, it was an Immigration Provision that stated that it was not legal to arrest and take to court foreigners unless it was endorsed by both the Solicitor General and the Minister of Police. My argument was, why can’t we arrest a foreigner who has committed a crime, but we can arrest Tongans? What is the difference. I proposed for the authority to be taken from the Solicitor General and myself, and to allow the police and the immigration officers to carry out their duties more freely. That is what I told parliament, and that is why they approved it. I want the application of justice and the law in this country to be uniform.

Does this apply to all offences?

All offences under the Immigration Act. For example, recently the police brought in a Korean who had been living illegally in Vava’u, and they are working on that case. Under the old provison they could not have touched him until it was approved by the Solicitor General and myself. It was a time consuming procedure, and that was why I proposed for our involvement to be terminated, and to allow the police to get on with their duties and the magistrate to decide on the merit of the case. That was the rational behind it.

What is the new requirement in regards to HIV/Aids?

Anyone who stays here for more than four weeks must be tested for AIDS.

When will you discontinue the inclusion of fingerprints in the Tongan passport?

We are working on it. One of the problems before was that a passport could not be issued to an overseas Tongan unless I was satisfied that the fingerprints had been impressed on the passport. The two main reasons why I am terminating that procedure are to expedite the processing of Tongan passports for Tongan overseas, and to make way for the launching of a new passport similar to the kind of passports used in overseas countries.

There are still criticisms and lies that claim that it is very difficult to get a passport, and that a person must pay $500 or $1000 before he is given a passport, that sort thing. I am looking into it and my finding is that some of the applications for passports were not filled in...there were no application forms.  So when I started in 1996, no passport was going to be issued unless I saw an application form with photograph attached, and a photocopy of the passport, for security in case the passport would be given to someone else. There were a lot of funny things happening with passports, no adherence to a system. I cut the whole lot out, then I tried to regulate the situation, and now applications come in with photographs. I started to straighten things up last year.

So the requirement to have fingerprints on passports was an effort to control passports?

To control passports and make sure that there was no forgery. The new passports to be issued next year do not need fingerprints.

Is it legal for a Tongan to hold two passports?

It is legal only if you become a citizen of a country by descent, but once you decide to become a naturalised citizen of another country, you no longer can be a citizen of your country. Some who were born overseas and by decent can become the citizen of that country at the same time by descent they are citizens of Tonga. There are others, and I am one of those who were born here but my father was foreign, and so eligible for two passports. It was legal because no one has disputed the sovereignity of the King. But when you have decided to decline the sovereignity of the King of Tonga and accept the sovereignity of another country that is when you lose your Tongan citizenship.

What about the children of a Tongan woman with a foreign husband, are they Tongans?

Her children will follow the nationality of their father. Unfortunately being born in Tonga does not confer citizenship. It began in 1935, before then we were just like overseas, if a child was born here he or she was eligible for a Tongan citizenship.

On a different issue, there seems to be some confrontation between the police and the judiciary?

I don’t think so. In what way do you think there is a confrontation?

In a recent case when there was an application for a habeus corpus to release the Noble Fakafanua from prison, you appealed and it was dismissed by the Court of Appeal.

It was the kind of legal argument that will always take place in such big cases, you just can’t get away from those interlocked, infighting applications in chambers and in open court. The only thing with that case was that it went to the extreme that the lawyer was advising his client to confront the police and that was when we sued the lawyer and his client, but that is normal. Particularly in this case of Noble Fakafanua, we continually seek direction from the Judiciary. Fakafanua is not an ordinary citizen, he was a minister and he is also a high ranking noble, and there are a whole lot of other connections, and we do not want to climb over anyone without getting those responsible to the proper area. It may have appeared that we disagreed but it had to be taken to the court to make a fair decision. If it was approved then we would go ahead, but if it was rejected then we should back off. That is how we operate because the police will always confront the defence, and both parties have to use the judiciary to decide on a final ruling. Some rulings we do not like but we are accepting them. Some we think are ridiculous, particularly when we can’t hold a suspect—we have to apply to the court, meanwhile the suspects runs away—it is ridiculous. There is nowhere in the world where you have such a situation, only in Tonga, but we are not complaining because of the nature of the case. If it was not for the nature of this case I would have blown this kind of decision apart, but we do not want to be too aggressive because they may think that we have a personal grudge against Fakafanua, and we don’t. If he gets off, good luck to him. We are only carrying out our duty, and you know in this case there is a lot of pressure on both sides.

How is the Probation service?

As a means of keeping people out of jail it should help with the rehabilitation of that person rather than going to jail. But if a person has no alternative but to go to prison we found that there is a lasting problem and they don’t seem to cure in prison. When they come back they do something else. But if we can save the first offenders, I will be happy. It is worth trying for our people.

What is happening in the House with regards to the petition to remove the Speaker?

They are sending the report to the King and we will wait and see what will happen. We are very impractical. My thinking is that if a law was broken then let’s work on it, but if no law was infringed then we have to look at the objective of this petition, what are we going to gain from it?

Let me explain why I take this view. There is a claim that Fusitu’a was feheke‘aki, or changing sides relating to the Impeachment case against the Minister of Justice, the Hon. Tevita Tupou. Can you really take someone to court over feheke‘aki? It is the most dangerous thing to charge someone with. The more important issue that I am concerned with is the fact that we have already dealt with this case. If we want to re-open the case, are we going to go over it again to find out who was right? You can’t judge Fusitu’a alone without judging Tevita, so what are they getting at? Are they indirectly bringing Tevita to trial again? You can’t judge feheke‘aki without having to dig up the papers on how Tevita behaved.

I felt that they are using these two men, and I don’t like these nasty politics, personal and nasty, making Tevita appear good but in the process they know that he will be ripped to pieces by both parties.

You are on the Board of the Tonga Rugby Union, how are we going?

Not too good I am sorry to say. The policy of the Board, trying to expose our players, and to promote Tonga through rugby is suceeding partially, but the actual standard of playing is not satisfactory. For example, we should have beaten Samoa. The team that went had a number of overseas players and it was a good team, but still we could not get it. We have had a lot of lost opportunities. Some how we are failing to provide good coaching, and good selection, I think we are missing something somewhere and I just can’t put my finger on it. But look at how Fiji has risen, they brought in Greg Johnson to take over the Fiji team. Fiji is now the Pacific Champion, thrashed Samoa and thrashed Tonga, but before that we both thrashed Fiji. We have good coaches and good selectors, good for local standards, but for we are a bit behind international standard. We need an international coach and a trainer. We have seen the impact on Fiji when they brought in  Brian Williams and others to Samoa and their rugby leaped forward. Fiji has also pumped in up to $3 million to develop their rugby, but we are not doing very much to develop rugby for Tonga. Rugby remains to be a potential money earner for Tonga, and that is why I am still very keen to get involved in the development of rugby. Fe’ao Vunipola, has just got a good contract to play in the UK. But through overseas tours we can sell our boys to overseas clubs and we can get some good players overseas. Potentially we have some good players and we want to develop the game of rugby in Tonga as an export product, and they can earn big money for themselves and their families, and indirectly Tonga will benefit.

Our main problems are a lack of money, and the fact that some players are tied up with contracts and therefore can’t play for Tonga when they are needed. In that area there is a reserve in the contract, with Tonga having to make the first call.

What about sponsors, any luck in that area?

With regards to the future of rugby in this country we must find some permanent sponsors. We need to look now on how are we going to get into the World Cup. As it is standing at the moment we would either go overseas in January to try and secure a place or we give up. It would cost a lot of money. It is something that we have to think about, maybe we should just stay home this time. But sports are good for the health of the nation.