
I join numerous other individuals and organisations, both locally, regionally, and internationally this week, to farewell a friend, a hero, and a mentor—the late legendary editor Dan McGarry. He was a staunch and fearless supporter and defender of truth—when it came to issues of power, politics, corruption, and leadership. He spoke truth to power, backed by uncomfortable evidence and facts. That’s why people—leaders in particular, who are supposed to be the core custodians of our democracy, responsible for protecting, guarding, and upholding democratic principles, the rule of law, and constitutional integrity—hated his guts. Dan became an enemy for upholding the truth. No wonder the saying, ‘truth hurts.’ They weren’t prepared to hear it.
I admire his courage and boldness in speaking out against corruption in this country, notably in view of a very ineffective Ombudsman’s Office—an institution which was once a bulwark of democracy during Ombudswoman Marie Noelle Ferrieux Patterson’s days, but which unfortunately is no longer the case today. All that the office is ever popular for nowadays is its constant reminder in the media to leaders of their late submission of their ‘Annual Returns,’ taking them to court over these, and so forth, while corruption and corruptive practices of unprecedented proportions stare the country right in the face.
Not only that, but Dan McGarry loved Vanuatu and he impartially defended what he believed to be right. As a writer myself (though no way near his calibre), I looked forward to reading every article he wrote because of how he articulated his views in ways that others within the region and abroad struggled to do. His choice of words, expressions, and analysis of issues were spot on, albeit my own reservations in other areas—such as with his overt pro-vaccination campaigns during the height of the global pandemic (COVID-19).
Voice of Freedom, silenced
Dan’s voice was silenced in mid-November 2019 when the then-Labour Commissioner Murielle Meltenoven wrote to his employer rejecting Dan’s annual work permit renewal and cancelling his residence visa. Virgin Australia staff confirmed this to him at Brisbane airport—that Vanuatu Immigration had issued a notice barring the airline from uplifting him and from re-entering the country. Had he been in the country, who knows—could he have perhaps been deported—for speaking truth to power? That, in a nutshell, was the unforgivable ‘sin’ he had committed. This, in his brief interview with The Guardian, was ‘a dark day for media freedom in Vanuatu.’ Not just media freedom, but the freedom of the ordinary citizens of Vanuatu to benefit from developments earmarked for them rather than the pockets of some greedy individuals in the country.
At the time of the incident, Dan said he had been targeted because of his reporting on China’s growing influence in the country. That influence has apparently not disappeared. In fact, it has possibly intensified over the past seven years. Take, for instance, the competition for recognition between the much-debated Vanuatu-Australia ‘Nakamal Agreement’ and China’s own version, which some unconfirmed sources have dubbed the Namele Agreement.
Dan’s final interaction with me in an official capacity was at 1:06 pm on 3rd September 2020, alerting me, as CEO of VFIPA back then, regarding an ‘upcoming application’ to VFIPA for investor status, purposely to turn his many years of experience and expertise in the field of journalism into the training of journalists in the country.
Warned, threatened with dismissal
Writing about development issues in Vanuatu has almost gotten me into trouble too. I and other officials were all awaiting the arrival of Ministers at Whitegrass Airport on Tanna that morning, back in 2021.
The plane finally landed. My Minister came by, we shook his hand, then came the Deputy PM. He shook my hand and walked by, then turned around and asked, ‘Hey CEO, are you still interested in serving as a public servant?’ I replied with a confused ‘Yeees.’ I knew the question was loaded, so I asked him, ‘Why?’ (with a hesitant smile). He replied, ‘Those articles of yours.’ Then I asked, ‘Which one?’ He then responded, ‘Oh, never mind, we’ll discuss over beer.’ Then he walked away.
The following week, on returning from Tanna, the 2nd PA to the Trade Minister phoned me and told me that the Minister was instructed by the DPM to ask me to ‘stop writing those articles,’ or they would discipline me. He then notified me that a warning letter would follow. Later that afternoon, I went to the Ministry for something, then came across the 2nd PA. On departing, I jokingly told the PA, ‘Hey bro, don’t make that warning letter too strong.’ I then left. I never received the warning letter but changed the column header or banner from ‘Inside Viewpoints’ to ‘The Distant Voice.’
Why did Dan McGarry’s writings matter?
Dan’s writings mattered because they represented the principles of a strong media. The media is considered the fourth pillar of democracy (or the “fourth estate”), functioning as a crucial watchdog alongside the three traditional branches of government: the legislature, executive, and judiciary. It holds power accountable, ensures transparency, and informs the public. That’s exactly what Dan’s voice represented. And he did it without fear or favour. That’s what we are seriously missing within media circles today in Vanuatu.
His writings also mattered within the context of a grossly watered-down, ineffective, and dysfunctional Ombudsman’s Office, as earlier indicated. In this regard, it is possibly high time to rethink the future of the Ombudsman’s Office, whether to keep it or scrap the entity and replace it with a more meaningful institution such as an Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC). Whilst the ACC and the Ombudsman’s Office are distinct integrity institutions—where the ACC specifically investigates and prosecutes criminal corruption, while the Ombudsman tackles administrative injustices (maladministration) and bureaucratic unfairness, and while the ACC focuses on illegal acts by public officials, the Ombudsman addresses mismanagement—it is high time that an ACC is established in the country to complete the work that Mr. Dan McGarry could only achieve as far as raising public awareness via his writings in the media.
Unexplained wealth has become so rife in the country today, yet nobody seems to have been able to do anything about it. Transparency International Vanuatu (TIV) was established in the country in 2001 (25 years ago). It was established purposely to combat corruption and to promote transparency, accountability, and integrity across all sectors of Vanuatu’s society. All that TIV has ever done is raise awareness in the media, but that’s about all it could do. TIV has possibly not achieved much in terms of effectively combating corruption. The Office of the Ombudsman was formally established in 1995 (31 years ago) with the passing of the Ombudsman Act No. 14 of 1995. Its prime purpose was to enforce the Leadership Code established in the 1980 Constitution. After a combined total of 56 years of existence, and achieving next to nil in terms of getting corruption effectively prosecuted, I say it is high time to establish an ACC.
Dan McGarry was definitely a voice of reason and of conscience, a staunch defender of truth, and a voice of freedom in this country. In his honour, and as part of celebrating his legacy in defence of our democratic principles, and if the Government really wants to show proof of seriousness about celebrating a truly democratic country on its golden Jubilee in 2030, how about making it a must to establish Vanuatu’s first-ever Anti-Corruption Commission by or before 2030?
I pay tribute to Dan McGarry for all his tireless efforts in upholding the principles of democracy in this country. Rest in perfect peace, legend!
The Distant Voice is a weekly column focusing on various aspects of life and development in Vanuatu.
SOURCE: VANUATU DAILY POST
