Fijian High Chief Calls For Significant Reduction In Military Power, Restoration Of Indigenous Rights

Margot
Staunton RNZ Pacific senior journalist

A Fijian
high chief Ratu Tevita Mara wants to reduce the military’s
powers and restore iTaukei (indigenous) rights.

“[We
need] a military that defends the nation and never rules it,
courts, prosecutors, and elections beyond the control of any
government and the strongest protection of our (iTaukei and
Rotuman) land, seas, and custom,” the former military
general said this week.

Ratu Tevita, who is the
traditional head of the Lau province, made the comments in a
written submission from the Vanua o Lau (Lau people) to the
Constitutional Review Commission (CRC).

“Repeal
section 131(2) [of the 2013 Constitution] which gives the
military an open-ended mandate over the nation’s
well-being,” he said.

“Return
the Republic of Fiji Military Forces (RFMF) to ministerial
control and parliamentary oversight.”

The son of
Fiji’s first prime minister and president, Ratu Sir Kamisese
Mara, he has become increasingly vocal in the political
arena and warned
the government last month that time was nearly up for it
to deal with Fiji’s drug crisis.

“The window to act on
Fiji’s drug crisis is closing,” he said, in yet another
salvo fired at the Sitiveni Rabuka-led coalition government
as the general election looms.

In Lau’s submission to
the CRC, obtained by RNZ Pacific, Ratu Tevita said the issue
of whether the term ‘Fijian’ was appropriate as a common
national identity was best decided by the
public.

“Return the question to the people through
proper consultation led by the Great Council of Chiefs (GCC)
and restore ‘Fiji Islander’ as the common civic name,” Ratu
Tevita, who is co-deputy chair of the GCC, said.

The
statement contradicts what he said in a statement in
April.

He also canvassed the idea of the
constitution’s immunity clause being “examined’ as well as a
review of the “secular state” clause, while guaranteeing
freedom of religion for all.

The sweeping immunity
provisions have protected those involved in past military
and political coups from criminal prosecution and civil
liability.

Ratu Tevita said the 2013 Constitution was
imposed on the people and a new constitution needed to
reflect the will of the people in the villages, the
provinces, the churches and the communities.

“Every
submission we make is for iTaukei, for the Indo-Fijian, for
the Rotuman and for every community in Fiji,” he
added.

Ratu Tevita fled to Tonga in 2011 and went into
exile after the then-Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama wanted
him tried for treason.

The royal family sheltered him
in their Nuku’alofa palace, where he worked as an advisor to
King Tupou VI.

The Bainimarama administration banned
him from re-entering Fiji – something that only became
possible after Prime Minister Rabuka’s government came into
power in December 2022.

The coalition government wants
to amend the current Constitution before the general
elections, and set up the independent commission in March to
consult widely on the issue.

The Commission officially
closed submissions on 10 July and said on its website that a
wide range of public and organisational submissions were
received during the consultation
period.

Constitutionally-entrenched

An iTaukei
political sociologist, distinguished professor Steven
Ratuva, said that modern constitutions must address the
“long tail” of trauma, corruption, and institutional decay
left by decades of political instability.

Professor
Ratuva, of Canterbury University in Aotearoa, also
challenged what he called the constitutionally-entrenched
“Fijian” label for the country’s citizens.

He argued
it was imposed by colonial administrators and did not
reflect how indigenous communities self-identify.

“The
word iTaukei is a word which the iTaukei used to define
themselves. When we talk to each other, it’s full of mana.
It’s full of the connection with the land,” he
said.

Professor Ratuva added the name “Fiji”
originated from a European interpretation of the Tongan
pronunciation “Fisi,” evolving from the islands’ original
name Viti, before being formalised during the colonial
era.

“This is very much an introduced European framing
and that is what a lot of iTaukei don’t realise, as labels
can be degrading as well as empowering.

He said the
term created a “boxing” effect similar to New Zealand’s
“Pacific Islander” classification, which flattens
distinctive sub-identities. He called for more nuanced
identity provisions that respect in-group definitions, while
avoiding fragmentation.

Meanwhile, civil society
organisation Dialogue Fiji said that the review process was
“rushed and opaque.”

“This commission is presiding
over the shortest major constitutional review in Fiji’s
history,” its director, Nilesh Lal said.

“That should
be a warning sign for anyone serious about democratic
reform.”

“Constitutional engineering in ethnically
divided societies requires careful deliberation on
power-sharing, electoral systems, decentralization, and
minority protections,” Lal said.

Professor Mosmi Bhim,
a political science researcher from Fiji National
University, said in a personal submission that Fiji risked
reverting to authoritarian rule.

“Repeated coups have
kept Fiji from consolidating democracy, with the country
currently in a similar transitional phase to that
experienced at independence,” Professor Bhim said.

She
added that coup makers currently immune from prosecution
should be banned from contesting elections.

On
electoral reforms, she called for removing the single
national constituency in favour of smaller constituencies,
implementing a 30 percent quota for women, and reserving one
seat for Rotumans as an endangered indigenous
group.

Another scholar of Indian heritage, Dr Romitesh
Kant warned the Commission against repeating the country’s
constitutional cycle of coups.

Dr Kant, who researched
constitution-making for his master’s thesis at the
University of the South Pacific (USP) said the country’s
history ” oscillated between elite compromises and imposed
constitutions, with public participation used merely to
legitimise pre-determined outcomes.”

He also argued
that Fiji should not abandon a common identity, but
cautioned against returning to a system that hardened ethnic
separation.

“The 2013 provisions, imposed in a
militaristic, authoritarian manner, deepened ethnic
insecurity … common identity should not become “ethnically
blind,” ignoring real inequality,” he said.

“The
recurring wound in Fiji’s constitutional history has been
that people are invited into the process, but political
elites control the final settlement,” he said.

The GCC
called the the current constitution “illegitimate”, saying
it “weakened traditional governance and stalled economic
progress”.

Its chair Ratu Viliame Seruvakula called
for specific support for iTaukei to become “genuine wealth
creators” rather than “passive recipients of state
benefits.”

“When indigenous people thrive
economically, the entire national economy expands,” Ratu
Viliame said.

The National Federation Party (NFP), a
coalition partner in the Rabuka-led government, has urged
the Commission to incorporate elements from both the 1997
and the 2013 Constitutions into a new document.

NFP
leader Biman Prasad was the former co-Deputy Prime Minister
and Finance Minister under the current administration and
resigned last October after facing corruption
charges.

Prasad warned the Commission that holding the
next general elections by February 2027, under a new
constitution, was “strictly impractical”, given the
extensive work required for consequential legislation and
electoral changes.

The NFP also recommended removing
references describing Fijians of Indian descent as
“descendants of indentured labourers.”

In a statement
on social media this week, the Commission said it was
compiling submissions and would review feedback from
stakeholders before delivering its final
recommendations.

“The review process remains a
critical step in shaping Fiji’s legal and political
framework moving forward,” the statement
said.

© Scoop Media