Of constitutions and things

There has been a burst of conversation around the constitution and as per usual it has unleashed a variety of opinion on the subject. First a little grounding ……. isn’t it refreshing that we can openly debate this topic, so long forbidden, along with so many other “banned” topics. The visit by Professor Regan has provided useful start to discussions.

BUT as has been pointed out by many commentators this is only the beginning of what must be widespread and considered debate that will hopefully focus on current facts and not ancient obsessions and prejudices.

As we have commented in the past, at the heart of this current constitutional debate is the fact that the 2013 constitution is impossible to change. Professor Regan reminded us that this in itself makes revising the constitution a necessity. Once that is achieved, the next step will be, as has already been pointed out by the Supreme Court, to correct its sloppy and sometimes bizarre drafting that has made interpreting many sections extremely difficult.

THEN we can start talking about real change. Put simply to avoid future political upheavals, military or otherwise, we need a living breathing constitution that can, assuming community support, be changed and adjusted to meet the “times.”

Leader of the Opposition Inia Seruiratu raised a valid issue, before we embark on yet another attempt to rewrite the rule book we need to figure out why we have failed so many times before..

Fiji’s political history since independence has been dominated by one issue, the need to produce a political formula that protects the rights of each of our communities. To summarise, protecting the position of the Indigenous iTaukei vs those of other ethnic groups who are seeking an identity and a secure home.

What has been lost in much of the early rhetoric is the FACT that at the time of independence, the demographic profile of our nation was very different. The iTaukei, still recovering from the epidemics of the early 20th Century, were marginally a minority. As a result, negotiations around the 1970 constitution centred on protecting Indigenous rights and most importantly land ownership. The result a communal based electoral system that guaranteed iTaukei dominance, or so they thought.

For Indo Fijian politicians’ universal franchise i.e. one person one vote was the desired outcome particularly as at the time they had a slight edge population wise.

You can see this traditional political belief system continuing to pop up today with many Indo Fijians celebrating and clinging fiercely to the 2013 constitution as the first to provide them with true political equality. At the same time, more than a few iTaukei leaders long for a return to communal based politics.

Here is the problem, rather than focusing on creating a constitution that protects ALL Fijians, we are in danger of returning to our ancient default position i.e. what can I get for my community or ethnic group.

This ignores the dramatic change that has taken place in the demographic profile of over the last fifty years or so. A proper census would be useful but based on data available, the trends are clear……. by the time we get to vote again in 2026, Fiji will be about 65% iTaukei, 30% Indo Fijian and 5% everyone else.

This should change thinking dramatically. For the iTaukei, universal franchise should no longer be feared while for the minority communities some level of protection will be needed if they are to have any say in the running of the country. Of course, this assumes that voting will continue along ethnic lines and communal lines. From the little data we can get from recent elections, mainly counts from individual polling booths, voting remains generally along ethnic lines.

YB won’t make the mistake of joining the armchair social media experts in proposing a solution beyond saying it needs a lot of community discussion and it will need our political leaders to rework past political thinking.

Professor Regan has suggested, and we note this thinking is supported by other well qualified commentators, that focus should be on getting the Supreme Court to overturn the section of the constitution that governs CHANGE. This would allow us to embark on the process of review within the current constitution. Any other option would seem to be too messy.

Let’s see what comes of all this … We do need the Prime Minister to reassure everyone that any changes will be focused on protecting the rights of ALL Fijians. Remember, for the Indo Fijian community any talk of constitutional change sparks fears based on the multiple traumas experienced since 1970. YB notes growing nervousness, and this could have a negative impact on the economy and provoke accelerated migration amongst those clinging on to Fiji.

Oh, and by the way if you want to read an excellent review of constitutional change in Fiji and issues facing us, click here!

https://devpolicy.org/is-the-time-ripe-for-constitutional-change-in-fiji-20240809/?fbclid=IwY2xjawErgN5leHRuA2FlbQIxMQABHRf-i4EAjrzEyGoTR8oQCpI1Q8Qy35zaaSGQIW8zxtbIYD6aOEYg8RMAcw_aem_Q7wEqtZJFSf-5JT0uVd0lg

PS We conclude on a slightly different topic. Within the Coalition, particularly the People’s Alliance, there has been some amusement at the mess Minister of Education, Aseri Radrodro had gotten himself into over the Deans Trophy. Outside observers may not be aware but one thing you do not mess with as a politician is high school sport, in particular the Coke Games and the Deans Trophy.

We were stunned when the Minister announced he was overturning a decision by the Fiji Secondary Schools Rugby administration preventing Bucalevu Secondary School from taking part in the quarter finals. The details are complex and not relevant to our tale today, but this “decree” raised many questions beginning with, did he have the authority. The answer to that was clear when he had to back down under pressure from World and Local Rugby bodies that take a dim view of any form of political interference. BUT then he dug an even bigger hole by proceeding to threaten the future of High School sport with investigations into teacher’s time spent on sport and more.

Why was this such a blunder? Well, if you think national politics is vicious it is nothing compared to when it comes to teachers! The Fijian Teachers Association, which represents iTaukei teachers is a powerful political player, note it is one of the few ethnic based bodies that survived the previous Government. The FTA is dominated by male MASTERS who wield considerable political influence within their communities. This is why SODELPA was so keen to take on the difficult Education portfolio, so they could reward their supporters within the FTA.

For the “Masters” high school sport and in particular “the Deans” is crucial to their existence. The Minister, in attacking them in such an aggressive manner is playing with fire and potentially undermining a key part of SODELPA’s dwindling support base.