Whose Vision for Fiji? Constitutional Reform at a Crossroads

As Fiji contemplates constitutional reform, questions arise about both the scope of the reform and the process itself. Debates unfold against a backdrop of militarised politics, contested ethnic identities, and a legacy of exclusionary practices. Further obstacles include the stringent "double majority" requirement for constitutional amendments and the military’s lingering influence over governance and reform efforts. With diverse stakeholders, a fragmented opposition, and a history of elite-dominated reforms, the key question remains: Whose vision will shape the future of Fiji? – write Romitesh Kant and Mereoni Chung

A decade ago, former Vice President Ratu Joni Madraiwiwi expressed "cautious optimism" about Fiji’s newly promulgated 2013 Constitution, recognising its promise and flaws. Today, as Fiji explores pathways toward constitutional reform, questions emerge about how much has truly changed since its enactment. Fiji's political history is deeply entwined with ethnicity and the military's pervasive role, including a pipeline of coup leaders transitioning to political power. Since independence in 1970, colonially imposed ethnic divisions between Indigenous iTaukei (comprising the majority of the population) and Indo-Fijian communities (about forty per cent of the population) have profoundly shaped political life, often leading to political instability and coups. The most recent coup in 2006 removed the elected government and ushered in a period of military rule, an institution dominated by Indigenous Fijians, that lasted until the 2014 elections. The military’s self-appointed role as a “guardian” of the nation, which it claims is bestowed by the Constitution, casts a long shadow over governance and reform efforts.

Discussions around constitutional reform have gained momentum in recent months, with the coalition government reaffirming its commitment to addressing critical structural issues in 2025. Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka intends to establish a legal roadmap to guide the process next year, prioritising a comprehensive review of the 2013 Constitution. This review will include tackling broader structural reforms, such as local government elections, and advancing the Truth and Reconciliation Bill—an initiative seen as essential for healing the divisions of the past.

As debates on the appropriate process and scope of constitutional reform unfold, they occur against this backdrop of militarised politics, contested ethnic identities, and a legacy of exclusionary practices. While the 2013 Constitution aimed to unify the nation under a common identity and an expansive bill of rights, concerns over concentrated executive power, limited public engagement, and other controversial provisions still resonate. With the government planning to prioritise constitutional reform next year, the process presents both an opportunity and a challenge: Can reform address the fissures of the past while fulfilling the aspirations of today’s diverse society?

Background: The 2013 Constitution in Focus

The 2013 Fijian Constitution marked an attempt to transition from years of military rule toward a more inclusive civic framework after a series of coups and political upheavals since independence in 1970. This constitution, introduced by then-Prime Minister Frank Bainimarama’s government following the 2006 military coup, purportedly sought to dismantle ethnic divisions that had long influenced Fijian politics. It brought significant changes, such as creating a single electoral roll, eliminating ethnic voting blocs, and establishing a common Fijian identity for all citizens, irrespective of ethnic background. These reforms aimed to foster a national identity that moved away from the divisions that had previously defined Fijian political life.

However, the process by which the constitution was enacted has been widely criticised for its lack of public consultation and inclusivity. The government rejected and discarded an earlier draft prepared by the 2012 Constitutional Commission, which had involved extensive community engagement and had garnered broad-based support. Notably, the Commission’s draft differed significantly from the final version in crucial areas, such as limiting executive power, expanding the judiciary's independence, and enhancing public participation mechanisms. The government’s abrupt rejection of the Commission’s draft in favour of a government-led approach (that also revoked a planned Constituent Assembly) fuelled scepticism about the legitimacy of the new constitution.

Additionally, several provisions in the 2013 document raised concerns about the concentration of executive power and the protection of fundamental rights, such as freedom of speech and assembly. While drafted by a military-backed regime, the Constitution’s explicit references to the Republic of Fiji Military Forces (RFMF) primarily reiterate provisions from past constitutions, notably Article 131, which assigns the RFMF the ‘overall responsibility’ of ensuring ‘at all times the security, defence and well-being of Fiji and all Fijians’. This self-appointed guardianship has historically positioned the military as a key arbiter in moments of political tension, often justifying its interventions to "protect" democracy.

Current Reform Efforts and Stakeholder Perspectives

While parties in the coalition government—the People’s Alliance (PA), the National Federation Party, and the Social Democratic Liberal Party (SODELPA)—have committed themselves to constitutional reform, including through their coalition agreement, the path forward remains challenging. There are two initial obstacles to constitutional reform: the cumbersome amendment process—which requires a dual supermajority of 75 per cent of parliamentary votes and 75 per cent of all registered voters in a referendum—and the military’s enduring influence.

A significant factor bolstering the government’s reform agenda is the dissolution of the FijiFirst opposition party.

A significant factor bolstering the government’s reform agenda is the dissolution of the FijiFirst opposition party. FijiFirst, which dominated Fijian politics for nearly a decade under the leadership of Frank Bainimarama, played a central role in shaping the political landscape after the promulgation of the 2013 Constitution. Its losses in the 2022 elections marked the end of its dominance, weakening its ability to act as a unified opposition force. The party’s deregistration—for failure to create an internal conflict resolution mechanism—fragments its parliamentary representation, reducing the influence of its previously cohesive bloc and enabling the coalition government to advance reform efforts with less resistance.

The 26 former FijiFirst members of parliament continue as independents but have split into two factions—the Group of 9 and the Group of 16—adding complexity to the political landscape. The Group of 9, led by Ioane Naivalurua, supports the coalition government’s efforts for reform, viewing it as an opportunity to remove perceived biases in the Constitution. Conversely, the Group of 16, led by Inia Seruiratu, favours a cautious approach, advocating for talanoa (open dialogue) sessions to discuss past political events, including previous coups. This division within the opposition underscores varying perspectives on reform: one faction seeks immediate adjustments, while the other calls for broader transparency and a historical reckoning.

Civil society organisations, including the Fiji Women’s Rights Movement (FWRM), the Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre (FWCC) and the Citizens’ Constitutional Forum (CCF), play a significant role in advocating for a human rights-centred, inclusive reform process. They stress the need for a transparent approach that includes broad public engagement to build trust and address historical grievances. Religious groups, particularly Christian denominations, are likely to advocate for moral protections within the constitution, echoing the calls from the PA and SODELPA for recognition of Fiji’s Christian heritage.

The debate is also shaped by demands from the Great Council of Chiefs (GCC), reinstated in 2023. The GCC has called for amendments to the “common identity” clause that designates all citizens as “Fijians,” a term some Indigenous groups believe undermines traditional identities. Its advocacy for constitutional reforms prioritises iTaukei interests, including natural resource management and preserving traditional societal structures. The GCC has also advocated for reinstating the power to appoint the President, a prerogative previously held by chiefs under the 1997 Constitution but removed in 2013. Beyond these specific demands, the GCC calls for reforms that bolster Indigenous institutions and ensure greater representation in national decision-making processes.

The GCC’s advocacy highlights its mission to preserve the vanua—encompassing land, people, and traditions—a core concept in iTaukei culture. However, these proposals must navigate a complex political landscape with diverse visions for Fiji’s future. Balancing the GCC’s demands with the pursuit of a more inclusive and equitable constitutional framework will be a critical challenge in the reform process, necessitating that the government ensures all voices, both Indigenous and non-Indigenous, are heard.

Finally, the military remains a presence in the current reforms. In 2023, RFMF Commander Major General Ro Jone Kalouniwai expressed the military's "concern" over the speed and ambition of the new government’s proposed reforms, emphasising the need to uphold the rule of law and adhere to due process, particularly given the Constitution’s high amendment threshold. His cautious endorsement of a constitutional review is significant, contrasting with the military’s earlier warnings about potential intervention. Major General Kalouniwai noted that, given Fiji’s nascent democracy and its history of coups, the RFMF's role as a constitutional "guardian" ensures that past excesses are not repeated and emerging democratic norms are not undermined. This tacit approval, albeit measured, underscores the military's enduring influence on Fiji’s political trajectory.

Challenges to Reforming the Constitution: Amendment Threshold, Elite-Dominated Reforms, and Public Disillusionment

As mentioned above, reforming Fiji’s 2013 Constitution poses significant challenges due to its stringent amendment requirements. Specifically, any amendment must first secure the support of 75 per cent of parliamentarians, followed by approval from 75 per cent of registered voters in a national referendum (Article 160), a requirement notably higher than in most other countries. While high thresholds aim to safeguard constitutions from frequent or partisan amendments, Fiji’s amendment formula creates considerable barriers even for widely supported reforms. Given the country’s current political environment, where divisions run deep and consensus is hard to reach, securing a double 75 per cent majority could prove insurmountable, especially on controversial issues such as executive power distribution and ethnic representation.

Past constitution-making experiences in Fiji have been elite-dominated to the exclusion of the public’s priorities.

Moreover, past constitution-making experiences in Fiji have been elite-dominated to the exclusion of the public’s priorities. The 1997 Constitution aimed to be more inclusive after the ethnically divisive 1990 Constitution, but it ultimately struggled to balance elite interests with public aspirations for more significant equity and representation. The 2013 Constitution was promulgated by the military regime under Bainimarama, bypassing the participatory process initiated by the 2012 Constitutional Commission, which had incorporated extensive community engagement. The Commission’s draft enjoyed broad-based support, but its abrupt rejection by the government led to public disillusionment and scepticism about the legitimacy of the final constitution.

Given this historical context, achieving broad-based support for new reform requires overcoming significant public apathy. Years of top-down constitution-making have left many Fijians sceptical about the potential impact of their participation, leading to widespread disengagement and a general sentiment that reforms may not address their needs. This public fatigue, combined with stringent amendment requirements, risks undermining the reform process from the outset.

Conclusion: Defining Fiji’s Democratic Future—Whose Vision?

Before embarking on technical steps in the reform agenda, it is essential to implement civic education initiatives, establish safeguards for public discourse, and clarify the guiding principles of the reform process. This foundational work is crucial to ensure that the reform reflects the collective vision of Fiji's diverse society. To move forward, the government must also ensure that any constitutional reform process is genuinely participatory rather than symbolic. This could involve structured consultations across all sectors of society, with particular emphasis on marginalised voices often excluded from political discourse. Robust civic education campaigns to prepare citizens for informed engagement, inclusive grassroots consultations, and digital tools to engage urban and diaspora populations are essential. Mechanisms like deliberative assemblies and stakeholder dialogues can also bring diverse perspectives into the process.

Revisiting the idea proposed in 2012 [...] of a National People's Assembly—could enhance the participatory nature of the current reform process . . .

Revisiting the idea proposed in 2012 by the Constitutional Commission under the leadership of Professor Yash Ghai—the establishment of a National People's Assembly—could enhance the participatory nature of the current reform process. Although not adopted in the 2013 Constitution, this Assembly, elected by the public and representative of Fijian society, could be a powerful tool in Fiji's constitutional reform process, allowing a broad cross-section of society to deliberate on fundamental issues such as governance, human rights, and the distribution of power. By fostering inclusive dialogue and debate, the Assembly could help build public buy-in, consensus, and legitimacy for the constitutional reform process. This approach aligns with democratic principles, ensuring the people have a direct voice in shaping their future.

Implementing robust safeguards against elite manipulation will also be crucial in convincing Fijians that the reform is intended for their benefit, not as a tool for political consolidation. To lessen ethnic tensions, reforms should focus on shared principles of equality and inclusivity while fostering reconciliation through dialogue and transparency. Regular updates on how public input shapes proposals will build trust and counter elite manipulation. A transparent, accountable, and inclusive approach will ensure reforms address democratic deficits and reflect Fiji’s diverse aspirations. By actively involving all communities, Fiji can create a constitution that embodies the nation’s collective vision for a more robust democracy.

Ultimately, the question of “Whose Vision?” remains central. Will this reform serve the interests of a few or embody the hopes of Fiji’s diverse communities? Only a process grounded in transparency, accountability, and broad-based engagement can produce a constitution that genuinely reflects the will of the people. As Fiji navigates this constitutional crossroads, the chosen pathway could define its democratic future—whether toward a unified vision that includes all or a missed opportunity that perpetuates old divides.

Romitesh Kant is a PhD candidate at the Australian National University, focusing on the intersections of masculinity, politics, and governance in Fiji. With nearly two decades of experience in civil society, academia, and research, he has worked extensively on issues of democracy, human rights, digital media, and public participation.

Mereoni Chung is a Fijian feminist with a focus on gender, environment, and development. She has over a decade of experience working with Fiji CSOs, supporting consultations, analysis, and advocacy on human rights, democracy, and Pacific development priorities.

♦ ♦ ♦ 

Suggested citation: Romitesh Kant and Mereoni Chung, ‘Whose Vision for Fiji? Constitutional Reform at a Crossroads’, ConstitutionNet, International IDEA, 5 December 2024, https://constitutionnet.org/voices/whose-vision-fiji-constitutional-reform-crossroads

Click here for updates on constitutional developments in Fiji.