Sitiveni Rabuka arrives for a parliament session last week. 7 March 2024 Photo: Parliament of the Republic of Fiji
A Fijian political commentator says the country is facing political overload, and any changes to the 2013 Constitution must not be rushed.
Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka won enough support in parliament last week to push through a bill for the second reading to amend the constitution.
Four independent opposition MPs backed the coalition government's bill, giving Rabuka the 75 percent support from parliament needed to proceed to the next stage of the process.
There were 41 MPs in favour of the bill, 13 against it, and one who did not vote.
According to the 2013 Constitution, section 160 states that a bill to amend the constitutional can be passed at the second and third readings if it gets the support of three-quarters of the members of parliament, among other things.
If the bill is passed at the third reading, then a referendum must be held, and the amendment needs to be supported by three-quaters of the total number of registered voters.
"The Constitution (Amendment) Bill 2025...seeks to amend the Constitution to allow for a feasible approach to amending the Constitution currently stated under section 160 of the Constitution. This would allow provisions to be updated and more so, a refinement of provisions that require public scrutiny and vote," the bill staes.
"The Bill also seeks the removal of the requirement for a referendum in the Constitution which is consistent with historical practice and precedent."
Distinguished Professor Steven Ratuva said Fiji is already facing political party fragmentation, a crisis in the judiciary, and a truth and reconciliation commission.
"This, on top of the recent Cabinet expansion, the government has taken on a mammoth task, which must involve widespread consultation," said Prof Ratuva, who is director of Macmillan Brown Centre for Pacific Studies at Canterbury University.
Read more:
"If it is too easy to change a constitution then its going to cause all kinds of volatility and can be used liberally by people in power who have enough support in parliament to do it.
"If it is too rigid, like it is now, then it can also cause instability in the future, because people start thinking around extra-legal means of changing it, like coups." he said.
Fiji has had four coups and four constitutions, formed in 1970, 1990, 1997, and 2013.
Prof Ratuva said the government had to take a measured approach to ensure change was not driven by political emotion or specific community interests.
"It has to be based on national interests in the long run, to ensure change brings unity.
"Sometimes constitutional amendments can be divisive, can isolate and marginalise particular groups in society."
Steven Ratuva Photo: RNZ Pacific / Lydia Lewis
Asked if the Rabuka government was pushing the bill for the right reasons, he said: "It's a mix of things. The last constitution was criticised for a lot of things, including the lack of consultation."
"It was quickly put together by the FijiFirst Party to serve their interests and naturally the response was to change it.
"The idea of amending the constitution started immediately after it came into being in 2013 and certainly after FijiFirst lost the last election."
"It was partly to do with the fact that it belonged to the old era, whatever was done by the previous government had to be changed," he said.
"Secondly, there were a lot of things which gave power to certain individuals, like the Attorney-General, and that needed to be addressed."
Rabuka has in the past raised the contentious issue of dropping the term "Fijian" for all non-iTaukei (indigenous) residents. However, in November last year, the prime minister said: "As far as Fiji is concerned, [Indo-Fijians] are Fijians."
"That has to be subject to consultation because it's critical in terms of identity," Prof Ratuva said, adding "particularly when Fiji is trying to build a community which is coherent and trying to address the issue of ethnic fragmentation, which has been party of the political reality in the past."
"Labels are very important; the communities themselves have to make sure that they are happy with them," he added.
