CCF Submission Trying to Please All But One

Review and Opinion by Crosbie Walsh
The Citizens' Constitution Forum submission to the Constitution Commission in Levuka last week could be striving a little too hard to achieve a general consensus at the expense of forfeiting once-in-a-lifetime opportunities for change.

The preamble and general principles will, I think, be accepted by all fair-minded people in Fiji— respect for differences, social justice, protection of NGOs, affirmative action based on needs,  a bill of rights, and leadership code of ethics, and decisions by dialogue and consensus.

Electoral reform
The document is forward-looking in its support to call all citizens Fijians, and for electoral reform that
includes proportional representation,1 open list seats, fewer electorates (the four divisions and the overseas diaspora), a voting age of 18 years, a smaller 51 seat parliament, and political parties that must  be open, inclusive, reflect diversity and promote national integration.

In addressing the issue of accountability, they recommended the establishment of a Constitution Office or Commission to appoint, terminate or discipline public servants such as the Ombudsman, the Attorney-General, Director of Public Prosecutions, Public Service Commission, Military Commander, Commission of Police, and the Governor of the Reserve Bank.

The Commission would be appointed by the PM, Leader of the Opposition, the Speaker, Chief Justice and Ombudsman (when his position is not involved). I could find no reference to who appoints the Chief Justice.

The judiciary would be appointed by a resurrected Independent Judicial and Legal Services Commission comprising the Chief Justice, the Ombudsman, legal professionals, and Chairman of the Public Services Commission.

The powers of the  Ombudsman were to be greatly extended with unspecified powers over the legislature and executive, a re-appointment Human Rights Commission and, I think, the Electoral Commission. Who appoints the Ombudsman and Electoral Commission was not clear but I assume it would be the new Constitution Commission.

Other issues
On other issues they wanted:
  • An elected President2 but they did not say who elects, or what his powers would be other than dissolving parliament in unspecified circumstances;
  • A Senate3 of 25 members but they said nothing of its functions, or how it was to be elected;
  • A Great Council of Chiefs that played no part in national politics, but they left "the back door" open by saying it could have a national advisory role and could continue to be active in provincial councils.

Here again, other than reducing the direct power of the Great Council of Chiefs, there is little change from 1997.

The role of the military
Finally on the Catch 22 question, what to do with the military, the CCF is unequivocal. It should be
accountable to civilian institutions "such as the legislature"; its size should be appropriate to "Fiji’s
national security requirements"; recruitment and appointment must be on merit; there needs to be a review of the roles of the military, police and corrections service; and, most importantly, the Immunity clause for "coup perpetrators should be revoked".

In other words, there is to be no role for the military in the Constitution dialogue process from this point onwards and no special role for the military in the governance of Fiji, not even on critical civilian appointments, a seat in Senate or in the Great Council of Chiefs.  Understandable perhaps, given the total insensitivity of the the military even towards its former friends in recent months, but not very realistic (even the Great Council of Chiefs is assured a greater role), and  historically a little unfair.

But what if?
If there had been no military coup in 2006, the CCF would not have been in Levuka last week for there is nothing to indicate that without the military intervention of  2006 Fiji would have become anything other than the unfair, unjust and undemocratic country it was. There were parliamentary advocates of change towards a more inclusive and representative democracy or moves towards change.

 Before the Coup here were  no SDL whispers of amending the 1997 constitution as urged ten years earlier by the Reeves Commission; no talk by the SDL or a frightened FLP of affirmative action for all; no concerted efforts to renew leases, increase agricultural production and sustainable development (the FLP mentioned it in 1999 and was out of office less than a year later); no attempts to rout out corruption (that even the Fiji Times said was rampant under the SDL government); no mention of seeing ordinary iTaukei receive a just share of land rents; no forthright attacks on the divisive, religious extremism and racism of some politicians and religious leaders; a little talk, but absolutely no action on tolerance, equality and national unity.

Surely, the Bainimarama government must have done some good over the past six years and deserves some place in shaping Fiji's future, at least until 2014.

And the final irony?  The CCF is advancing  recommendations that for the most part will find support from the old racially-elected parties and the Great Council of Chiefs: the very people it condemned prior to December 2006, and condemning those who sought change, and be opposed by the Government that launched the People's Charter, also unmentioned by the CCF.

If all does not go well
The CCF is "putting all its money" on a new electoral system that if all goes well should  return a truly representative government and opposition, and on administrative checks and balances.

But if all  does not go well —if the military insists on some role in Fiji's future, or if too many of the old politicians, political parties and lawyers put in a reappearance; if there has been insufficient change in the mentalities that allowed corruption and abuse of office to flourish; or if it takes a while to get used to the new system —they may well wish they had recommended more powers for the President and the ongoing participation of the military in some role acceptable within the new Constitution.


1. CCF prefers Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) representation which it claims "assures proper representation for any group to be represented in parliament." This would presumably involve voters having two votes, one for their constituency, the other for one (or more) candidate on open lists supplied by the political parties.
2.  No mention is made of the position of Vice-President.

3. Senate could be an assembly of representative experts with authority to receive public petitions, advise Government, and defer certain legislation for further parliamentary consideration. Membership could comprise two representatives each from  designated sections of society, for example, the professions, educationalists, lawyers, trade unions, employers' associations, religious organizations, ethnic minorities, women, youth, and the disabled, preferably elected or nominated by them from among  their membership.. The disciplined forces (military, police, correction services) could also each have two members, and certain officers or their nominees (for example, the PM, Leader of the Opposition Senate, Ombudsman)  could be ex officio members. Senate could meet for one or two days six times a year when parliament is sitting. Senators could be paid a sitting fee and expenses.  .


Better future possible said…
Dear Croz,

...or maybe they (like many of us) beleive the Military should in fact step aside. Just because their presence in everyday life has been a reality for the past five years does not mean we should aspire to it continuing. Every one know Frank will not give up power easily. There is much talk of delayed elections in Fiji already. Unless he is certain he can win and the constitution has him in the clear and the military still above the law most beleive Frank will let it happen. However we should not just accept this. If we all roll over then that will become the new norm. Good on the Reverend for making hard calls. I remember a smiling picture on your site a while back. I assume you do repsect him as one of the reasoned voices in Fiji ?

“Surely, the Bainimarama government must have done some good over the past six years and deserves some place in shaping Fiji's future, at least until 2014.”

It has done a lot more harm than good so really yhe sooner it has nothing to do with the decision making of this country would be better.

It is also deeply corrupt. Can you give me one good reason why Minister’s pay has to go through Nur Bano Ali and not theough the ministry of finance as it has always done in the past

Why will the prime minister not reveal ministers salaries? They were all on public record before and he tells us he is big on transparency so why keep it a secret?

Come on Croz answer those questions and you might regain a little credibility.

Or have you become a paid lackey of the regime like your fellow blogger Davis?
Anonymous said…
Sorry Croz but cementing the military's power once and for is not the sort of once in a lifetime opportunity I am looking at. It's the one thing we really need to be firm on. No military in public office, no special powers, no more 'military above the law'. If we get them out we have a good chance of a future without coups and that has to be good for Fiji.

As to their achievements after 6 years ? Let's rebook at their promises...
1. Sugar industry no
2. Economic no, still recovering from negative tears post coup
3. Accountability....only to the military
Gutter Press said…
Crosbie, I’m not sure what you mean when you write the CCF ‘could be striving a little too hard to achieve a general consensus at the expense of forfeiting once-in-a-lifetime opportunities for change.’ You appear to be disparaging of CCF’s attempt to tread the middle ground.

Democracy is pretty much defined as ‘general consensus’ so it’s imperative that our constitution, the document which underscores Fiji’s democracy is, itself, one which is as widely accepted as possible. Hopefully it will be a compromise between many different points of view, save one - the dictatorial.

You make several other points, the gist of which seems to be that the military’s not all bad and some (even much) good has come out of having it control Fiji, therefore why should the military be denied a say in the constitution?

As an organisation, the FMF must remain subservient to its civilian masters. For this to be achieved it should not be allowed to have any say or constitutional role whatsoever – save to be solely at the beck and call of the government of the day. For the avoidance of doubt no ‘doctrine of necessity’ clause should be allowed in the constitution.

Individuals in the military can, and should, be allowed to give their suggestions to the constitutional committee as citizens of Fiji. But whatever gave you the idea that the best way forward to a coup-free future is for Fijians to accede to the ‘right’ of the military to be heard? I believe that doing so will be the quickest way towards the next coup.
Use by date said…
The FMF is a bit like you. It has reached its used by date. Under the poor leadership of Bainimarama its reputation is destroyed. It has nothing to offer the future of the nation of fiji.
No more coups said…
The only way to stop coups is to hold people accountables for coups. frank was right in insisting George and friends not be released but he can't then expect not to face the law himself. Whatever the promises he conducted a coup just like those before him. If he does not face the music others will conduct coups in the future - that much we can be certain of.
Hold Them Accountable said…
CCF is not pushing hard enough. The only language a military dictatorship understands is a very tough stand. See what happens with the Essential Industries' Decree? Only the tough position of Anthony and the unions have the dictator running for cover. We will get absolutely nothing with anticipating obedience. We will gain everything with an unrelenting tough stand against a human rights abusing regime.

Popular posts from this blog

Fijian Holdings Scandal: Betrayal by their trusted sons

Lessons from Africa

The Ratu Tevita Saga, Coup4.5, Michael Field, the ANU Duo, and Tonga