It is an ironic fact in Fiji, a multiethnic Pacific nation of under one million people, that coups don’t work and ultimately lead to constitutional reforms and democratic elections.

As Fiji goes to the polls this Wednesday, the choice is between choosing one former coup leader or another to govern Fiji for the next five years.

Both fought the same battle in 2018, and the incumbent Prime Minister Josaia Voreqe Bainimarama won in an election considered largely free and fair.

The two combatants are Prime Minister Bainimarama and his challenger Sitiveni Rabuka, a former prime minister.

Bainimarama staged a coup in 2006 when he was the commander of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces (RFMF), and after changing the constitution, he was elected as prime minister twice in 2014 and 2018 in national elections.

Rabuka, at the time a lieutenant colonel in the Fiji Military, staged two coups in 1987, claiming to reassert ethnic Fijian supremacy.

Following the adoption of a constitution in 1990 that guaranteed indigenous Fijian domination of the political system, he formed the Soqosoqo ni Vakavulewa ni Taukei (SVT) political party of indigenous Fijians and won two elections in 1992 and 1994 to become prime minister.

Rabuka lost power
Rabuka lost power at the 1999 election, and he was succeeded ironically by the Fijian Labour Party leader Mahendra Chaudhry who fought the elections on a nonethnic platform and became Fiji’s first Indo-Fijian Prime Minister.

A few months later, in May 2000, he was ousted by businessman George Speight with the help of rogue troops.

Significantly, Speight was not a soldier and was backed by only one faction of the army. He was sentenced to life imprisonment and remains in jail. Both Bainimarama and Rabuka were clever and powerful enough after their coups to ensure that Fiji’s constitution was rewritten to absolve them of any legal wrongdoing.

Fiji is a unique country where a Hindu Indian population known here as “Indo-Fijians” have established themselves as part and parcel of the country.

Their ancestors were brought to the islands as indentured labour by the British to work in the new sugar cane plantations. But now they have established themselves in the business sector and in politics, so much so that the economic czars of both political camps are Indo-Fijians.

The four coups of the 1980s and 1990s led to a massive out-migration of Indo-Fijians and their ratio of the population has now dropped from 50 per cent in 1987 to about 35 per cent. Ethnic tensions have in recent years diluted with the Bainimarama government’s “One Fiji” policy and the recognition of the role Indo-Fijians have played in building modern Fiji.

Though race politics is still in the background, Bainimarama and Rabuka are fighting the forthcoming elections on mainly an economic platform, with the incumbent government arguing that they have protected Fiji better than many other countries of its size from global economic currents of recent years.

Economic ‘volcano’
However, Rabuka’s opposition alliance is arguing that Fiji is in the grip of an economic volcano about to erupt.

The December 14 general election is being contested by 342 candidates from nine political parties. Bainimarama’s ruling FijiFirst Party (FFP) and Rabuka’s Peoples’ Alliance Party (PAP) will each contest 55 seats, while the National Federation Party (NFP) led by former University of the South Pacific’s economics professor Biman Prasad will field 54 candidates.

Rabuka and Prasad have formed a strong political alliance and have been campaigning together for months leading up to this election. If the PAP-NFP alliance wins, Prasad is expected to be Rabuka’s Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister.

Meanwhile, Bainimarama’s Deputy Prime Minister, Attorney-General and Minister for the Economy, Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum—an Indo-Fijian Muslim—has been accused of running the government for Bainimarama and expanding the influence of Indo-Fijian Muslims with money from Arabs at the expense of the Hindu Indo-Fijians.

Rabuka and Prasad have been campaigning across the country, asking the people to vote out the FijiFirst government to rid Fiji of the “damaging legacy of Voreqe Bainimarama and Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum”.

They are offering a “consultative government” and a democracy — as opposed to Sayed-Kahiyum’s “dictatorship”.

The message seems to have hit a chord, even though the Fiji economy has not been doing badly compared to many other countries, and Rabuka is strongly tipped to win a close election.

‘Unstoppable’, claims leader
“We are unstoppable all over the land,” Rabuka said at a recent election rally in Lautoka, an Indo-Fijian stronghold.

“We are ready to make history on December 14,” he added, “tell the people about our plans and keep emphasising that they are the centre of our mission.”

In an interview with Fiji Live, Professor Prasad revealed that if his party forms the next government with the PAP, Sitiveni Rabuka would be the Prime Minister, despite any party having more seats than the other after the election.

He confirmed that the two parties have decided that between the two of them, they will form the government, and that is the bottom line. Prasad is optimistic that they will win substantially more seats in this election and will be in a very strong position when they form the government with their partners, the PAP.

Something that is worrying Fijians is whether an unfavourable result for the government would trigger another coup. Bainimarama’s 2013 constitution has given the Fijian military constitutional rights to be its custodian:

“It shall be the overall role of the Republic of Fiji Military Forces to ensure at all times the security, defence and wellbeing of Fiji and all Fijians.”

It goes on to say the armed forces will perform its “Constitutional Role locally and also ready to tackle the modern-day security challenges brought about by Climate Change, Radicalism and Transnational Crime”.

Honouring democracy
In an address on December 5, the RFMF commander, Major-General Jone Kalouniwai, ordered his soldiers to honour the democratic process by respecting the outcome of the votes in the 2022 general election. This comment has been widely welcomed across the political spectrum.

Fiji Labour Party Leader Mahendra Chaudhry says the statement by Major-General Kalouniwai is reassuring for the party.

He told Fiji Broadcasting Corporation that FLP was twice robbed of its mandate to govern by coups executed or supported by the military.

People’s Alliance deputy party leader Manoa Kamikamica said: “Major-General Ro Jone Kalouniwai has voiced what the bulk of Fiji want to hear — which is, we wait for the ballot box to decide.”

Professor Prasad said: “That’s an absolutely fantastic statement from the commander, and I want to thank him because everybody who believes in democracy, who believes in good governance, who believes in a free and fair election, will respect the outcome of the election.”

In a commentary published by the Fiji Times, Professor Wadan Narsey, a senior economist and political analyst in Fiji, expressed some views that reflective many of the voters, which may ultimately tip the scales of who governs after next week.

He argues that under the 2013 Constitution, the government has been able to stifle freedom of expression by the public and the media, with a large section of the taxpayer-funded public media being brought under the control of the government, effectively acting as government propaganda and to attack opposition parties and MPs.

Proper dialogue promised
“There were no such restrictions or control in the Rabuka government era, and these are unlikely to happen in the Rabuka/Prasad era,” argues Professor Narsey.

He points out that “in his recent public statements, Rabuka has promised to govern through discussion, dialogue, proper debate and compromise when necessary”.

He points out that the views of the people are not respected, even though Fiji is functioning under a “democracy”.

The government has arrested those who express views that the government does not like.

Pointing out to the MOU between PAP and NFF, Professor Narsey believes “they would not rule by fear or imposition of two men’s views on the whole country.

“They would focus on providing good health services, education, water and infrastructure like roads and electricity, which have all been failures under the current government, despite massive expenditures using borrowed money”.

“Whether it is a yearning for improvements to infrastructure, construction and allocation of school quarters, assistance to construct a bridge, issues on education, or discussions over manifestos, it is encouraging to note that many Fijians are actually making an effort to be part of the voting process,” The Fiji Times noted in an editorial last week.

“Now, as we look ahead to next Wednesday, there is a sense of ownership in the air. There appears to be a willingness to cast a ballot. There is a willingness to be part of the process,” The Fiji Times added.

Ravindra Singh Prasad is a correspondent of InDepth News (IDN), the flagship agency of the International Press Syndicate. This article is republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Addressing the training development deficit in the Fiji media industry can stem journalist attrition and improve coverage of election reporting in the country, says University of the South Pacific journalism coordinator Dr Shailendra Singh.

Speaking during last week’s launch of the National Media Reporting of the 2018 Fijian General Elections study in Suva, Dr Singh said media watch groups regarded Fiji’s controversial media law as having a “chilling effect on journalism” and “fostered a culture of media self-censorship”.

Dr Singh, who co-authored the report with Dialogue Fiji executive director Nilesh Lal, said scrapping or reforming the 2010 Media Industry Development Authority Act was crucial to “professionalising journalism”.

“The Act does nothing for training and development or journalist attrition. In fact, the Act may have exacerbated attrition,” he said.

This situation, Dr Singh said, highlighted the importance of training and development and staff retention, which were longstanding structural problems in Fiji and Pacific media.

“This underlines the role of financial viability and newsroom professional capacity in news coverage.”

He said two core media responsibilities in elections were creating a level playing field and acting as a public watchdog.

“It seems doubtful that these functions were adequately fulfilled by all media during reporting of the 2018 Fijian general elections.”

Advertising spread
Dr Singh said the research also recommended the even distribution of state advertising among media organisations as well as the allocation of public service broadcasting grants fairly among broadcasters to minimise financial incentives to report overly positively on any government.

According to the report, the FijiFirst Party received the most media coverage during the 2018 Fiji general elections and this was expected given its ruling party status.

However, variance in coverage tone and quantity appeared too high.

“The largely positive coverage of the ruling FijiFirst party could be deemed irregular. It questions certain media’s ability to hold power to account,” Dr Singh said.

“Under a stronger watchdog mandate, ruling parties face greater scrutiny, especially in election time. Instead, media coverage put challenger parties more on the defensive which is curious.”

He said challenger parties were forced to respond to allegations in news stories and were grilled more than the incumbent during debates.

“It should be other way around. In such situations the natural conclusion is journalist bias but only to a certain extent,” he said.

Direct political alignment
While the report found that certain media outlets in Fiji seemed to privilege some political parties and issues over others, distinguished political sociologist and Pacific scholar Professor Steven Ratuva said this could be due to several reasons such as direct political and ideological alignment of the media company to a political party or conscious and subconscious bias of journalists and editors.

“Bias is part of human consciousness and sometimes it is explicit and sometimes it is implicit and unconscious. This deeper sociological exploration is beyond the mandate of this report,” Professor Ratuva said in the foreword to the report.

“Election stories sell, especially when spiced with intrigue, scandals, mysteries, conspiracies and warring narratives.

“The more sensational the story the more sellable it is. The media can feed into election frenzies, inflame passion and at times encourage boisterous political behaviour and prejudice which can be socially destructive.

“The media can also be used as a means of sensible, intellectual and calm engagement to enlighten the ignorant and unite people across cultures, religions and political ideologies.”

He said keeping an eye on what the media did required an open, analytical and independent approach and this was what the report attempted to do.

Research findings
The research found that after FijiFirst, the larger and more established opposition parties SODELPA and NFP, were next in terms of the quantity of coverage, but were more likely to receive a lesser amount of positive coverage and at times found themselves on the defensive in responding to FijiFirst allegations, rather than being principles in the stories.

The smaller, newer parties had to content themselves with marginal news attention and this was generally consistent across four of the five national media that were surveyed — the Fiji Sun, FBC (TV and radio), Fiji Television Limited and Fiji Village.

“The only exception was The Fiji Times, whose coverage could be deemed to be comparatively less approving of the ruling party and also less critical of the challenger parties,” the report found.

“Besides comparatively extensive and favourable coverage in the Fiji Sun, FijiFirst made more appearances on the major national television stations, FBC and Fiji One, as well as on the CFL radio stations and news website.”

The report noted that even in special information programmes where news media allowed candidates extended time/space to have their say, the FijiFirst representatives enjoyed a distinct advantage over their opposition counterparts in the two national debates, with regards to the number of questions asked, the nature of the questions, and the opportunity to respond.

“When the two major opposition parties were in the media, it was often in order to respond to allegations by the ruling party, or to defend themselves against negative questions,” the report noted.

“The results could explain why the government accuses The Fiji Times of anti-government bias, and the opposition blame the Fiji Sun and FBC TV of favouring the government.”

However, there were other factors other than media/journalist bias that could be attributed to the lack of critical reporting.

“These could range from the news organisation’s and/or newsroom’s partiality towards the ruling party politicians and its policies. The reporting could also be affected by the inexperience in the national journalists corps to report the elections in a critical manner.”

This observation, the report highlighted, was supported by “issues balance” results indicating that key national issues, such as the economy, were understated.

The focus was instead on election processes, procedures and conduct. Another factor in the reporting could be news media’s financial links to the government.

Election reporting
As Fiji prepares for its next general election, Dialogue Fiji’s Nilesh Lal said it was important to put the spotlight on factors that impinged on an even electoral playing field.

“Given the importance of news media in disseminating electoral information and shaping public opinion, it can profoundly influence electoral outcomes, and therefore needs to come under scrutiny,” he said.

“There may also be imperatives to consider safeguards against the negative impacts of unequal coverage of electoral contestants through legislating as other countries, like the US, for instance, have done.

“Alternatively, media organisations can self-regulate by instituting internal guidelines for election reporting. A good example is the BBC’s Guidelines on election coverage. Another alternate could be the formation of an independent commission/committee made up of media organisation representatives and political parties representatives that can set rules and quotas for election coverage.

“For example, in the UK, a committee of broadcasters and political parties reviews the formula for allocation of broadcasting time, at every election.”

Lal said the purpose of the report was not to accuse any media organisation of having biases but rather to show that inequitable coverage of electoral contestants was a problem in Fiji that required redress at some level if “we are sincere about improving the quality of democracy in Fiji”.

He said the co-authors hoped the report would initiate some much-needed public discourse on the issue of equitable coverage of elections by media organisations.

Wansolwara is the student journalist newspaper of the University of the South Pacific. It collaborates with Asia Pacific Report, which prioritises student journalism.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz