“You want a friend in Washington? Get a dog.” Although made in an American context, this observation by President Harry S. Truman has universal appeal.

It highlights the unpredictable and treacherous nature of politics, whether it’s the chameleon-like antics of politicians or the fickleness of voters. The precariousness of politics was felt most acutely in Suva as recently as October 2025.

Few anticipated that two of Fiji’s three deputy prime ministers, elected with much fanfare in December 2022, would be forced to resign over allegations of failure of ministerial integrity.

The Fiji Independent Commission Against Corruption (FICAC) is an autonomous body, at least constitutionally, but Dr Biman Prasad and Manoa Kamikamica’s indictments still sparked speculation about political conspiracies and high-level skulduggery.

This political earthquake was far removed from the euphoria of the People’s Alliance Coalition election victory over the FijiFirst government — on the promise of a fresh start.

Led by Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka, the People’s Alliance Party’s partnership with the National Federation Party and the Social Democratic Liberal Party secured electoral victory on a show of unity and a set of vote-winning pledges: cost-of-living relief, curbing government wastage and greater media freedom.

Restoring media freedom was relatively straightforward, perhaps because it was cost-free, and it was implemented almost immediately through the repeal of the draconian Media Industry Development Act.

Other pledges more difficult
Other pledges — such as addressing the national debt and the budget deficit — proved far more difficult, in part because of global economic conditions, as did the challenge of resisting the urge to increase parliamentary salaries, which went up by 130–138 percent.

Additional benefits were thrown in for good measure: tax-free vehicle purchases for cabinet ministers, increased overseas travel allowances for the prime minister and president, and non-taxable duty allowances, business-class travel, and enhanced life insurance coverage for MPs.

In comparison to other jurisdictions, the salary increases may not, in themselves, be unreasonable. The core problem, as noted by some observers, is that Parliament should not be determining its own benefits.

The approval of the benefits also stunned many because of the Coalition’s longstanding criticism of FijiFirst over pay levels, and its pre-election pledges to slash them.

Moreover, there were questions of affordability given Fiji’s ballooning debt and deficit situation, which the Coalition had pledged to address as part of its plan to eliminate what it considered were the excesses of the previous FijiFirst government.

Increasing parliamentary benefits seemed an odd way of honouring those commitments.

There is also the question of whether taxpayers are getting what they are paying for. But perhaps the increase in benefits should not have been entirely surprising, since such outcomes are often consistent with the realities of politics in Fiji, and elsewhere.

Lying could cost politicians
So much so that Wales, for example, is considering becoming the world’s first country to introduce laws that would mean politicians could lose their jobs for deliberate lying during election campaigns.

Fijian voters, who may be disillusioned, are not entirely powerless. With elections scheduled for next year, they may well turn the tables on their representatives by springing a few surprises of their own at the ballot box.

Governance, after all, is a shared responsibility between the government and the governed. Voters usually get the government they vote for, and recent experiences would be a reminder of the importance of informed participation in politics, and the prudent use of voting power.

Especially when, as a nation, Fiji has a long and arguably worsening experience with unfulfilled or broken promises, whether by politicians or coup leaders.

Fiji’s coup culture and its fallout are a reminder of the saying, “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”

The 1987 and 2000 coups were carried out by political and military elites claiming to represent indigenous iTaukei interests, while the 2006 coup was justified on the grounds of good governance, equality and national unity.

It is safe to assume that none of these utopian promises have fully materialised. The country appears more divided than ever, and too many people still remain trapped in poverty.

Costs of elite power struggles
According to World Bank estimates, of the roughly 258,000 people (29.9 percent) in poverty, about 75 percent are iTaukei, which underscores how ordinary communities bear the costs of elite power struggles rather than benefit from them.

Coup instigators’ rhetoric is one thing, but what is more troubling is that our elected leaders increasingly seem unbothered by going back on their word — even by their own low standards of keeping election promises.

Granted, structural pressures typical of a young, transitional democracy like Fiji can make reforms around debt and budget deficits quite complex and difficult to achieve.

However, successive governments are failing even when it comes to basic good governance policies and practices, which are often the pillars of sustainable development.

As part of its self-proclaimed “clean-up campaign”, the ousted FijiFirst government promised many things, including merit-based appointments to boards and other government positions.

Instead, appointments were frequently made on the basis of offspring, as at the Fiji Sports Council; siblings, as at the Fiji Broadcasting Corporation; and in-laws and cronies in various other institutions.

This was rightly criticised ad nauseam by the Coalition when in opposition, with the promise to address it once in power. But has the Coalition honoured its word, or are we just seeing more of the same?

Disproportionately marginalised
Some observers have argued that under the FijiFirst Government, appointments made in the name of merit had disproportionately marginalised iTaukei representation in certain areas.

Against this backdrop, the Coalition’s approach to appointments has been described by some as a form of “rebalancing” by prioritising iTaukei candidates.

The concern now being raised is whether the pendulum may have swung too far in the other direction, and whether appointments continue to be made largely based on family ties, clanship, kinship and friendship.

These questions are not just about due process: appointments to key positions also shape the country’s long-term progress and development. In this context, merit should not become an afterthought, nor should appointments result in any form of blatant exclusion, as both can undermine confidence in the system, with the risk of exacerbating Fiji’s brain drain dilemma across all ethnicities, including among qualified iTaukei.

This possibility was obliquely raised recently by none other than the Chair of the Great Council of Chiefs (GCC), Ratu Viliame Seruvakula, who stated that Fiji needed other races to progress.

“If every other race left Fiji, we’d be doing exactly what we were doing to cause more pain to the country,” he said.

As Truman noted, politics can be a dirty game. To make politics cleaner, politicians must be accountable, with a longer-term vision for the country.

Punishing at the polls
One way to make politicians take voters seriously is to punish them at the polls if they fail to keep their promises.

This is the path to a healthier, performance-based political system that facilitates development — driven by the fear of and respect for the voter’s power. This depends not only on politicians, but also on an engaged, ethical and informed electorate that votes on issues, rather than on the basis of race, religion, party or personality.

As the country entered 2026, Prime Minister Rabuka offered a welcoming and constructive New Year’s message, emphasising teamwork, unity and inclusiveness: “Fijians must work together with faith, hope, and shared responsibility to overcome challenges and build a stronger, united nation.”

The Prime Minister reminded the country that the Coalition government was elected on a “promise of integrity, inclusion and reform”. Since these virtues were the Coalition’s mantra and its winning formula in the 2022 elections, the government would do well to apply this thinking consistently in its day-to-day decisions and long-term vision for the country.

The bottom line, as alluded to by the GCC chair, is that indigenous leadership now plays a central role in shaping Fiji’s political direction. With that power comes a duty to build a country that works for future generations of iTaukei while also ensuring that ethnic minorities continue to feel included and valued as equal stakeholders in a shared future.

Shailendra B. Singh is associate professor of Pacific journalism at The University of the South Pacific, based in Suva, Fiji, and a member of the advisory board of the Pacific Media. This article appeared first on Devpolicy Blog, from the Development Policy Centre at The Australian National University.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The deposed Prime Minister, Mahendra Chaudhry, says Speight’s motive had less to do with indigenous rights and a lot more to do with power, greed, and access to the millions likely to accrue from Fiji’s mahogany plantation.

On this day 25 years ago, the elected government was held hostage at the barrel of the gun, the Parliament complex started filling up with rebels supporting the takeover, Suva City and other areas in Fiji were looted and burnt, and innocent people were attacked just because of their race.

Chaudhry said indigenous emotions were “deliberately ignited to beat up support for the treasonous actions of the terrorists”.

He said the coup threw the nation into chaos from which it had not fully recovered even to this day.

Chaudhry said using George Speight as a frontman, the “real perpetrators” of the coup, assisted by a group of armed rebels from the Republic of Fiji Military Forces (RFMF), held Chaudhry and members of his government hostage for 56 days as they plundered, looted and terrorised the Indo-Fijian community in various parts of the country.

The Fiji Labour Party leader said that, as with current Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka, who led the first two coups in 1987, so with Speight in May 2000, that the given reason for the treason and the mayhem that followed was to “protect the rights and interests of the indigenous community”.

Chaudhry said today that it was widely acknowledged that the rights of the indigenous community was not endangered either in 1987 or in 2000.

He added that they were simply used to pursue personal and political agendas.

The FLP leader said those who benefitted were the elite in Fijian society, not ordinary people.

Chaudhry said this was obvious from current statistics which showed that currently the iTaukei surveyed made up 75 percent of those living in poverty.

He said poverty reports in the early 1990s showed practically a balance in the number of Fijians and Indo-Fijians living in poverty.

The former prime minister says it was obvious that the coups had done nothing to improve the quality of life of the ordinary indigenous iTaukei.

Instead, he said the coups had had a devastating impact on the entire socio-economic fabric of Fiji’s society, putting the nation decades behind in terms of development.

Chaudhry said the sorry state of Fiji today — “the suffering of our people and continued high rate of poverty, deteriorating health and education services, the failing infrastructure and weakened state of our economy” — were all indicators of how post-coup governments had failed to deliver on the expectations of the people.

He said: “It is time for us to rise above discredited notions of racism and fundamentalism and embrace progressive, liberal thinking.”

Chaudhry added that leaders needed to be judged on their vision and performance and not on their colour and creed.

Republished with permission from FijiVillage News.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Chiefs are to serve people and not to be served, Fiji President Ratu Wiliame Katonivere told the Great Council of Chiefs (GCC) on Bau Island in Fiji today.

The Council — regarded as the apex of traditional Fijian leadership and also accused of being a racist institution — was discarded by former prime minister Voreqe Bainimarama following his 2006 military coup.

Today, 16 years since it was removed, the Great Council is returning under Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka’s coalition government.

Ratu Wiliame Katonivere said the Great Council was now challenged more than ever in their decision making as traditional leaders to safeguard, collaborate and promote inclusivity in the dynamics of an evolving Fiji.

He said the Turaga Tui Macuata urged chiefs to stand to together in unity in their service, while expecting challenges and changes.

Ratu Wiliame said the chiefs met in a new dawn and they needed to welcome those who made up Fiji’s multicultural society and have made Fiji their home.

“We are chiefs in our own right — we have subjects, we are inheritors of our land, sea, and its flora and fauna,” Ratu Wiliame said.

‘Unifying vision’
“As we meet, we bring with us the hopes and the needs of our people and our land that depend on our vision in unifying our wise deliberations that shall lead to inclusive decisions that encompasses all that we treasure as a people and a nation.”

“As it reconvenes, the GCC must focus on two principles, firstly, we need to be conscious of the existence of those who will challenge the status quo; and secondly, to encourage our people to work together for our advancement as a people, where no one is left behind,” he said.

Ratu Wiliame said the reinstatment of the Great Council was happening at a critical stage in Fiji’s development and the challenge was for the chiefs to stand up and be counted by playing their roles that they were born into, reminding them of the words of the late Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna that being a chief was not an ornament.

“The title of chief is not an ornament. An ornament is adorned to be marveled and admired, or as fashionable wear, rather as chiefs we are bound by duty and responsibility that require our intentional and undivided attention,” he said.

With this new beginning, it was “paramount that we reflect on our traditional ties with one another as iTaukei, to the government of the day and to the church.”

He said it was crucial that the reconvened Great Council of Chiefs delivered on the very purpose with which it was initially established, for the preservation of the iTaukei land, marine and natural ecosystem, guided by relevant legislation.

“The Great Council of Chiefs is duty-bound to safeguard, defend, liberate all-encompassing matters of all Fijians respecting the rule of law,” Ratu Williame said.

Ratu Sukuna’s legacy
Speaking to the gathering on Bau Island, Ratu Wiliame also referred to the late Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna.

“He was predestined for leadership that included military training and he was awarded the Croix de Guerre for his gallant role in World War I under the French Foreign Legion.

“The preordained life of Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna became the gateway to his life of servitude to his people, the land and the crown.”

He said these were traits that the late Ratu Sir Lala Sukuna was renowned for, a visionary, decisive and intellectual leader that was indicative only of a leader who was divinely anointed.

Ratu Sukuna was Fiji’s older statesman and he helped in setting up iTaukei leadership and land systems.

New vision and mission
Ratu Wiliame said it was therefore crucial that the Great Council of Chiefs establish and build on its previous accomplishments and embark on a new vision and mission to be able to better navigate the new changes and developments as we chart our way forward.

He said their role as leaders remained to be the fiercest defender of Fiji’s natural resources both on land and at sea, particularly with protecting their frontier from the current effects and impact of climate change.

He also called on chiefs to remember their role equally lay in encouraging iTaukei and people to contribute to growing the economy and to promote economic empowerment and stability to better enhance their livelihoods.

“Should we want a better Fiji, it is pertinent that our younger generations are groomed in iTaukei protocol, leadership and all mannerism befitting a servant leader,” he said.

“The Great Council of Chiefs is now challenged more than ever in our decision making as traditional leaders to safeguard, collaborate and promote inclusivity in the dynamics of our evolving Fiji.”

Ratu Wiliame acknowledged the Turaga na Vunivalu na Tui Kaba, Ratu Epenisa Cakobau for inviting the Great Council to be held on Bau Island.

Ratu Epenisa is the paramount chief of Fiji in his traditional title as the high chief of the Kubuna Confederacy.

Forgiveness
The opening ceremony also saw the seeking of forgiveness from government and the Christian churches in Fiji for past events that had caused splits within the Great Council and Fiji as a nation.

The government’s traditional apology, or matanigasau, was presented by Apimeleki Tola, Acting Commissioner of the Native Lands Commission and was accepted by the Marama Bale Na Roko Tui Dreketi, Ro Teimumu Kepa, the traditional head of the Burebasaga confederacy.

Tola asked the chiefs to forgive the past government and its decision to de-establish the Great Council and also asked for their blessings and support in the work that government is doing for the people of Fiji.

Ro Teimumu accepted on behalf of the chiefs and urged government and civil servants to continue their service to the people of Fiji.

Two other apologies were presented and accepted.

The first was from the government to the church and religious leaders and the second from the religious leaders to the chiefs of Fiji.

The official opening ceremony was preceded by a church service conducted by the president of the Methodist Church in Fiji and Rotuma and full traditional Fijian ceremony of welcome.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Concerns are being raised about the future survival of the iTaukei (Fijian) language as a threat of extinction looms despite its everyday use among its people.

A language and culture scholar in Fiji, Dr Paul Geraghty, said a growing generational gap within the iTaukei language had been detected and caused concern.

Dr Geraghty said the extent of knowledge of iTaukei vocabulary and its diversity through the different dialects had reduced significantly over the years.

“Young people of today, especially in urban areas, do not speak as well as their parents or grandparents. They don’t have the same vocabulary knowledge, so that is something to be concerned about,” he said.

“People are losing their distinctiveness. The language is becoming what I would call standard Fijian or Fijian of the urban centres.”

Dr Geraghty added that the loss of richness within the iTaukei language was rooted in Fiji’s long colonial history.

“The peculiar colonial history that we have is to a large extent to blame not only for the loss of indigenous languages in Fiji or the reduction of the knowledge of Fijian language but also perceptions are an essential thing.”

New Zealand’s influence on Fijian education
Dr Geraghty explained that until 1930 all education was in the vernacular, either iTaukei, Hindi (Fiji’s second largest spoken language) or Rotuman, until it was no longer sustainable and colonial law makers began to look to the region for assistance.

“The New Zealand government began teaching in Fiji, and its education system was not inclusive towards teaching Māori, which is not the case today. But that culture was brought across to Fiji and children were punished for speaking in their native languages.”

The lasting impacts of this event were still actively practised in Fiji, added Dr Geraghty.

“We look up to English as a superior language and make jokes about people who don’t speak English well. That is not funny — English people don’t make jokes about people who can’t speak French. The most important thing in a child’s education is learning to speak their language well.”

Dr Geraghty has advocated the importance of incorporating native language into the education system as a scholar of language.

History has always been a leading guide to the future, and learning not to repeat the past, is what linguists advise.

Importance of sustaining iTaukei language
Dr Geraghty said that multilingualism was vital for a child’s education as it stimulated the mind and opened many other possibilities.

“Bilingualism and multilingualism — speaking two or more languages should be encouraged as it will increase the beauty of diversity in the world and our knowledge of this world and our position in it.”

A call for the Fijian Ministry of Education to act now and implement the compulsory learning of iTaukei and Hindi in schools was paramount.

Dr Geraghty added while the Fijian government and universities had started incorporating vernacular into the curriculum, more needed to be done.

Fijian Language Week celebration

The Fijian community has launched a week-long celebration of the Fijian language, traditions and culture with events across Aotearoa.

The Minister for Pacific Peoples, Aupito William Sio, marked Macawa ni Vosa Vakaviti — Fijian Language Week, welcoming this year’s theme of nurture, preserve and sustain the Fijian language.

Aupito acknowledged the enduring strength and sustainability of Vosa Vakaviti and its importance as the Fijian community navigated its recovery from the covid-19 pandemic.

“Fiji has been hit hard by the covid-19 pandemic and climate change’s ever-increasing impacts,” he said.

“Yet, while it faces a road to recovery, the Fijian people can always rely on their language, traditions and values to sustain them.

“Now more than ever, the Fiji language, culture, and identity is important to uphold both in Aotearoa and Fiji.”

Aupito said the Fijian community in Aotearoa, New Zealand, should be applauded for their tireless efforts in advocating for and strengthening Vosa Vakaviti.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Nadroga Navosa paramount chief Na Ka Levu Ratu Tevita Nabekwahiga Makutu says his province will not take part in the “disrespectful” land bill public consultations carried out by Fiji government.

In a letter addressed to Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama, Ratu Tevita explained the province’s exemption from the consultations following the passing of the Bill in Parliament last month.

“Sir, you are fully aware of the position of the vanua on the new amendment to the iTaukei Lands Trust Act,” he stated in the letter.

“It is disconcerting to learn that after the law has been amended, your ministry and the iTaukei Land Trust Board officials saw fit and proper to do awareness in the province to the very people who should have been consulted in the very first place.

“This demonstrates a gross disrespect to the dignity of the landowners or the iTaukei community in general.

“The action of your government undermines the trust of the landowning units (LOUs) vested to the board for the efficient and effective administration of iTaukei land.”

He said the vanua must be recognised and respected.

Vanua served faithfully
“History will reveal that the vanua has faithfully and diligently served its functions and purposes for socio-economic development of the nation.

“The government cannot operate in isolation or with a sense of distrust with people who have elected them to Parliament.

“We are the true voices of the people of Fiji, must and should be, consulted on pertinent matters relating to our land.”

Questions sent to the permanent secretary for the Office of the Prime Minister, Yogesh Karan, remained unanswered when this edition of The Fiji Times went to press.

Repeka Nasiko is a Fiji Times reporter. This article is republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

The frequent detention and questioning of some of Fiji’s political leaders by the police late last month for merely engaging in public debate on the contentious iTaukei Land Trust Bill No. 17 has raised questions about Fiji’s claim to be a champion of human rights.

All this has happened when the country was losing its grip on the escalating covid-19 pandemic, and experiencing the worst economic crisis in its history. The only silver lining for Fiji was the glittering Olympic gold won by its Rugby 7s men’s team and bronze by its women.

But these temporary celebratory moments should not divert attention away from the long-term implications of the repressive responses to alternative ideas by the government.

The coercive measures were justified by the police and government as important for sustaining national security, an often arbitrarily defined term. The rationale is that comments against the bill by politicians have the potential to stir up racial tension and public discord.

At the centre of the controversy is the attempt by the government to liberalise the use of indigenous Fijian land and give more power to lessees to carry out such things as sub-leasing and mortgaging without the consent of the iTaukei Trust Board (ITB), which was established in 1940 to administer indigenous land.

Opposition to the bill spans a variety of political positions. Those on the nationalist end of the spectrum argue that it was part of a “Muslim conspiracy” to alienate indigenous land. Certain individual keyboard warriors even resorted to the use of online racial threats.

The more moderate ones argue that given the cultural and racial sensitivity around land issues, the bill was insensitive and itself a security threat. There was nevertheless consensus that the process used to push through the bill lacked proper and meaningful consultation with landowners and the public generally and thus lacked democratic legitimacy.

One of the fears raised is that removing the regulatory process of subleasing and mortgage by lessees can lead to the Vanuatu situation where 90 percent of land on the main island, Efate, has been alienated through extensive subleasing and selling by foreign investors with little income for the landowners.

To get their land back at the expiry of the lease period, landowners have to pay back millions of dollars worth of land improvement value, something no one is able to do.

Cycle of vengeance
The response by Fiji’s government and the police was to invoke the Public Order Act, a leftover from the British colonial days, which was made even more coercive through the 2012 Public Order Amendment Decree by the then military government. The Act gives the police unlimited powers to arrest anyone they deem to be a threat to public order and safety.

The arrests of leading opposition politicians, MPs and former prime ministers have raised a number of fundamental questions about human rights and freedom of expression in Fiji’s struggling constitutional democracy.

One of the critical issues is that the institutional norms, political psyche and behaviour associated with military coups have been embedded implicitly in Fiji’s constitutional and legislative systems.

Despite the elections and global projections of being a vibrant democracy, the arbitrary use of repressive means to suppress alternative views remains a lingering issue.

Well-meaning actions and words by citizens are securitised and considered a threat, while the entire security apparatus of the state is let loose on so-called perpetrators of instability.

The second point here is that this military psyche permeates through society in various subtle ways, creating a culture of fear and distrust and worsened by what people see as the government’s uncompromising tactics in micro-management of the civil service, as well as the use of the merit system as a tool of nepotism and patronage in civil service and board appointments.

Normalisation of the use of fear and psychological intimidation in the civil service, Parliament and society generally may result in short-term compliance but can spawn silent resistance which can explode into a major security issue in the future.

Driver of political antagonism
A third and related factor here, resulting from the hardline stance of the government, is the way in which Fiji politics has taken a dangerously dichotomous cycle of vengeance and counter-vengeance as a driver of political antagonism.

Both sides of the political divide have dug into their trenches with hardly anyone in “No Man’s Land” to keep a sense of restraint. The repressive tactics will only fuel counter-vengeance sentiments at a time when the country needs to focus on covid-19 and associated problems.

A fourth issue here is the battle for the moral high ground. The government policy of “racial blindness” has given them the licence to cast almost anyone who raises issues relating to identity and culture as “racist” or trying to inflame racial strife. This is certainly the case with the bill in question.

Public criticism of acts of nepotism, patronage and racial favouritism by government have often been constructed with racial lenses and thus framed as security threats.

Sociological research in various countries has shown that the policy of so-called racial blindness is ironically a racist prism in itself because it does not allow one to appreciate the value of racial diversity and it can actually be used as a Trojan horse for cultural nepotism and ethnic patronage by states. Many have accused the Fiji government of doing exactly that.

Who benefits from development in Fiji
The fifth and last point relates to what the bill represents in terms of the broader development strategy of Fiji. Because of the four points raised above, the efforts of the government to sell its rationale have not gone smoothly.

The critical question here is whether the bill was originally intended to benefit the landowners or was it to serve the interests of foreign investors and other local entrepreneurs who have been part of the government’s lobbying and patronage system.

I do not want to speculate on this but the point here is to do with what type of development is best for the landowners?

Covid-19 has shown us the fundamental fragility of the tourism-based economy and the need to strengthen the land-based social solidarity economy. This requires developing a comprehensive land innovation plan which includes training for landowners in modern agriculture, developing food processing plants and creating global markets in a holistic way throughout the value chain.

This will allow landowners to commercialise and acquire direct benefits from their land, empower them economically and address prevalent poverty.

A number of communities in Fiji have been able to do that at a very localised level, making millions of dollars even without any government support. A much larger model to look at is the multi-billion dollar Ngai Tahu indigenous corporation in New Zealand’s South Island.

Rather than remain passive lease money recipients and subservient players in the market economy as the current system promotes, landowners can be active players in the market.

The land bill in question will simply perpetuate the system of post-colonial servitude. Rather than making minor “administrative” adjustments which will only benefit some foreign and local individual entrepreneurs as the bill suggests, it is time to relook at alternative, equity-based and innovative development strategies with landowners as active participants and direct beneficiaries as empowered partners with other investors.

This will address the issues of poverty and inequality as well as create a much more favourable climate for national security for all.

The future of security in Fiji depends not on using repressive tactics to impose government’s will on the population, but on using an approach which incorporates equitable and people-centred development strategies, empathetic political governance and a reconciliatory way to unite different ethnic, cultural and political groups.

Arresting political leaders will only exacerbate tension and shamefully reveal the deeper structural and normative weaknesses of the ruling political class.

Dr Steven Ratuva is a global award-winning political sociologist and is director of the Macmillan Brown Centre for Pacific Studies at the University of Canterbury.This article was first published by RNZ News and is republished with the permission of the author.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

As Fiji struggles with an unprecedented health and economic crisis, the country’s already limited democratic space is being choked off.

Opposition MPs routinely face arrest for criticising legislation before Parliament, and the international response has been found lacking.

In the past two weeks numerous opposition politicians — MPs, former prime ministers, party leaders and even party volunteers — have been taken in for police questioning in relation to their criticism of a government land bill.

Land ownership is a highly sensitive issue in Fiji. As new legislation relating to land and introduced in the middle of the country’s alarming covid-19 crisis, the iTaukei Land Trust Bill No. 17 was destined to trigger debate.

But criticism of the contentious legislation has prompted the repeated detention of opposition figures, with police saying they were being questioned under the Public Order Act.

The National Federation Party leader, professor Biman Prasad, was taken in four times.

“All this talk about Fiji being a genuine democracy as espoused sometimes by [Prime Minister Voreqe] Bainimarama and others in the government is all hogwash,” the MP said.

“We are not in a country where we have the freedom to talk about legislation which has been tabled in Parliament. I mean, that’s the role of the opposition.”

Public order
While Dr Prasad said he was treated courteously by police, it is unclear who has been laying the complaints which spark the arrests, or who is ordering them.

Dr Prasad said the head of the police, or the government, should come clean about it.

However, Fiji police are contending with what the Acting Commissioner of Police, Rusiate Tudravu, describes as attempts to incite instability and rally support against the government.

He issued warnings to the public, particularly after a series of recent fires, including at a shopping arcade in Ba, and a mosque compound in Tavenui.

“We want to assure all Fijians that any attempts to destabilise and cause instability will be investigated and dealt with,” Tudravu said on a police Facebook post.

The head of the Fiji Women’s Crisis Centre, Shamima Ali, said while there was tension in the community over the worsening pandemic, job losses and economic hardship, it was unclear whether the fires could be linked to anti-government sentiment.

But according to her, community fear and uncertainty have deepened regarding what people are or aren’t allowed to say.

“The police, whenever people start talking, start questioning the government, in recent years, they come in and start talking about the Public Order Act.

“But the laws are such that people are scared to talk,” Ali said, adding that the media in Fiji remained largely muzzled.

No room for criticism
Fiji’s government has not taken up RNZ Pacific’s requests for comment on the issues raised here.

A government on the back foot, it continues to defend its no-lockdown policy as covid-19 spreads like wildfire on Fiji’s main island, Viti Levu.

For the past two weeks around 1000 new cases of the virus were reported each day, along with a steady rise in deaths.

There has been no shortage of epidemiologists quietly urging the Fiji First government to employ some form of lockdown in order to curb the spread of the virus, perhaps buy it some time to complete vaccination without too many people becoming gravely ill. But Bainimarama and his deputy remain unmoved.

After delivering a new budget aimed at helping Fijians recover from the pandemic’s economic fallout, the Attorney-General and Minister for Economy, Aiyaz Saiyed-Khaiyum bristled at opposition suggestions that throwing all of Fiji”s eggs in the vaccination basket was unwise.

“What is the alternative? There is none, and of course they [the opposition] won’t offer any,” he said.

“If we just rely on lockdowns, unfortunately we’ll forever be closed to the outside world. That is why the opposition wants a lockdown, because they don’t want this crisis to end, so they can blame the socio-economic woes on the government, and make this an election issue.”

The government has made steady progress with the vaccine rollout, with 85 percent of Fiji’s eligible population having received at least a first dose, and almost 30 percent having had two doses.

The rollout is being conducted using doses purchased for Fiji by Australia and New Zealand, whom Saiyed-Khaiyum claims are supporting his country with vaccines because it is “the only solution”.

Ali said people who criticised government handling of the covid-19 crisis were lambasted by the administration.

More worrying, she said, some critics of the goverment land legislation were held in police detention over for almost 48 hours without charge.

“Democratic and human rights spaces are really diminishing in this country over the years, and it’s at its worst right now, with the taking in of all these people — two former prime ministers, leaders of this country — with no reason or rhyme. No charges have been laid, just intimidation and so on.”

‘Docile’ regional response
Most regional governments, including Australia, have been silent on the arrests. New Zealand’s government has registered concern, via a statement from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

“New Zealand is concerned by reports about the detention of a number of Fiji political figures,” a ministry spokesperson said.

“We are continuing to monitor the situation and the New Zealand High Commission in Suva is making inquiries with Fiji officials to ascertain further details.”

Ali said that she had worked with various diplomatic missions in Fiji over the years as upheavals, including coups, have happened in the country.

“I have never seen such a docile international community as I have seen this time around. The threat of China is also there, so people are taking it easy,” she said.

“Monitoring the situation is good, they need to do that. But I just think some firm diplomacy around accountability and those things also should be there.”

The situation in Fiji is a major concern for the Pacific Islands Forum, but the regional body’s limited ability to respond to the crisis is compounded by the expectation that the Bainimarama government is about to take up the Forum’s rotational chair.

While covid has the country’s health system is on its knees, job losses and food shortages are causing serious hardship in Fiji.

Shamima Ali said her centre was seeing increasing cases of domestic violence, a sign that the strain on Fiji’s social fabric is becoming untenable.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Violence can only hinder Fiji’s safe passage leading up to next year’s next general election, says former prime minister Sitiveni Rabuka.

After the enactment of Bill 17 to amend the iTaukei Lands Trust Act 1940, he said no disturbance could change what had been done in Parliament but it could hinder the election.

“There is no need to agitate because the Bill has now been enacted, it’s now part of the iTaukei Lands Trust Act of 1940,” Rabuka said.

“I don’t have a political standing. My comment as the former prime minister is that there is no amount of disturbance that will change what already has been enacted, there is no need for violence.”

In his position as a proposer of a new political party, he said he hoped to participate in the next election.

“It is very dangerous for Fiji to be going through a period of instability because this could delay elections,” he said.

“What has now happened has happened according to law through parliamentary process and can only be undone through parliamentary processes.

“Nothing else, it is in my interest to have a stable passage between now and to the next general elections.”

Article republished with permission.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz

Fiji’s opposition MPs who were arrested after their criticism of a government land bill say they will not be intimidated or silenced.

Police have since released several leaders of the opposition who were arrested late Sunday.

One of those arrested, the National Federation Party leader Professor Biman Prasad, said he was wanted in relation to his party’s criticism of government moves to amend the iTaukei Land Trust Act in Parliament in recent days.

After two hours of questioning, he was later released, telling RNZ Pacific that it felt like an attack on Fiji’s democracy.

“We don’t blame the police. This is coming from the government. They are using police to oppress the opposition’s political leaders, and that’s not the way democracy works.”

Prasad said the government failed to consult the public properly over the bill, and there are now calls to withdraw it because it is seen as abusing the rights of indigenous landowners.

“We are elected members of Parliament. Our job is to continue to speak and we are not going to be intimidated by such tactics by the government to silence the opposition who have an important contribution to make in the process of any lawmaking in the country.”

Accused of ‘malicious act’
Another leading opposition MP, Lynda Tabuya, was also taken into custody and accused of a “malicious act” by police for her social media posts about the Land Bill.

She said she was accused of a malicious act by police for criticising the government’s moves to push through an indigenous Land Bill.

Critics claim that an amendment removes a protection provided via the iTaukei Land Trust Board which was set up to protect indigenous landowners’ rights.

Tabuya had given a blunt message to Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama via social media:

“We are sick and tired of all the bullying and fear mongering. We are sick and tired of all the death and destruction allowed on your watch because of your recklessness,” she said.

“We are sick and tired because you don’t give a damn. You don’t give a damn about iTaukei, you don’t give a damn about human rights.”

The Fiji government and police have been approached for comment, but there has been no response for an interview.

However, over the weekend – before the arrests were made – Bainimarama did speak out for the first time condemning his opposition leaders on Facebook.

“These are a bunch of urban elite who are nothing but stirrers. Only a few control the show, and they become the gatekeepers of what is right and what is wrong.”

Bainimarama defended the government’s planned amendment to land legislation.

“Even this amendment makes ultimately iTaukei land a lot more attractive. It removes bureaucracy without undermining any of the protections. We should not be concerned about a piddly thing such as this when we should all be happy about it.”

Meanwhile, Acting Police Commissioner, Rusiate Tudravu said his officers were not questioning the politicians for the purpose of intimidation, but as a pro-active means to find out the truth.

He was reported in local media as saying not everyone who was brought in for questioning would be charged.

This article is republished under a community partnership agreement with RNZ.

Article by AsiaPacificReport.nz