'Legalisation of dictatorship': Why Fiji government wants to change the country's 2013 Constitution?

One of Fiji's deputy prime ministers says the country's 2013 Constitution effectively legalises dictatorship.

Manoa Kamikamica hit out after the former Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, labelled by critics as the architect of the document, accused Sitiveni Rabuka's coalition government of having "deeper" political motives for wanting to change the constitution.

In a lengthy Facebook post last week, Sayed-Khaiyum said that the country's social and economic problems were more urgent than constitutional change.

He said Fijians were more concerned about the rising cost of living, crime, and drug problems, among other things.

"If Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka is concerned about our economy and the welfare of ordinary Fijians then he must direct all his own, that of his ministers and the whole of government's energy, effort and resources to addressing the issues faced by all Fijians, our businesses and investors," he wrote.

"If he can do that and not listen to the political opportunists and extremists around him, then he will gain the political ascendancy that he seeks."

However, Kamikamica was quick to defend the coalition government's focus on constitutional change.

"This clearly demonstrates how out of touch he (Sayed-Khaiyum) is with the sentiment on the ground," he said.

"One of the main reasons why the (Frank) Bainimarama regime is not in government now is the imposition of a constitution that was foisted on the people, with little consultation.

"I am told that only a handful of people were involved in the drafting of it, then it was brought in by decree," the deputy PM said.

"There are major concerns about it and if you look at it closely enough, it really looks at the legalisation of dictatorship."

Sayed-Khaiyum disputed comments that the 2013 Constitution was drafted by a handful of people.

"...to say that the 2013 Constitution has had no input from ordinary Fijians and was drafted by a handful of people in some closed room in secrecy is a complete lie."

'A document that everybody can own'

But Kamikamica said Bainimarama and Sayed-Khaiyum had a level of control unheard of ever before in Fiji.

"We inherited the issues (social and economic) that [Sayed-Khaiyum] talks about. But for Fiji to develop as a truly united country, we need a document that everybody can own and accept."

Former PM Bainimarama seized power in a military coup in 2006 however Fiji returned to democracy in 2014.

Bainimarama's - now deregistered - FijiFirst Party swept to victory in 2014, the first General Election in eight years, but the party was viewed as being dictatorial due to the bullying and intimidation of opponents, flouting of human rights and suppression of the media.

Asked about one of the key changes which has previously been mooted by Rabuka, the removal of the word "Fijian" for everyone except iTaukei (indigenous Fijians), Kamikamica replied: "I am not sure where you are getting that information from."

"Those are historical contexts from before [Rabuka] was a member of the People's Alliance Party and he speaks for himself."

When asked if it would mean an end to dual nationality, he said: "Not necessarily," adding "the final version will come from the people, we totally understand the concerns about nationality."

"There is a lot of intermarriage in Fiji now, the younger generation look at things a lot differently, that will have to be considered when we come up with the final version," he said.

"The idea of one name for all of us is a key issue from my perspective, and we will have those discussions to resolve it."

When asked whether the government wants to change Fiji from being a secular to Christian country, he said: "There's been no statement on anything to do with core changes to the constitution."

"Any of those discussions are scare-mongering. We are focussing on make the constitution amendable, then we can deal with the specifics."

Sayed-Khaiyum had also suggested that the government may be acting out of political self-interest ahead of the next elections.

Kamikamica said the government was "well within our mandate to discuss that issue".

"It is certainly not political opportunism; it is a national imperative.

"Any responsible government would have to look at constitutional amendments because it is a major cause of disunity amongst the people of Fiji."

"We are dealing with the country's economic and social problems now. If you can juggle more than one priority, which has to be the case because of the 16 years of dictatorial rule that we've inherited, you need to do remarkable things."

The government recently failed in its bid to win enough support in parliament to amend the constitution and has now sought advice from the Supreme Court.

Rabuka could not get the 75 percent support needed to amend the 2013 Constitution during the Constitutional Amendment Bill's second reading.

"The way the constitution is written, it is virtually impossible to change. Legal and constitutional experts have stated the same," Kamikamica explained.

"Recent debates in parliament have included creating a pathway to enable practical, pragmatic changes to occur.

"Once we are clear on what we can do with the amendment of the amendment provision, we will then consult widely."

Govt following 'letter of the law'

Asked why the government wants to remove the need for a referendum on key changes, he said: "Our argument in the amendments was why create a referendum when it was imposed through the 2013 constitution. Nobody in Fiji agreed to it."

"The 1997 Constitution was passed successfully without the need for a referendum. It was a well-proven process of changing it."

He said the current government is "absolutely nothing like" the previous FijiFirst administration.

"During our term so far we have listened."

Kamikamica has previously floated the idea of restoring the 1997 Constitution.

"Only so far as its an option, but that will depend on what the courts rule," he told Pacific Waves.

"In 1997, there was no need for a referendum, a duly elected government agreed to have a constitutional commission go and canvas the people.

"They tabled a fairly sizeable report that was discussed with all the political parties."

Prior to the 2013 Constitution, no constitution in Fiji had a referendum requirement.

"Until now, the coalition has government has followed the letter of the law," Kamikamica said.

"Sayed-Khaiyum cannot, with a straight face, say that to get to the 2013 Constitution he followed any law."

"To gain any form of political power, the previous government had to remove the 1997 Constitution, which is probably the best yardstick of how to bring in a constitution to Fiji.

"There was thorough consultation with the people, followed by the political parties getting together, and agreeing unanimously what would be the final outcome.

He said Fiji needs to reset in terms of the supreme law of the land.

"Whether that means a reversion to 1997 or significant amendments to the current constitution, we are now in the hands of the courts.

"We will be seeking written opinions from the Supreme Court and, hopefully, it will provide some guidance about what needs to be done.

"If you go by some of the recently rulings, they have essentially said that the 2013 constitution was imposed on the people. You can probably get a picture of what may be possible. I don't want to preempt their decision, whatever their ruling is we will be bound by it."

RNZ Pacific has reached out to Sayed-Khaiyum for comment.