Bainimarama’s banana republic
December 26th, 2008 — 06:24 pm
Fiji has a history of civil unrest over the divisive issue of how political power is to be distributed between ‘Fijian-Indians’ and the ethnic or indigenous Fijian population.
The Fijian-Indian population is the legacy of the British attempt to establish an economic base for the ex-colony. Between 1879 and 1916 Indians were bought to Fiji as indentured labour for the sugar cane plantations, by 1987 they comprised an estimated 46% of the population. Given the increase in Fijian-Indian numbers a multiracial government was elected in April 1987, which was promptly overthrown in May of that year by Colonel Rabuka. Fiji eventually declared itself a Republic having been suspended from the Commonwealth and introduced its 1990 constitution. This constitution favoured indigenous Fijians, reserving for them two thirds of the Senate, much of the House and banning any Fijian-Indian from holding Prime Ministerial Office.
In 1997 a Constitutional Review Commission returned its recommendations for a multi-racial constitution founded upon the protection of basic human rights which was passed in the House on 3rd of July 1997.
On May 19, 2000 George Speight took Prime Minister Chaudhry hostage and attempted to abandon the 1997 constitution to institute indigenous-Fijian supremacy. However, as the security situation worsened Colonel Bainimarama imposed martial law fully abrogating the 1997 constitution effective 29th May 2000. Following this Bainimarama vested in himself complete executive authority with the military might to enforce this.
Mr. Prasad a farmer exiled from his land took a case to the High Court in order to establish that the 1997 constitution was unlawfully suspended, and was successful. Curiously the the Interim Civilian Government appealed to the Court of Appeal vesting the judiciary with the extraordinary authority to determine the status of the constitution. They found it to have been unlawfully abrogated and such it was subsequently reinstated with Parliamentary elections taking place in September 2001.
Then in 2006 as a response to the leniency to be shown to the perpetrators of the previous coup d’état, and his dislike at government policy; which he feared would return the country to, “paganism and cannibalism” Bainimarama decided to topple the government. He unconstitutionally installed himself as Prime Minister, a post which he has now enjoyed since January 2007.
Bainimarama declared High Commissioner Mr. Michael Green persona non-grata shortly after citing his, “persistent interference in Fiji’s domestic affairs”.
“The practice of quiet diplomacy was foremost given all the chances to prevail by Fiji authorities in our efforts to seek understanding and co-operation of H.E Mr. Green to stop interfering in Fiji’s domestic affairs given our status as a sovereign nation.”
More recently the Fijian Government has repeated this action with our subsequent High Commissioner Mrs. Caroline McDonald. Although Article 23 of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations 1961 does not require a state to give reasons as to why consular staff are to be declared persona non-grata the imposition of travel sanctions seems to the the likely reason behind this move. As stated by Fiji the sanctions are “one of the clearer indicators of the state of our current relations”.
At present there is a ban on all members of the Fijian Military Force, certain individuals associated with supporting the coup as deemed by the NZ Minister of Immigration and their close associates, sectaries of Fijian government departments, and the immediate family members (partners, children and children’s partners) of all those banned. Our sanctions primarily inconvenience the Fijian ruling elite. Any new aid initiatives that involved partnership with the Fijian government have been suspended. Our 2008/2009 aid allocation to Fiji is $5M for NGO projects.
The balance of political power in Fiji is contentious, and it appears as though there was some corruption in the Fijian government prior to it’s dissolution. However, nothing on the scale of what we’ve seen after the coup. Bainimarama’s undermining of the electoral system to seize power for himself is in no way legitimate, using force claiming to uphold the constitution is nonsensical. The correct process for reform is to be made by the voters, with free universal suffrage. A coup is the antithesis of the rule of law.
Expelling our High Commissioner on grounds of claimed domestic political interference seems to be a front for the fact that the Fijian elite are upset by the travel sanctions imposed upon them by NZ. Do they expect us to turn a blind eye to the treatment of citizens and foreign journalists post coup. Perhaps showing some movement toward a fair and just elected government of the people would’ve gone some way toward lifting these sanctions. However, Bainimarama appears happy to continue his dictatorship of what is aptly being termed Bainimarama’s banana republic. Fiji’s economic decline is likely to highlight the disparities between Fijians and make the process of moving forward that much more difficult.
