Eighteen months after the end of 16 years of Fiji’s notorious two-man rule, the country’s political landscape is in the middle of another seismic shift.
The former ruling FijiFirst Party (FFP), relegated to the Opposition benches after losing the 2022 general elections by a whisker, is suddenly non-existent after it was deregistered for failing to amend its constitution to include a dispute resolution clause in line with the requirements of Fiji’s Political Parties Act.
The saga began with 16 of its 26 Members of Parliament defying a party directive in May to vote against the government side to restore post-COVID-19 pay cuts to the Prime Minister and Minister for Finance and increased salaries and benefits of Cabinet Ministers, Members of Parliament, and the Speaker of Parliament.
The passage of the motion through Fiji’s Parliament sparked public outrage while once gain rocking the governing Coalition apple cart. Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka threatened to take action against Coalition partner, the National Federation Party (NFP) for voting against the motion while Parliamentary Emoluments Committee Chairperson, Lynda Tabuya launched into a public tirade against NFP leader, Professor Biman Prasad, who is Deputy Prime Minister and Minister for Finance.
FijiFirst Party executives decided to sack its 17 revolting MPs, who in turn refused to step down. As the matter escalated to the Registrar of Political Parties, who ordered that the party include a dispute resolution clause in its constitution, all the party’s officials and founding members, including former Prime Minister Voreqe Bainimarama and former Attorney-General Aiyaz Sayed-Khaiyum, resigned. The party was eventually deregistered in July.
The party’s surprise wipeout appears to have cleared the way for Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka to press ahead with plans for a broader governing coalition he has been reportedly contemplating some time.
Constitutional review
After Bainimarama was jailed for one year in May for obstructing a police investigation while in power, Rabuka was said to be waiting for the verdict in the (still ongoing) trial of Sayed-Khaiyum on abuse of office charges before he pushed ahead with pulling the Opposition into a grand coalition.
That could have seen him get numbers for a review of Fiji’s 2013 Constitution, entrenched by the former ruling pair with a review requirement for a 75% Parliamentary majority, as well the support of three quarters of registered voters.
The obvious concern in an expanded governing Coalition arrangement is that “the lack of a viable opposition is a great worry for a parliamentary democracy”, as Professor Steven Ratuva (former Fijian academic and Pro-Vice Chancellor, Pacific and Director of the Macmillan Brown Center for Pacific Studies at the University of Canterbury) puts it.
Beyond that, the FijiFirst saga brings to the forefront some key takeaways for the current Coalition, as well as future governing arrangements.
As Ratuva puts it, FFP was “top heavy in terms of centralised control” and since those who were controlling the central party machine “are no longer in place, the structure of the party collapsed”.
In a paper published by Griffith Asia Institute, Romitesh Kant, a PhD Candidate in the Department of Pacific Affairs at the Australian National University says the scenario underscores the “double-edged sword of political power”.
“The very laws designed by FijiFirst and the former regime to curtail Opposition parties now threaten the party’s own survival in a highly restrictive political environment,” Kant wrote prior to the deregistration.
“The short-term consequences will see FijiFirst MPs transitioning to independents or joining other parties, leading to significant implications for representation and political cohesion. Long-term, the dissolution opens a political vacuum, especially within the Indo-Fijian electorate, which overwhelmingly supported Bainimarama and FijiFirst.”
In the greater analysis, as Fiji’s political landscape braces for these changes, the country faces a critical juncture, says Kant, because the potential for new coalitions and alliances “offers a chance for democratic evolution, emphasising the need for transparency, accountability, and internal democracy”.
“FijiFirst’s demise is a cautionary tale about the dangers of centralised power and the importance of resilient, inclusive political frameworks. The future of Fijian politics now hinges on how parties adapt to these shifts and whether they can rise to the challenge of fostering genuine democratic leadership.”
Lack of inclusion
As is evident from this latest fiasco, no sooner has FijiFirst departed the scene that Fiji appears to find itself on that learning curve.
Fiji Council of Social Services (FCOSS) Executive Director, Vani Catanasiga, an outspoken critic of the government, says the lack of an inclusive political framework is contributing to the problems in the governing three-way Coalition, referring to the NFP breaking ranks to vote against the pay rise.
“Everyone was so focused on removing the last government, they didn’t really anticipate the kinds of discussions that would emerge from having a Coalition,” says Catanasiga. “So, it just speaks to a lack of foresight within the three parties.” Catanasiga says the deficiencies in the Coalition can be fixed if “they all agree on the goals” they want to achieve instead of having “a clash of principles” manifesting in the way that has played out.
NFP Leader, Professor Biman Prasad, said that their five MPs voted against the salary increase because the party felt “the Emoluments Committee lacked independence”.
Prasad also warned Parliament about the danger of allowing the committee “to determine our own salaries and allowances ourselves”, while the party in its submission to the committee said, “the committee should get experts from outside Parliament to get the public’s views since the taxpayer’s are footing the salary and allowance bill for the Members of Parliament”.
Thus, the NFP’s stand spilling over into a very public spat between the governing partners, is, as Catanasiga puts it, because “they have never really had the time to do that visioning together… to agree on the collective goals, and how to achieve them”.
After coming under attack from both Rabuka and Tabuya for being naysayers, Prasad used his Budget address to smooth things over.
He said the Coalition Government acknowledged that people were not adequately informed about the pay hike, and that there should be a reasonable period of public consultation on increase in salaries for MPs in the future.
“The vote taken last month on parliamentary pay rises was deemed as deeply unpopular. We are not blind to the commentary in the mainstream media, on social media and planned protests and the petitions,” he told Parliament.
Although the Budget announced public sector pay rises and a negligible hike in the minimum wage, it does not take away from the longer-term structural problems of leadership staring Fiji’s politicians in the face, such as the leadership being “built mainly around patriarchal ideas”, according to Catanasiga.
“Power becomes stronger when you devolve leadership [and] responsibilities to your members. And I don’t see that happening [that] much because the challenges that are confronting us right now … when you think about climate change, or the high debt problem that we have, they require perhaps a multi-faceted approach to leadership. [Instead], what we have been seeing is perhaps more hero complex … that ‘I have the solution’.”
Another factor is Fijian politics being based on a “clientpatron component where if you didn’t vote for a particular politician, you will be neglected”, says Catanasiga.
“We have forgotten that politics is about serving people, it’s not about serving our own interests. And that’s what saddens us as NGOs as we look on and they [government] make decisions without prioritising the needs of those who voted for them.”
The growing public disquiet over a series of major botch ups in the Coalition’s 18 months in power finally escalated into what was seen as a public vote of no-confidence with the pay rise episode.
No less than the government’s own Fiscal Review Committee (FRC) sounded the alarm bells this time around.
In a letter to Prasad, FRC Chair Richard Naidu said that government “will lose citizen’s support if they don’t work effectively and productively in the nation’s interest”. Naidu said the committee’s view, based on the broad public sense “is that the government is not working to full capacity or productively” and that the saga “was another dent in public confidence”.
A surprise motion
When the Parliamentary Emoluments Committee submitted its report to Parliament in April 2024, there was agreement between all three Coalition partners to put the report on the backburner.
Hence, it was a surprise to some members when they were suddenly told on the morning of May 24 that the motion to vote on the report’s recommendations was being brought before the House.
The motion had not been tabled in that day’s Order Paper, meaning Parliament had not been notified of the motion that week or even the day before, as is standard practice. Which meant that when it was moved the next day, it was an extraordinary motion.
One member of the special committee on emoluments said if he had known there would be a push to vote for the report’s recommendations, he would have never agreed to be on the committee.
According to insiders, it was evident there was a faction within the Coalition that eventually pushed for the report to be brought before the House for a vote – despite strong objections from other members.
Chaired by Lynda Tabuya (People’s Alliance Party – PAP), the emoluments committee included Ro Filipe Tuisawau (PAP), Aseri Radrodro (Social Democratic Liberal Party – SODELPA), and Alvick Maharaj and Mosese Bulitavu of the then-FijiFirst.
A broad coalition
According to Ratuva, Rabuka’s idea of a Government of National Unity (GNU) is basically “assimilating the FijiFirst independents” into the Coalition.
“So instead of a GNU, it’s simply going to be a broader Coalition of the three parties, plus independents.”
There’s also the question of how that might impact present Coalition arrangements.
“Unless the Coalition bond was too watertight” for any of the changes to suddenly take place, roping in some of the independents “might cause instability” within the coalition because the National Federation Party and SODELPA would now be aware “they are readily dispensable”.
Adjunct Professor in Development Studies and Governance at the University of the South Pacific, Vijay Naidu believes Rabuka would be in a “very advantaged position” if that happens because he can sever ties with SODELPA and “give Radrodro the boot” for being a thorn in his side.
Much of Rabuka’s first year in power in 2023 was marred by Radrodro’s repeated public defiance of the Prime Minister as Education Minister, until Rabuka replaced him citing insubordination.
Shaping the future
Despite a steady series of fumbles in Rabuka’s leadership, including the botched Cabinet reshuffle last year, Radrodro’s removal from the Education portfolio, then reinstatement, the alleged sex scandal between two Cabinet ministers, and the latest salary increase fiasco, Rabuka remains unfazed because his political survival is linked to the vanua, says Ratuva.
“The vanua connection is still a powerful force in the background because it still gives Rabuka the provincial electoral support and political mana.”
Ratuva says it’s an “identity issue” with many indigenous voters because a leader like Rabuka “enriches their ‘Taukeiness’”.
Thus, Rabuka retaining Siromi Turaga in a separately created portfolio as Minister for Justice (despite replacing him as Attorney-General while blaming him for underperforming) and Lynda Tabuya keeping her job as Minister for Women and Children despite being removed as Rabuka’s Deputy Party Leader because of an alleged sex and drug scandal, could be attributed to keeping their provincial origins on-side.
Nevertheless, bread and butter issues are now increasingly central to many iTaukei, says Ratuva.
“The increasing poverty, unemployment, drugs, poor health, lack of opportunity and social disillusionment are more potent issues than vanua links.”
While the timing of the Budget delivery may have helped Rabuka negotiate one more self-inflicted disaster, the glaring irony is that just as his first coup threw Fiji into more than 30 years of political wilderness, the demise of FijiFirst may well turn out to be the true test of how Rabuka uses the opportunity to shape Fiji’s political landscape for a second time.
