Fiji's constitutional review targets coup immunity, proposes bicameral parliament

Fiji's Constitution Review Commission delivered its report to parliament in Suva on Tuesday, and what it contains could reshape the country's political foundations in ways that have not been attempted since the military seized power two decades ago. The commission is recommending the removal of immunity protections that have shielded anyone involved in the nation's three military coups—in 1987, 2000, and 2006—from criminal prosecution. This is not a theoretical proposal. It directly implicates the current prime minister, Sitiveni Rabuka, who orchestrated the 1987 coups and has been protected by the very immunity clause the commission now wants scrapped.

The constitutional document Fiji operates under today was written by the military government of Frank Bainimarama following his 2006 coup. It has never been submitted to voters for approval, a fact that Fiji's supreme court highlighted last year when it found the constitution carried a "democratic deficit." That ruling opened the door to this review. The commission's report, delivered on more than 200 pages via USB stick to each member of parliament, proposes not only removing the immunity that has protected past coup makers but also prohibiting any future immunity provisions. The Republic of Fiji Military Forces has backed this recommendation, a significant endorsement from an institution that might have been expected to resist it.

Beyond the coup immunity question, the commission wants to fundamentally restructure how parliament operates. Fiji currently has a single-chamber parliament of 55 members, all elected from one national constituency. The review calls for a return to a bicameral system: a House of Representatives with 41 members and a Senate with 19. Under the new arrangement, voters would elect 26 members through traditional first-past-the-post constituency voting and another 15 through party lists. The Great Council of Chiefs, which was abolished under Bainimarama and revived in 2023, would gain its own constitutional chapter and the power to nominate eight of the 19 senators. It would also hold three of seven seats on a new commission responsible for appointing the country's president.

The military's constitutional role would be redrawn to focus exclusively on external defence, with domestic deployment only permitted when parliament authorizes it. The island of Rotuma, a self-governing territory about 465 kilometers north of Fiji's main islands, would receive its own constitutional chapter and a formal pathway toward self-determination—a proposal that has drawn skepticism from constitutional experts who question whether such a provision reflects genuine demand or simply the preferences of the commission members themselves.

What happens next remains uncertain. Fiji's Lands Minister Filimoni Vosarogo said the constitutional amendment bill would go through three parliamentary readings, followed by at least 30 days of consultation by a parliamentary committee before a final vote in November. The government needs 37 of the 55 parliamentary votes to pass the amendments. If approved, the bill moves to the president and then to the electoral commission, which would oversee a public referendum. Civil society groups have criticized the speed of the process, but Attorney-General Siromi Turaga defended the timeline, saying the government had been transparent and that the mandate to bring a new constitution was clear from the beginning.

The timing creates a political problem. Fiji is scheduled to hold general elections in February, and it remains unclear whether the constitutional review process will be completed before that date or whether it will force a postponement. Deputy Prime Minister Manoa Kamikamica said it was "premature" to discuss whether the election would be delayed. The opposition landscape has fractured: Fiji First, the primary opposition party, was liquidated in the years following the 2022 election, leaving its voters without formal representation. Constitutional scholar Jon Fraenkel from Victoria University of Wellington has warned that pushing through constitutional changes before an election, while the opposition is in disarray, could create a serious problem of democratic inclusiveness. "It's not an appropriate time to do it ahead of a general election," he said.

Fraenkel also noted the peculiar political position the immunity question puts Rabuka in. Removing immunity from future coup makers is straightforward enough, he observed, but removing protections from past coup makers—including the sitting prime minister—is far more complicated. Rabuka has previously stated that the immunity clause does not actually protect him and that he is "free," a claim that the commission's recommendation now puts to the test. The coming weeks will reveal whether parliament has the political will to vote for changes that could expose the country's leader to prosecution, and whether Fiji can navigate a constitutional transition while its electoral calendar and political opposition remain in flux.