KRISHNA DATT

Minister for Labour and Industrial Relations - 2006 74 RATU SUKUNA ROAD P O BOX 2592 NASESE GOVTBLDGS MOBILE: (679) 9923111 SUVA .

Submission for the Fiji Constitution 15th October, 2012

Introduction
In the planning and preparation of this submission I am grateful to the very many people who have shared ideas with me and have helped to provide a sharpened focus. Some groups who have shared some ideas such as the Fiji Public Servants Association, the Fiji Teachers Union and the School Management Association of Fiji have gone ahead to make submissions of their own. I am grateful to all those individuals who have acted as a sounding board and have provided useful critique from time to time. Some individuals have felt inspired to make their own submissions.

I am particularly grateful to Jill Cottrell and the Commission for providing A Guide to Constitution-Making for the People of Fiji. The guide has been particularly useful in providing a focus and raising pertinent questions on issues for submissions.

However, I am solely responsible for the views and ideas expressed in the submission. There is no order of priority. All issues are important but issues closest to my concerns have been dealt with first. Some ideas may even be contradictory. It is not a conventional submission of fixed and unchangeable ideas. Some ideas are being put forward for further discussion. They spring from felt needs at the time. The submission assumes that a collective vision will be better than individual submissions whether presented personally or in the name of a group. They are offered here as options, in the firm belief, that there will be other opportunities to comment and to contribute to the draft proposals made by the Commission.

Political Parties
This section on political parties is offered as an issue of concern. It may well be that the Commission will find that there is indeed no good alternative to political parties. In that case this section must be read as an expression of a strong desire to reform political parties. The concerns expressed can then be directed at setting clear criteria for political leadership and political party reforms. Some ideas on these issues are spread through-out the submission. Political parties have been the major cause of division and rift in the Fiji Society. It has been a misnomer to think that political parties represent the people. At best and closest to the inception of a new party, political activist strive very hard to represent what they consider to be in the best interest of the people. With time, the activists fade away and the party becomes the preserve of a few on the top. On the top, generally one person takes total control and begins to manipulate the party composition, structures and ideas to suit him/her self. With some slight variation, such has been the state of party political decision making and control. It is no different from an oligarchy. Power concentrates in the hands of a few often, in one hand only. It is a far cry from the participative democracy we aspire for. It is completely non representative. Yet the dialogue of the demagogues are usually couched in a faade of democratic framework and indeed when the system goes wrong greater democracy is demanded. The demands can be totally undemocratic. The call has been for supremacy and dominance of one race over another. More recently the first coup has been redefined as an attempt to reinstate the Fijian elite to power. No real heed is paid to democracy. In 2002 and in 2006, those who were pro-coup turned anti-coup. The arguments were reversed. The pro-coup advocates of 1987 became protagonists of 2006. Political partners quickly realigned themselves to seek advantage for themselves. Shamefully, some leaders and prominent citizens let down their people by following petty political and personal self interest, clearly demonstrating that they had no consistent vision for Fiji in any case. When self interest was no longer fulfilled or it came to threaten the self interest of the more dominant partners in coup, they were thrown out of the partnership.

There is complete lack of democratic decision making within political parties. Venues and agendas are set up for making desired decisions. Support and petitions are manipulated and prearranged. The delegates, elected, or, more often, appointed or maneuvered into positions by the top hierarchy is then used to carry through the leaders agenda. A henchmen especially kept and nurtured to spread decisions already made, are used to propagate the directions of decisions to be adopted. When it has suited political parties, the parties have supported the coup-makers keeping the rhetoric of democracy. In 1987, a major political party, a religious organisation, some social institutions, all others who had joined and supported the coup makers are today demanding democracy. Those who had felt ashamed with themselves in 1987 had found false defense in phrases such as we agree with the cause but not with the means. Nobody paraphrased what was the cause. In the 2000 and in 2006 coup, major groups changed sides. People are being fooled by some leaders one more time. There has been no sign of commitment to any higher vision or goals for society. The rhetoric for greater democracy and justification for their present stance has been recast in the light of their advocacy to save the country and to bring about democracy at the earliest. Thus we find ourselves participating in the development of a new constitution for genuine, real and grass-root democracy. The grass-root has been calling out that they have been let down by their leaders in the past. Political parties are clearly identified as responsible for the mass that this country has been in. The Commissions own notes (Building the Peoples Constitution: Your Responsibility, Suva, August, 2012) has pointed out at surveys and assessments which have reiterated that political parties have been responsible for most of the division in the society. Reeves Commission was very critical of the politicians exploiting ethnic differences and creating animosity among the people. (referred to in the Commissions Guide, pg 7) It is understandable why in some countries political parties have been banned. Such is the frustration and disappointment with political parties. The Commission is invited to pay heed to these frustrations. However, it is noted that political parties do and can provide avenues for like-minded people to get together and organize themselves to support a common vision and give direction to the country.

Individual ideas may have a lesser chance of success unless organized in a larger group. Unfortunately, the initial high ideals of a party are often high jacked by manipulating and self centered individuals who take control through a pervasive mafia type operation within the party. The unsuspecting members are stunned into believing or inaction having lost any independent says on the issues. Those who scrutinize are either bought off, cornered into a minority or sacked from the party. Political parties have tended to reflect most undemocratic decision making style. A recent victim of a prominent party had this to say about the Party and its leader: In the next calculated move, which has been the hallmark of the leader, he proceeded to read a motion signed by some branches to conduct elections. It is believed that the son (of the Leader) worked behind the scene to get signatures from cronies. The process was over with a couple of minutes. ..Again we witnessed the total manipulation of the process which is not new to the Party. Here we have a Party that preaches democracy but its practices and its operations are totally the opposite to the very principles of democracy. In utter frustration and disgust, I decided to walk out of the meeting. Those who were in the meeting would have observed the father and son domination on each and every discussion and allowed little room for anyone else to have their say. My interventions were only possible as I had to stand my ground and make a point but on every other issue was allowed to have a comment before anyone else was allowed a voice. This is the antithesis of transparence and democracy. (FTUC Press Statement on Labour No: 26-13/12, 28/08/12) Alternative to Political Parties: It is recognized that it may be hard for a country used to political parties to make a meaningful transition from party politics to a system using a non party mechanism. If members of the Commission would put their minds together it may be possible to find alternative which does not depend on party political control and manipulation. It may be possible for example, for individuals to be elected independently and be responsible directly to their constituency structures. To be a candidate, a specified number of signatures supporting the candidate would be required. Once elected the member joins one or two standing committees of parliament. In this way the members would be directly responsible to their constituency. The political party as an intermediary will no longer be required. The members in Parliament will have direct responsibility to his/her constituency. The member will be able to set his or her own constituency structures. Each structure will be constituency based. In this important sense it is likely to be more representative of the people. This system will entail direct responsibility of members to their constituency and give greater and more meaningful role to the Parliamentary Standing Committee.

Such a system of a constituency based structures could dovetail well with a Presidential model in which most members of the Cabinet is appointed immediately after the election of the President and a substantial number could come from outside the Parliament. In order for the President and his/her Cabinet to pass a Bill other than a Money Bill the Ministers will have to persuade and negotiate with the relevant Standing Committee to put the Bill before the House for a full debate. The system has the potential for greater check and balance on the Executive. It requires hard work by the Executive to persuade the Standing Committee and the Parliament. A two tier election will determine the President and the Parliament. For election, Individuals aspiring to be PMs would be required to submit a list of signatures to the election office supporting a candidate. Once elected, he/she is responsible to the parliament and normal checks and balance of a presidential or a West minister system shall prevail. The Prime Minister/President selects his or her cabinet either from outside or from the House or from both. It is recommended that Fiji should continue to have Ministers from the Parliament. Perhaps 2/3 of the Ministers from the Parliament and 1/3 be limited to selection from outside. The Presidential model of a Bills passage shall be adopted, with the standing committee having the responsibility for the passage of the Bill through the House. The crux of the outline proposes a system which makes a political party structure redundant. It will no longer be an intermediary between the elected member and his/her constituent. The member has direct responsibility to the constituency. This submission is not blind to the reality that some trans constituency alliance will take place. If not at election, there is a real possibility that it could take place in the Parliament. It is argued, however, that these alliances will be formed on a commonality of visions and policies. At least the pernicious control and manipulation of a Party elite will no longer be there. With other reforms in place in a new Constitution, it is also hoped that the new generation of leaders will be less likely to sell themselves.

Members in the House will be free to align or re-align depending on the Merits of the Bill. The Standing Committee will become a full time operation. The Executive will also have to work very hard to persuade the Members of the House. It will be far more accountable and responsive to the wishes of the people. The Parliament will really be supreme. It could impeach the Prime Minister and could get rid of the Ministers by a vote of no confidence.

Recommendation:
The Commission is asked to find or develop a system in which the role of political parties is made redundant or minimized. The recommendation is intended to impress on the Commission, the seriousness of the frustration that people have faced with political parties. Alternatively, the Commission is invited to recommend some far reaching reforms to make political parties much more accountable.

Leadership:
Fundamental to political party reform is the question of leadership. The major reason for the peoples disenchantment with political parties springs largely from the nature and caliber of political leadership. The scheming, manipulistic, self centered leadership of the past has been the major cause of disenchantment. Any system of government will continue to depend on individuals to come forth and take the cudgel of leadership. What we need is for the constitution to provide for a strict criteria for people offering themselves for national leadership. The Reeves Commission had found much to be desired in the national leadership. The Reeves Commission had called for a strong, honest leadership based on personal integrity and management skills. Providing for national leadership is a sensitive and complicated issue. It is not easy to set measureable personal qualities for selection of leaders. However, an attempt must be made. The Parliament, as an institution requires some qualities of its members over and above those of honesty and integrity. For the Parliament to be relevant in a globalised world, one obvious quality expected of a member is to have a good understanding of the global forces affecting our economic, political and social behaviour. A member should be able to read, understand, critique Parliamentary

business and be able to participate effectively in the Committee processes. The demands are almost pointing to a graduate Parliament. Pitched against the demands of the Parliament, a member must also have the social skills to interact with the constituents and represent their views and concerns in Parliament. Conversely, the member should have the ability and skills to translate the affairs of the State and explain the forces of global economy to his/her constituents.

Recommended:
That the Commission lays down specific skills and personal qualities required for national leadership which is keen to adopt practices of a cooperative and participative democracy in a country fast becoming an integral part of a globalised world.

System of Government
The Present System It must be said at the outset that the 1997 model of Government was workable. The right of parties with more than 10% of the seats in Parliament to be invited to be part of the cabinet was a good one. The last government was quite popular from this point of view. For such a system to work, we need leaders with vision. Unfortunately, the leaders have never wanted to make this system work. There was a basic lack of trust amongst political leaders. A deep seated sense of reluctance to share power had marred the successful operations of such a system. Some people have argued that a voluntary association of parties that qualified to be in the Cabinet may have helped. Mandatory provision to participate in government did provide the option to opt out, if a party felt it could not work with the majority party. Reluctant participation in a system posing difficulties for parties to work together provides opportunity for greater challenges. Only a more creative and empathetic leadership can handle such situations. Reasons of difficulty in working together also provide greater check and balance of the majority party by the other partners. This would maintain a check on abusing excessive power. The association of a number of parties in government helped to create a sense of national unity. The system is held responsible for the failure of the leaders to work together. Personal motives, selfish interest, overriding desire for power has been the major factors in the inability of the system to work. The solution is not in getting rid of the system but in finding ways and means of ensuring

that enlightened leadership is at the helm of government. Voluntary rather than mandatory invitation to Cabinet may have worked better. Without leaders determined to make the system work, no innovation could succeed. The new constitution can make a difference if it can establish criteria for good quality leadership in the country. The West Minister System Generally the Fiji system has been based on the West Minister model. People have become accustomed to this model. Crucial to this system is the choice of Cabinet Ministers from within the Parliament. The leader of the majority party is given this prerogative. Some ministerial positions could be drawn from the Upper House. The constituent is generally aware of the hierarchy of parliamentary accountability. The citizen has access to a Cabinet Minister through the member representing his/her constituency or the member can have direct access to the Minister. The Constituent is aware that the Minister is finally accountable to the Parliament and could be asked questions to explain the Government policy and practice. A variation of the system, as in the case of Tonga, permits the Prime Minister to nominate a certain number of members from outside. Such members need not be drawn from an Upper House. Presidential Model Public whispers in Fiji is already forecasting a presidential form of government for Fiji. The substantial difference for Fiji would be in the two tier election used in selecting the President and the Members of the House (or Congress). The second difference would be in the selection of the Cabinet Ministers. The President nominates his/her own set of Cabinet Ministers from outside the House. While the system has some merits, the fear for Fiji, is that in the exercise of Presidential powers to select his/her own Cabinet, the ministers could well be selected on cronyism , or be used to give jobs to those who were ardent supporters of the President. If no complimentary standard of leadership is imposed, the Presidential model could further corrupt the Government system. This would defeat the very purpose of trying to bring capable and skilled people into Government without getting them to face the hassle of politics.

In this system the usual checks and balances of a Presidential model (as in US) would apply. If the system is at all considered for adoption, the right of the President to choose his/her cabinet should be carried out in consultation with the party hierarchy or any other consultative body. The idea is to ensure that the Cabinet does not comprise merely of cronies or close supporters and allies of the President or the Party. The cabinet Ministers should be chosen strictly on merit and be consistent with the specific needs of each of the portfolios. The criteria spelled out for Members of Parliament, should also be used for the selection of Cabinet Ministers. In any case, for continued direct link with Parliament it is recommended that no more than 1/3 rd of the cabinet ministers be chosen from outside the Parliament. All cabinet members whether elected or nominated should be required to answer questions raised in the Parliament. All other checks and balances of a Presidential System should be put in place. The right to override the choice of the President to nominate a Cabinet minister from outside shall remain with the Parliament. At any one time the Parliament could impeach the President and or could dismiss a Minister with a vote of no confidence. Mixed Member System A Recommendation Having taken all the factors in to account, a mixed member system is recommended which marries the Presidential and the West Minister model. The title President shall merely become a name change. The Prime Minister will then change to a President. The President should be elected by the whole country rather than the leader of the Parliamentary party with the larger majority. On election the President shall select his/her Cabinet on the basis of 1/3 from outside the House and 2/3 from the Parliament. The outsiders must have specialized skills and training in the specific portfolio for which they are selected. In making Cabinet appointments the President must do so in consultation with an appointing body - so appointed.

Electoral System
The communally based electoral system of the previous constitutions has become an accepted

feature of voting. It will not be easy to eradicate communal voting under any system of elections. It may take a long time still to change. However, this is not to say that a beginning should not be made. Even under one man, one vote, one value system a voter is most likely to look at the party which is likely to represent his/her communal interest before he/she decides to cast a vote. Faced with this kind of stark reality, the Joint Parliamentary Select Committee (JPSC) negotiating the 1997 Constitution had reversed the numbers recommended by the Reeves Commission, in favour of larger number of communal seats to the number of open seats. The JPSC had done this with the clear understanding that by the time of the next revision the number of open seats will be increased. The Commission is now faced with two non-negotiable provisions: one man-one vote, one value and proportional representation. Both these principles does not inherently negate the forces of communal thinking or voting. It may be suicidal for minority communities to continue to think in communalistic ways but the fears and apprehensions reinforced by bad quality communalistic leaders of the past cannot be overcome by the stroke of a pen writing a new constitution. Some very smart, creative and innovative electoral engineering will have to be done to ensure that even communally based thinking will throw up merit based leadership from all communities. Some actual and real safeguards will have to be provided to ensure that merit based candidates from all communities are given priority listing in all political parties. No matter what system of election is adopted the choice of candidates based on merit will be crucial in overcoming age bound apprehensions and fears. Similarly, affirmative action for women should be seriously considered. A minimum percentage on priority listing or priority seats should be allocated by political parties. With massive Civic Education, visionary leaders at the helm, it may be possible, gradually, for the people to come to accept that representatives of the people need not come from the same community but be men/women of honesty, integrity and with skills and ability to lead and to represent the Constituents in an increasingly globalised society. To assist in this confidence building process, institutions of governance and independent

commissions and agencies may help to safeguard the rights of equal citizenry. The creation of such institutions may in time allay the fears of the various communities and shift their thinking from communal leadership to leadership based on the merit principles. It should be the intention to shift from dependence and reliance on individuals to institutions of governance and commissions to safeguard and fulfill the needs and aspirations of the citizens. rights. The Commission is challenged to find an electoral system that will fulfill the vision outlined above. Some variation of the mixed member proportional (MMP) system may in some ways help to realize such a vision. This may not be a radical a departure from the known system. A mixed system based on a Party List and Constituency Representation may fulfill some of the needs. A party list, treating the whole country as a single constituency could provide the proportion of support that each party has in the country. Having determined the overall percentage, the party list will then supplement the numbers determined by the constituencies. Not less than half of the number of total seats may come from the party list. There are two ways of determining constituency votes. The constituencies could be either single member constituency or three member constituencies. The three member constituency will perhaps provide a better choice for voters to be more generous in casting their votes. In other words, a voter may well be persuaded to distribute his/her vote to merit based candidates of major or minority communities and one for a candidate of preferred sexual orientation. A single member constituency will tend to limit the voters choice to one person which may well be only from the voters community. Independents could also stand from such a constituency. The voter may also decide to cast his/her vote across party lines. Instead of a tick, the voter may be required to number transferable votes. The constituency seats are determined first and winners declared. Each party then takes only the remaining percentage of seats from the party list. In this system the people have the choice to vote for a party at the National level and an individual, independent or any other choice that the voter wishes to exercise. Citizens must be able to access fairness and justice from public institutions and agencies of law and order to safeguard their human

In a 53 member parliament, 26 could come from the party list and 27 from nine constituencies of three members each.

Strengthening Parliament
The Standing Parliamentary Committee system introduced in the 1997 Constitution should be kept and strengthened. The Executive must have support of the relevant standing committee of the House for a Bill to be passed. It is anticipated that the Minister and his/her civil servant will first persuade the relevant committee to adopt the Bill with or without amendments to be put to full debate in the House. The Committees report will have to be taken much more seriously than it was the case under the 1997 Constitution. The draft Bill should go through a full consultation phase with the people, part or whole of it to be re-negotiated with the Minister if deemed necessary and then taken to the full House for debate and any further amendment and passage. The Standing Committees should meet regularly to supervise the work of the Ministry, ask questions, raise peoples issues, etc. It should not be activated only when a Bill is before the Committee. All Bills must be referred to the relevant Committee. Parliament should become a near full time work. Members should be well paid and well resourced to do Parliamentary and constituency duties.

Discipline
The constitution should provide for a Code of Conduct for members and Ministers. Only a breach of the Code could be considered a matter for expulsion or any other suitable punishment. Such punishment is to be recommended by the Parliamentary Disciplinary Committee. Once elected, no political party should be able to expel a Member from the Parliament. A Party may present a case to the Parliamentary Disciplinary Committee for expulsion but cannot on its own expel a member from Parliament.

Corruption
Corruption has been a feature of Fiji life for a long time and appears to have gained momentum after independence. Some corrupt action may be attributed to an overflow of customary obligations in a traditional society. The demarcation between social obligations and favours verging on corruption has been a fine line. Seeking favors from members of the Vanua or family heads has been an expected norm for most people in Fiji of whatever community. Fiji has to find ways to get out of these obligations and learn to deal with complaints and provide service on an equitable basis. Corruption is rife not just amongst civil servants, traffic wardens and anyone who has a service to provide but also in high places including parliamentarians and ministers. When any matter or issue raised by the people is not fully and appropriately addressed, the people conclude that there must be corruption. Corruption must be serious enough in Fiji for Transparency International to rank Fiji 4/10 in 2005. Corruption undermines the very fabric of a democratic society. It undermines all that is good and founded on honesty, integrity and the rule of law. It undermines the right of the citizen to have equal access to state resources and services. It leads to erosion of confidence in the government and the public service. Elimination of corruption must be the responsibility of every citizen. No one single institution can eradicate corruption. There has to be a multi pronged attack. The constitution must ensure that there is an: independent judiciary the State meets standards of fairness, transparency, effectiveness and the Conduct of an organization or association with the rule of law the government is accountable to the people there is respect for human rights there is social justice, the poor and the marginalized have equal access

Most of the investigation and prosecution can be done by the police. There is no need for a special

agency. The Parliament may establish specific independent committees to investigate corrupt practices which are of national importance. The actual appointment of members to special committees entrusted to execute justice must be done by either the Judicial Services Commission or an appropriate independent body provided for in the Constitution. The Commission is asked for a way to create really independent bodies. Each department of government and organizations in the public sector should set up its own mechanism for a regular and continued supervision. The Commission set up to supervise and conduct Civic Education could also include a programme on the nature and consequences of corruption in the society. The state should also provide protection for whistle blowers until Fiji becomes a nation of whistle blowers. A more vigorous system of punishment should be meted out to those found guilty of corrupt practices. The Parliament should keep a close watch on the Executive and be quick to demand explanations or institute appropriate enquiry on any signs of corruption. The whole society, the media, the Parliament, the NGOs should all act as watchdogs on people providing service to the citizens.

Independent Commissions and Officers

In making one man, one vote, one value, non-negotiable, the sense of security, real or imagined, that existed with communal voting should be addressed by the creation of independent commissions, institutions and agencies which would ensure that the communal and individual concerns of the citizens are secured. We have had some such commissions before but the partisan appointment of members of these commissions, as merely tools of the Government in power, has marred their effective functioning. It is important that whatever and whenever such Commissions, institutions or agencies are created under the Constitution, the mechanism of appointment of these bodies are seen as independent and free of any extraneous influence from Government or any other social or political agent. The

Parliamentary Select Committee as an overseer of State Affairs can also behave in a partisan way if the members are not people of integrity. The system should allow them to act independently once an issue is brought before them. The Judicial Services Commission may be charged with the additional responsibility for appointment. The Commission may utilize its wealth of experience and wisdom to recommend an appointing body. Some of the bodies that have been known to exist for this purpose include: Electoral Commission: Should be independent and remain in existence at all times. The voter registration should be religiously updated annually. The Election Commission should be absolutely free of the Government. It should be adequately funded to carry out a free and fair election. Independent Auditor General An ombudsman Human Rights Commission Judicial Services Commission Independent Commission for the Protection of Cultural, Religious and Linguistic Communities Anti Corruption Commission Independent Office of Director of Public Prosecution Independent Public Service Commission which should be responsible for Standards in Public Life An independent Reserve Bank

International Conventions
The Constitution should give pride of place to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It should also acknowledge and endorse international instruments governing human rights provisions including all conventions and treaties ratified by the Fiji Government. Amongst them: Convention on the Right of the Child International Convention on the Elimination Against Women International Convention on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities (Not yet ratified but should be)

Human Rights:
The Constitution should contain provisions for safeguarding the entire set of rights associated with living in a democratic state. Amongst them the right to education, food, housing, health and healthy environment should feature strongly. Every citizen has the right to meaningful work, fair treatment by employers, the right to form associations and unions to foster any of the rights, particularly to be able to form unions to bargain with employers for salary and better conditions of work. Every human being has the right to equality. In the Fiji society men and women should be entitled to the same rights. There should be no discrimination on the grounds of race, religion, disabilities and sexual orientation. Human rights should be limited only when it is reasonable to do so. The reasonableness of a limited right should be determined by the Court.

Existence of an Upper House

A lot will depend on the Commissions recommendation on the type of Government. The usefulness of an Upper House has increasingly been questioned. It will lose one of its major purpose if the Constitution is going to compromise the role of the Council of Chiefs. The group rights of the iTaukei Community for which the Upper House traditionally acted as a custodian of will have to be entrenched elsewhere. If the select committee system is given its due recognition and made to work effectively and responsibly there will be less need for a second House of review. Similarly any other check and balance maintained by an Upper House should become the responsibility of Independent Commissions and Agencies provided for under the Constitution.

If however, the Constitution Commission finds that it is making too radical a departure from past practices and stands a danger of being rejected by the Fiji community, it could continue to keep the Upper House with the President being responsible for the appointment with recommendations from representatives of legitimate, registered and recognized NGOs, provincial councils, school management association, and trade unions.

The criteria for selecting members of the Upper House should be the same as those of Members of Parliament. The Upper House should act independently and shall only have powers to review and delay. It shall not be able to delay any money bills. Fijis Dual Administration Fijis dual administration is also part of the vestiges of our Colonial past.

The Darwinian desire to preserve all species in their primordial form had broadly, determined the Colonial Policy of safeguarding indigenous people from the then modern day commercial exploitation of its people and their resources.

Such a framework had resulted in creating a different set of principles for iTaukei administration and for paternalistically shadowing the iTaukei from the full impact of colonial commercial culture.

It meant that rudiments of pre-contact social structures were used to construct an administrative system. The Council of Chiefs and the Confederacys are part of such a construct. The Provincial Councils, village courts and turaga ni koros are all vestiges of separate administration.

Some of these have been reformed over a period of time.

Once a system is put in place and begins to serve a function, the community takes total ownership. Thus, the creations of yesterday are seen today as part of a tradition.

It is the iTaukei community, therefore, which should rightly determine what and when they want to do away with their own institutions.

The Provincial Administration could well become part of the central and district administration but the Council of Chiefs has grown to fulfill an emotional and psychological need of the iTaukei community. In the 1997 Constitution it was given some additional roles as well. These roles had emerged from a continuing fear of loss of ownership, culture and tradition. It is the iTaukei that should decide whether these fears are still there.

The Constitution could provide for affirmative action to young chiefs to make the transition into professional and business life of the country. A new source of power base, more attune to a growing urban, egalitarian society may be a way to encourage a modern transformation. A need has already been expressed in some quarters to provide affirmative action for Fijian entrepreneurs. Some chiefs are already adapting well to the new commercial culture.

However, the specific future of the Council of Chiefs, as an institution, should be the preserve of the iTaukei community. The State should only play a role to wean the Council into mainstream administration and business life. An attempt to destroy overnight an arrangement which presumably continues to play an important role in the life of the iTaukei community could be counterproductive and undesirable.

Land
Land issues have been a major source of conflict in Fiji. Most conflict has been based on imagined fears of landowners. The constitution should clearly state that communal and individual property rights including land will not be interfered with by the State. Land for development purposes can only be utilized by the full consent of the owners of the land. However, land usage and leasing mechanisms may be better rationalized by the State. Investment capital and individual entrepreneurs would most likely favour dealing with a single institution regulating land usage. The iTaukei owners must be paid a fair economic rental for the land they lease. Ownership of all other land including freehold land must be guaranteed. Residential pieces of land leased for such a purpose should be on the basis of perpetual lease if the occupant so desires. There can be no other single factor which can provide a real and a meaningful sense of belonging to the country.

Local Government
One of the reasons for the continuous lapse of democratic principles in Fiji can be attributed to the fact that democratic values and principles have not completely been imbibed as a way of life in Fiji. We seem to have made half hearted efforts to practice democracy but have perhaps only learnt to use the rhetoric of democracy rather than living by democratic principles. If we are to live by democratic values such values, should permeate all areas of life and living in Fiji. It must be the complete modus operandi of the school system, the household, rural and urban organisations and the local and national institutions of governance. It must, at least be the goals of the Fiji society. In this context the local government must be based on principles of democracy. The people within

the rural and urban boundaries should be given an opportunity to decide and manage their own affairs. It could provide the most useful and meaningful experience of first hand exposure to democratic values, principles and governance. The National Government must ensure that sound principles of governance are followed in the administration of the local government. The affairs of the local government must be legislated by parliament. Where the functions of the national government overlap with those of the local government, the areas must be very clearly defined under an Act of Parliament.

Affirmative Action
Fiji should focus on affirmative action based on actual surveys rather than a generalized belief on weaker sections or areas of the communities. Recent surveys on poverty indicate that affirmative action needs to be provided for all communities in rural areas. Even this may be an over generalization. To be realistic it may be possible to ascertain conditions of rurality rather than focusing on rural areas, geographically, to identify where rural conditions are prevalent and then direct affirmative action to those people affected by such conditions. The rural urban category may be easier to delineate using geography as the guide, but poverty is not necessarily confined to geographical boundaries only. Poverty in urban squatter areas cannot be ignored because it falls within an urban boundary. Affirmative action must be targeted and monitored.

The Military
The military is no longer seen as the protector of civil authority. It has outgrown any perceived fears of foreign invasion which may have determined colonial policies to provide for a military buffer to prime colonial possessions of Australia and New Zealand. The military in Fiji is no longer required to defend any colonial interest. It is clearly an appendage of our colonial past. Having tasted political power, there can be no guarantee that the military will not usurp political power again. It appears that every ten years or so, there is a bottle neck of military leaders on the top who have nowhere to go. It leaves little option but to take over civilian control and redistribute its top leadership into political appointments in Government. This has been a repeated phenomena in Fiji politics. It is likely to continue until the military finds an enlightened leadership agreeable to limiting its own numbers and confining its activities to peacekeeping and civilian activities which require a more disciplined labor force to conduct emergency business during natural disasters, etc. The military must be commended for its tenacity and perseverance in the way in which they have conducted the business of the state, no matter how short sighted their vision for the country has been. If democratic governments in the past had carried out their work with the same dedication and

perseverance it would have been very difficult for a military, no matter of what size, to wrench democratic control from civilian hands. The constitution should provide for an honorable exit for the military from civilian preoccupations. Military personnel should be provided with redundancy packages and assisted to settle to work in regular civilian life. The peacekeeping activity should be regulated and executed as a one or two time operation for each officer. Thereafter, they should return to civilian life. International agencies requiring peace keeping services should provide for the training and payment of emolument for their services. The predominant ethos of military training and work should be predicated on an overriding and an all encompassing philosophy of subjugation to civilian authority and control. There can be no exception to this. Any breach of this fundamental principle should incur severe punishment.

Compact
The Chapter on the COMPACT in the 1997 Constitution was an innovation and should be kept. The idea that the various communities, institutions and the people of Fiji should come together and voice their aspirations in a compact with themselves to adopt a constitution based on values of a secular state, respect for human rights, and the rule of law in a parliamentary system of democracy is a laudable one and should be maintained.

Civic Education
Democracy has never really been a way of life for the Fiji people. A mere adoption of democratic forms has not completely allowed the seepage of democratic values in the manner of our thinking, administering and governing ourselves. Forms of democracy has been adjusted and readjusted with every constitutional change in the past. No conserted effort has ever been made to inculcate democratic principles in all facets of governance. Indeed some institutions and organisations within Fiji have been allowed to exist and conduct their affairs in total contradiction to democratic values. We can no longer continue to live with this contradiction. One way to get the people of Fiji to fully appreciate democratic principles and values is by conducting a massive and continuous programme of civic education. It has to be fully resourced by the State; be independent; have the capacity to manage and organize its own civic education programme; be able to supervise similar programmes conducted by NGOs; be able to supervise civic education curriculum in schools and conduct awareness and understanding of democratic

values and principles to adults, parliamentarians, police and the military. It could be part of or independent of a national education advisory board appointed by the Parliament to oversee all national curriculums including that of civic education. In addition to specific fund set aside by the State the body should be able to solicit its own funding from independent sources. There should be no Government interference in the course material or the principles and philosophies of democracy propounded by the civic education programme. The number of coups in this country is symptomatic of the lack of awareness and understanding of the citizens rights and responsibilities in a democratic state. The fact that Fiji citizens do not overtly protest against the usurpation of democracy is indication of the lack of their commitment, and understanding of democratic principles. What is even more astounding is the changing allegiance of the people to democracy. There has been no consistency of support. Respect for human rights issues, democratic forms and principles are seen as being too remote to the daily struggle of dealing with bread and butter issues. The relationship between human rights, parliament, participative decision making are all substance for civic education curriculum. The state has failed in the past to provide appropriate training and education on civic issues. The entire Fiji society including children and adults should be the target for an ongoing education programme. Education and training curricular should not only provide technical skills but be able to prepare individuals with critical analytical skills to examine government institutions, policies, operations of parliament and decision making processes. There is very little critical analytical training for an ongoing analysis of social, economic and political issues. Sadly our political leaders have shown a marked short fall in these areas. Dissent, a fundamental behaviour in a functional democracy is often frowned upon by leaders. Faced with chairing dissenting views most leaders find themselves unable to synthesize the issues.

Recommendation
The Fiji Constitution should provide for an Independent Commission or an Education Advisory Board tasked with the work of supervising school curriculum and all civic education programme.

The Commission should be adequately funded by the State and be able to solicit its own funding from other independent sources. The programme undertaken by the Commission should be on-going and not a sporadic effort made before an election. The Commission should be appointed by the Parliament on the recommendation of an independent commission responsible for all appointments to public office.

Reconciliation, Peace and Truth Commission

In the education system; societal mores, thinking and behaviour; decision making processes; structures of individual and communal engagement, no concerted effort has been made to reconcile differences amongst the various communities that make up Fiji. Instead of laying foundations of peace and togetherness political leadership has often fanned animosity, jealousy and greed. Visionary leaders have been marginalized. The Fiji Constitution should provide an opportunity for individuals and societal groups to re-foster common visions of share, care, peace and stability. A known way to begin is perhaps to establish a truth commission to which past and present leaders could make confessions of the articulate various forces, fears and apprehensions that had conditioned their social and political behaviour. They are to be given an opportunity to talk about forces and individuals responsible for coups in the past. Those who would tell all should be recommended to parliament for pardon. Anyone subsequently found to mislead or tell lies to the Commission should be punished for treason. It would be easy to blame and to apportion total responsibility and punishment to the military leaders who conducted the coups. But this, in my view would be totally unfair. In all coups there have been people behind the scene who have prodded individuals and the military to conduct coups. Unless we get to know who these people are and what motivates them we will never be able to stop coups in the future. Fiji society deserves to know who have been the real movers and shakers in destabilizing the state. If those who lurked in the background came up before the Truth Commission they should be recommended for pardon as well. Otherwise, full investigation and due punishment be meted out to those found guilty of perpetrating coups in the country. There should be no amnesty before confession. Reconciliation, Peace and Truth Commission may be the way forward.