Sept 20, 2000 (by Jone Dakuvula)

The Government advertisement of Interim Prime Minister Laisenia Qarase (D.P 18/09/00) was, I suppose, the substance of his submission to the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (C.M.A.G) Meeting last Friday. It was interesting to read alongside the statement by the C.M.A.G, in response. The C.M.A.G rejected the two years time table "as incompatible with the provisions of the Millbrook Action Programme on the Harare Declaration and inadequate in terms of the need to promote national reconciliation and unity in Fiji as a matter of urgency".

That is the answer to Ratu Inoke Kubuabola's constant claim that the C.M.A.G was acting inconsistently and imperialistically in not allowing Fiji two years to prepare a new Constitution. Ratu Inoke is now reduced to attacking the Australian and New Zealand Foreign Ministers because they are white and the situation of Aboriginal and Maori people. Incidentally, most of the members of the CMAG are indigenous Foreign Ministers from third world states.

LEGITIMACY

Ratu Inoke has basically white-anted Kaliopate Tavola's agenda for building bridges of understanding with our traditional partners with his insulting statements. Tavola should have known better. Noting that the 1997 Constitution had been unanimously endorsed by the Council of Chiefs and both Houses of Parliament, the C.M.A.G. went on to express "very real concern that the Interim Administration intends that the new Constitution incorporate further restrictions on the basis of racial origin".

It also expressed concern "that the Interim Administration is itself the product of the unconstitutional overthrow of an elected government and its actions therefore lack both legitimacy and credibility."

Note that Mr Qarase's Cabinet is still called by the CMAG an "interim administration", not even an "interim government", and is condemned as having no "legitimacy or credibility". These are very demeaning and damning words. Qarase's proposal for increased Fijian seats and a voluntary social contract between communities to reserve the positions of President and Prime Minister for indigenous Fijian is not favoured by the C.M.A.G, not because of the merit of the argument, but because they see it as really intended to be an imposed restriction under a Constitution that will be decreed. There is no need for an agreement on the Presidency to be Fijian because that is decided by the Bose Levu Vakaturaga.

CONSTITUTION

Had the "social contract" on a Fijian PM been made by a genuine Government of National Unity under the 1997 Constitution, the C.M.A.G. reaction might have been different! But because it was proposed by an illegitimate regime, it was viewed negatively. I believe there is no need for such an agreement because the 1997 Constitution Compact is sufficient, if the principle of paramountcy of Fijian interest stated therein is observed in spirit by politicians when forming a government. That is what constitutional governance is about, observing both the letter and spirit of laws and agreement. The Fiji Labour Party leader made that costly mistake in not including the S.V.T. in his Government at the outset.

Qarase's did talk about an option for "amending" the 1997 Constitution, but then dismissed the idea because this would mean reconvening the deposed Parliament. I suspect somebody else who is not a Parliamentary made this decision for him.

Qarase argued that a reinstatement of the 1997 Constitution, with the Chaudhry-led Coalition as part of a Government of National Unity will re-ignite widespread violent feelings of disaffection amongst indigenous Fijians. This threat is premised on the understanding that the Fiji Police Force will again not perform it's professional role of upholding the law by protecting Parliament and, the Fiji Military Forces also will allow George Speight's activist supporters to repeat what they did on May 19th. The CMAG was not influenced by this argument.

GOVERNMENT OF NATIONAL UNITY 

Why is Qarase so unwilling to form a genuine G.N.U. under a reconvened Parliament? Is it because people like Tora and Kubuabola threaten to incite the mob again if they are excluded from a G.N.U? Or is it because he believes that the FMF and the Police cannot be trusted anymore to defend Parliament or a Government of elected politicians? We have no choice but to wait two years says Qarase, with sanctions likely to intensify and involve the European Community and pressure from the United Nations. Is that the price we must pay for a new Constitution that we can already predict, will not be legitimate to the majority of our citizens' and the international community? If Qarase and his civilian colleagues lack the courage to form a genuine GNU, then why don't they just hand back power to the Military Council? After all, it was certain elements in FMF who supported George Speight and then conducted the real military coup on 29th May. They should be held responsible to clean up the mess they created.

RECONCILIATION 

The interim administration's submission is also hypocritical in its call for inter-communal political reconciliation because it does not favour reconciliation under a genuine government of national unity to set the process in motion in other areas. His National Reconciliation Council (N.R.C.) and Constitutional Review Commission had been rejected by the deposed Coalition Government and the National Federation Party. The CMAG said it was "Inadequate to promote national reconciliation and unity as a matter of urgency." Some community leaders who were invited to its' first meeting were shocked to learn that the N.R.C. was only about reconciliation between indigenous Fijians to achieve racial and political unity. So the question remains, when and how will Qarase's administration achieve the inter-communal reconciliation it desires as the basis of its new "stand alone" constitution? Who amongst the Indo-Fijians, and other communities is he now expecting to join his administration in this national reconciliation project?

THE MILITARY The problem of Laisenia Qarase's Cabinet is that the members had decided sometime ago that they will stay in place, until there is an election in two years. This was probably done as a condition of the "agreement" with the Commanders of the FMF. It was the FMF that had forced the President to resign, abrogated the 1997 Constitution and declared martial law outside of the Emergency Powers Act 1998. What the FMF actually wanted to achieve out of this disastrous intervention is still an open question. Was the original plan to get rid of the President and have a Military Government like they have in Burma, and was it later decided that a Civilian Cabinet would be more acceptable publicly? Well, the cover of an "interim civilian administration" has been blown asunder by the resistance of the international community.

The FMF Commanders should know now that a military-imposed regime is no longer acceptable internationally, especially one that is intent on imposing racial dominance and discrimination. The Military regime which cancelled the General Election result in Burma in 1991, is still treated as an international Pariah state today. The cost to the country of having Mahendra Chaudhry removed as Prime Minister to satisfy George Speight and his mob, some greedy Fijian Politicians and some FMF and ex army personnel is 7,000 jobs lost so far, a $10 million budget increase for the FMF, accelerated emigration of qualified and experienced professionals, massive cuts in income etc. The impact will be felt for many years ahead. Whilst the FMF has been success in its peace-keeping roles overseas, at home it has only brought us costly disasters.

LESSONS

Laisenia Qarase's submission expresses no concern about the lesson that his endorsement of George Speight's Coup is conveying to the young indigenous Fijians: that it is all right to dishonour any Constitutional Settlement in the future if it does not secure electoral victory by holding hostage and threatening to murder leaders who fairly won an election. That it is better to change any perceived deficiencies in a Constitution or any laws for that matter by methods such as executed on May 19th , rather than through Parliament. That it is better to change any law by decree than have these scrutinised and debated publicly.

The submission continues to blame Mahendra Chaudhry for the Coup even though he had not done anything illegal or so reprehensible as to justify any coup or any actions that the Fiji Military Forces and the Interim Administration had done subsequently. What Qarase's submission accused Chaudhry of as the cause of the Coup: arrogance, insensitivity, unwillingness to listen and to change; it is committing and displaying the same. The only difference is that Chaudhry's government had an electoral mandate.

There is no evidence for Qarase's claim that the majority of indigenous Fijians would oppose the reinstatement of the Coalition Government as a participant in a Government of National Unity.

Mr Qarase has already rejected in advance the offer of the C.M.A.G., to appoint a Special Envoy to help mediate for the formation of a G.N.U. This can only mean that his cabinet does not seriously intend to return Fiji to the Commonwealth. And thereafter he spoke to an almost empty U.N. General Assembly and then claimed recognition of his Government by the U.N. as an answer to the embarrassing failure at the CMAG. The U.N. recognises States and not Government. He was not invited there to be recognised.

MORALLY WRONG

There is no acknowledgement in his Statement that the May 19th Coup was legally and morally wrong. It was an injustice to the members and supporters of the People's Coalition Government. I do not think we indigenous Fijian should demand other communities' co-operation to address what some of us believe as our just desert when the Interim Administration will not recognise the wrongness of the coup which enabled them to take the reins of political power. That is not to say that there are not some Members of Qarase's Cabinet, (including himself) who accepted these positions out of a genuine sense of duty. Some of them probably realise now that they can never regain international and national credibility because their moral authority to rule is crumbling. Legitimacy and credibility will not be theirs because of their refusal to acknowledge the emotional injury to the Indo-Fijian Community and the supporters of the deposed Coalition Government. These injuries, bitterness and feelings of injustice need to be healed through genuine initiatives for reconciliation. And genuine reconciliation and healing can only come about under a genuine government of national unity.