published 16 March 2001

Media release

Fiji's continuing political crisis


Every action of Ratu Josefa Iloilo as acting President since the Fiji Court of Appeal judgment on the 1997 Constitution has been illegal, unconstitutional and unlawful.

It is clear that Ratu Josefa and his advisers never had any intention of acting within the bounds of the constitution or the rule of law. Their undertaking to do so was a mere stage show to mislead the people of Fiji and the international community.

To begin with, his own appointment as President and that of the Vice President are unconstitutional because the chairman of the Great Council of Chiefs did not consult me as the constitutionally appointed prime minister, as required under Section 90 of the 1997 Constitution.

The appointment of Ratu Tevita Momoedonu as ‘prime minister’ for a day was not only unlawful but farcical and fraudulent. It made a mockery of the constitution itself.

The reappointment of Mr Laisenia Qarase as the caretaker ‘prime minister ’ is yet again unconstitutional because the appointment contravenes Section 98 of the Constitution which stipulates that only a member elected to the House of Representatives can be appointed as prime minister. Mr Qarase is not a member of the House of Representatives.

The dissolution of the House of Representatives on the advice of Ratu Tevita Momoedonu is null and void. Legally and constitutionally the House elected in May 1999 continues in existence.

Ratu Josefa’s assertion that he did not heed my advice for dissolution of the House because he believes I did not have the confidence of the members is pure conjecture. My support was not tested on the floor of the House. It certainly does not explain how Ratu Tevita Momoedonu’s purported advice for dissolution was accepted without ascertaining his support. So far as I know Ratu Tevita was not supported by any political party in the House.

My advice to Ratu Josefa was offered in good faith and to help the acting President find a solution to our political impasse within the Consitution.

Ratu Josefa’s speech writers have deliberately distorted my advice to him to make it appear as if I had advised the immediate dissolution of the House. Their intention no doubt was to mislead the public.

Let me make it quite clear that in my meeting with Ratu Josefa on 7th March, I had offered to advice dissolution but only after parliament had been reconvened to deal with the call from a number of indigenous political parties for a change to the voting method to revert to first-past the-post system.

Had the acting President heeded my advice, he would have stayed within the bounds of the Constitution. If members of the House did not want me as prime minister, as claimed by him, they would have had the opportunity to bring a no confidence motion on the subject and remove me, thus paving the way for Ratu Josefa to appoint a new prime minister who had the support of the House to lead a caretaker government until the general elections.

It is not proper for Ratu Josefa to assume that he could not appoint a caretaker prime minister from the elected members of the House of Representatives because of the split among political parties.

Clearly, the answer lay in his awaiting developments in the reconvened House of Representatives in relation to the prime minister issue. Ratu Josefa is quite wrong in pre-empting the matter on bad advice.

Fiji had the option of dealing with its political crisis within the law. But those in authority chose to take the unlawful path. They chose not to listen to the good counsel of a majority of our people, our Courts and the international community.

Sadly, the innocent people – the poor and the disadvantaged of all races in the community will have to pay the price for the decision of those in authority not to act responsibly.

Mahendra Chaudhry
Prime Minister.

END
14 March 2001
People's Coalition Office
Suva