'Great loss': Fiji govt's constitutional reforms fail, PM decries setback

By Christine Rovoi, PMN

The political standoff over constitutional amendments in Fiji continues to escalate. This time, the coalition government accuses the opposition of weak leadership and refuses to engage in meaningful dialogue.

The conflict follows the government's recent attempts to amend the 2013 Constitution, which were unsuccessful.

Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka failed to secure 75 percent support during the second reading of the Constitution Amendment Bill 2025 in parliament last week.

Despite initial backing from opposition MPs, the final vote saw 40 members voting in favour, 14 against, and one abstention. Rabuka needed 41 votes for the Bill to pass.

The government argues that the proposed changes aim to reduce the thresholds for constitutional amendments from 75 per cent to 66 per cent, which Rabuka describes as crucial for democracy and citizen representation. The Bill also seeks to remove the required 41 votes to pass.

The prime minister has called the defeat a "great loss" for his government, saying it denies Fijians the opportunity to shape their supreme law.

The Bill's failure also deals a major setback for Rabuka's coalition, which presented the review of the 2013 Constitution as a key promise during its successful 2022 General Elections campaign.

Rabuka admits that the government miscalculated its support for the Bill.

"We had indications that we would get the numbers, but during the debate, one of those that had indicated support did not turn up to vote," Rabuka told the media. "So it is the percentage of the numbers of the members of parliament, not those present. We lost out."

While Rabuka did not name the absent MP, local media reports indicate that opposition MP Sanjay Kirpal was the only member who did not vote.

In a statement, Kirpal says he left parliament due to illness. He attended the morning session but had to see a doctor, missing the debate and vote.

"I was sick, so I went to see a doctor. If I had been there, I would have voted no. But in the Constitution, you need at least 41 members to get it through, and whether I voted No or wasn't in parliament, the result would have been the same."

Kirpal, one of four opposition MPs who had previously supported the government in suspending two standing orders to allow for the Bill's first reading, cited concerns over transparency and public participation as his reasons for changing his stance.

"This shift would have effectively silenced the voices of the people, allowing significant constitutional amendments to be made without their direct input. Such a move risks eroding public trust, discouraging investor confidence, and ultimately leading to economic instability."

Opposition leader Inia Seruiratu has been criticised for failing the people of Fiji, as he had the opportunity "to rise above the politics and seek common ground".

But Seruiratu claims the opposition has worked in good faith to seek dialogue with the government.

He alleges that the government has been engaging in "underhand tactics", offering "enticements and inducements" to opposition members to support the Bill.

"They were tempting our members to their side with promises and other enticements and inducements that verge on bribery," Seruiratu says in a statement.

"When they saw that the voice of the people would be removed, they had to make a stand with us.

"We are not the bitter losers. We are open to a roper procedure to review the constitution, but it must be done correctly and transparently," Seruiratu says.

After its defeat, the bill will not advance, but the government plans to regroup and may seek clarification from the Supreme Court. In his ruling, Speaker Filimone Jitoko says that since the Bill has been defeated, it cannot proceed. "It ends here."

Rabuka dismisses calls for him to step down as prime minister and rejects claims that the Bill was rushed. "It was not rushed. It was a platform manifesto issue for the party. We had to do it. And we failed. The mandate given to us by the people was not enough to pass the Bill."

Concerns have been raised about the existing power dynamics and their impact on smaller political parties. Various leaders and experts have called for a review of Fiji's constitution to address issues facing the indigenous population.

Professor Steven Ratuva, the head of Pacific Studies at Canterbury University, says Fiji is experiencing "political overload".

In an interview with William Terite on Pacific Mornings before last week's vote in Fiji, Ratuva highlighted the complexities of amending the constitution and the ongoing fluidity in the political landscape, especially following the breakdown of Frank Bainimarama's government.

In 2017, Bainimarama dismissed opposition calls for a partial review of the 2013 constitution.

"When Fiji First broke up, nine members joined Rabuka's government, and then the judiciary has been in a bit of a tense and fluid situation," Ratuva says.

"The constitution is seen as belonging to the Fiji First government. So when the new government came into power, that is one of the first things they did, was to talk about constitutional change in the beginning."

Ratuva says the Truth and Reconciliation Commission's efforts to address the impact of past coups are contributing to the stress on the Fijian government and society.

He says the process for constitutional change is controversial. It requires parliamentary approval and a referendum supported by three-quarters of voters, posing challenges.

Ratuva had called for a balanced constitutional amendment process to maintain stability. He warned that making amendments too easy or too difficult could lead to instability and potential extra-legal actions.

"In the case of Fiji, they immediately think of coups because they've had coups in the past. So it's very sensible to have a constitutional amendment process, which is somewhere in the middle, to maintain that sense of stability."

Meanwhile, Rabuka addresses allegations he received a Rolex watch valued at FJ$150,000 (NZ$114,000) in exchange for pardoning businessman Mahendra Motibhai Patel, who faced criminal charges.

Rabuka says he has the right to remain silent and criticises the media for trying to distract from important issues.

Photos of the prime minister wearing the watch have circulated on social media, with former PM Mahendra Chaudhry calling for accountability over the watch's origins.

The Labour Party leader has also condemned Rabuka's response as insulting to Fijians, highlighting the prime minister's previous commitment to combat corruption and promote transparency.

-This article was first published by PMN.