This comparative analysis covers the election of members of the House of Representatives under Fiji’s 2013 Constitution and under its earlier Constitutions of 1970 and 1987.
The purpose is to determine which is the best system of electing our MPs.
Under Fiji’s Constitutions of 1970 and 1987, the electorate was divided into four, based on ethnicity. The constituencies, the roll of voters, and voting method used reflected this.
As a political community, Fiji was to be considered as comprising four ethnic-based voting groups, and not as stand-alone or independent individual voters.
These are the Fijians, Indo-Fijians, Rotumans, and General Electors, comprising Europeans, part-Europeans, Chinese and Pacific Islanders.
The Fijians were to elect their candidates to pre-designated number of seats allocated to their community in the House of Representatives. The Indo-Fijians were to elect their candidates to pre-designated number of MPs for their community. Likewise, the Rotumans and General Electors were to elect candidates to their designated number of MPs.
In addition to the communal-based seats, a designated number of seats was classified as open or cross-voting seats to be elected by every voter regardless of ethnicity.
This ethnic-based system was discriminatory. The only advantage was that it guaranteed the political representation of the four communities in the House of Representatives.
For example, in the 1997 Constitution, the 71 members of the House of Representatives are to be elected as follows:
[1] 46 MPs are to be elected by voters registered in communal electoral rolls, with 23 by Fijians, 19 by Indo-Fijians, 1 by Rotumans, and 3 by General Electors.
[2] 25 MPs are to be elected by every voter registered in an open electoral roll.
So, one can see that the four communities were guaranteed a minimum of seats in the House of Representatives, with 23 for Fijians, 19 for Indo-Fijians, 1 for Rotumans, and 3 for General Electors.
The iTaukei political leaders insisted upon the adoption of this ethnic-based electoral system in the belief that this would enable the iTaukei to maintain leadership and control of the executive Government, and to safeguard the paramountcy of their rights and interests in the governance of Fiji.
In reality, however, it only served to promote political extremism especially within the iTaukei polity, and with disastrous consequences.
Here are two illustrations:
[1] In the first general election held in 1977, Prime Minister Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara’s Alliance Party lost in the election, and through that, its leadership of Government, and it was for one simple reason. The iTaukei votes were split when a breakaway party, the Fijian Nationalist Party, led by Sakeasi Butadroka, withdrew their support for the Alliance Party.
[2] In the general election held in 1999, Sitiveni Rabuka’s party, the SVT, was defeated by a rival newly-formed iTaukei party. As a result of this split within the iTaukei polity, Mr Rabuka lost office as Prime Minister.
Today, the question to consider is: which community has benefitted the most from the electoral system in the 2013 Constitution?
The electoral system under the 2013 Constitution has adopted a totally different approach. It has completely discarded the ethnic-based system under Fiji’s earlier Constitutions.
Instead, it is based on the following foundational principles.
Firstly, there is to be a single national electoral roll of all registered voters, based on qualifications as set out in the Constitution, but no longer on one’s ethnic identity.
Secondly, the right to be registered to vote derives from one’s individual civil and political rights as a citizen of Fiji.
Thirdly, the Electoral Commission has set the total membership of the House of Representative at 55, and in future, this is to be reviewed based on the results of a whole of Fiji national population census.
Fourthly, these 55 seats are to be contested by competing political parties and independent candidates, from a single and undivided (55-multi-member) national constituency, based on the whole of Fiji.
Fifthly, the 55 members of the House of Representatives are to be elected by an open list system of proportional representation, under which each voter has one vote, with each vote being of equal value in electing an MP.
Sixthly, for a competing political party, or independent candidate, to win a seat in the House of Representatives, it must secure votes with a minimum total of at least 5 per cent of all valid votes cast in a general election.
Seventhly, after each general election, the Electoral Commission will determine from the total valid votes cast, the number of votes that constitutes 5 per cent of the total votes cast, and from this, determine the political parties and other candidates, who have met this threshold, and, therefore, qualify for seat allocation.
Since the 2013 Constitution’s promulgation in September 2013, general elections were held in 2014, 2018 and 2022. What are the results and trends we have seen?
The iTaukei have been the clear winners. The number of their MPs in the House of Representatives, from all political parties represented in the House of Representatives, have now exceeded two-thirds of the total membership of 55 MPs and it is projected to continue to increase.
Indo-Fijians are the only community, other than the iTaukei, to be represented in the House. But their total number is progressively declining.
There was once a Rotuman MP and a part-European MP in the House. However, they have all gone since then. Today, there is no representative of the minority communities in the House.
The continuing increase in iTaukei MPs in the House of Representatives can be attributed to two concurrent phenomena.
Firstly, when an iTaukei voter enters the voting booth to cast his vote, I believe that what is uppermost in his mind is one’s duty as a mataqali member to safeguard the collective rights in common of the iTaukei to their customary lands and other natural resources.
And further, all iTaukei are conditioned by their membership of their communal kinship social unit, starting with the family, and then in an ascending order, the itokatoka, Mataqali, Yavusa and Vanua, and also by their communal way of life, living together in a village or as an extended family in urban centres, to always place the collective interests of the iTaukei, first and foremost.
This strong sense of common belonging and mutual duty is reinforced by the membership of every iTaukei of a church in the various Christian denominations. Whether they live in their villages or individual homes in urban centres, it is an integral part of their communal way of life to go to church on Sundays and in mid-week on Wednesdays.
The second contributing phenomenon to the steady growth in the number of iTaukei MPs is the continuing increase in the iTaukei population.
In the Fiji national population census in 2007, the Government’s Bureau of Statistics estimated the iTaukei population to comprise 57 per cent of Fiji’s total population. And it projected that the iTaukei population, because of their high fertility rate, would continue to progressively increase every year. Today, it is estimated at circa 63 per cent of Fiji’s total population.
So, one can see from this that the projected continuing increase in iTaukei membership of the House of Representatives, is the combined effect of the two phenomena explained above.
As for Indo-Fijian representation in the House of Representatives, the progressive decline in their number reflects the decline in their population from 38 per cent in 2007 to circa 33 per cent today. The cause of this population decline is a combination of low fertility rate and emigration.
The underlying assumption on the voting behaviour of Indo-Fijians and other minority communities is their concern for their property rights, the safety and security of their families, and equal and fair opportunities for education, employment, or to operate a business for their livelihood.
Clearly, the biggest challenge in national politics in Fiji, one can learn from this analysis, is the imperative need for predominantly iTaukei political parties to include more candidates in their open party list from the Indo-Fijian, Rotuman and General Elector communities in Fiji.
In fact, it is the fundamental consideration in my recommendation to the 2013 Constitution Review Commission for a change to the current electoral system in the 2013 Constitution.
Instead of continuing with a single and undivided constituency system based on the whole of Fiji as a single 55-member national constituency in general elections, we are to move to three smaller multi-member regional constituencies based on Government’s three administrative divisions: Central Division (24 MPs), Western Division (22 MPs), and Norther Division (9 MPs). And in addition to these 55 regional seats, five seats are to be contested through single member constituencies in the Eastern Division, with two for Lomaiviti and one each for Lau, Kadavu and Rotuma.
The underlying hope and intention in the creation of three regional constituencies is that this will lead to the election of MPs from all communities and not just the iTaukei and Indo-Fijians.
This is apart from making the 5 per cent threshold to qualify for a share of seats in the House of Representatives more reasonable for small political parties and independent candidates.
Jioji Kotobalavu was a long serving permanent secretary in the Civil Service and is currently a lecturer in public law and in international relations and diplomacy at the University of Fiji’s JDP School of Law.
