Fiji under a New Political Order: Ethnicity and Indigenous Rights

Abstract

Promulgated by decree in July 1990 under an interim government appointed by the military, the new constitution of Fiji seems to be another prescription for political injustice, ethnic repression, and systemic instability. Chances are that underlying forces of discontent will erupt once more, compelling the military to intervene again. None of the major complaints by the Fiji military forces, acting on behalf of the Fijian people, have been settled decisively so as to quell new challenges. MajorGeneral Rabuka, architect of the coup carried out in May 1987 and a second one four months later, expressed dissatisfaction with the constitution, saying it would not achieve all the objectives of the 1987 coups and consequently he had not ruled out a third coup if things did not go right.1 Many of the factors often assigned to internal insurrection have been institutionalized in the new Fiji constitution. To begin with, in a multiethnic population dominated by Indians (49%), the minority Fijians (46%) have allocated to themselves 37 out of 70 seats (53.6%) in the House of Representatives, while the Indians have been assigned 27 seats (39.1%). In a democratic world of individual human rights, the principle of one man, one vote is the prevailing norm, and the constitutional provisions for inequality are the incendiary raw materials for rebellion. Second, in a state where most taxes supplying revenues to run the Fiji government are paid by Indians, Europeans, and Chinese but where most civil service jobs (50%) are constitutionally set aside for indigenous Fijians, this dis-