The GCC Muddle (ed. in FT 9/3/2024)

The resurrection of the Great Council of Chiefs is a prime example of how the Rabuka Government is utterly rudderless when it comes to re-establishing the “rule of law”, although I doubt if that is even on its agenda.

     No one knows what Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka was intending to do with the resurrected GCC apart from casual remarks thrown around here and there. But of course, he is only too aware of how the GCC has been misused in the past, during the coups of 1987 and 2000.

     I suspect that PM Rabuka and his close advisers did not expect that former RFMF Officer Viliame Seruvakula would be elected Chairman, rather than the several other prominent high chiefs who were vying to become Chairman.

     Fiji remembers that in 2007, when Bainimarama advised them to go and “drink homebrew under the mango tree”, the chiefs (except Ro Kepa) meekly complied.

     Now that the GCC is “in existence” again, Fiji is being put through totally unnecessary turmoil as competing interests once more try to gain influence over the GCC, for their own political ends.

     Chairman Seruvakula faces a mountain to climb if he is to mould the GCC into an institution that can help Fiji to recover from the Bainimarama/Khaiyum dictatorship, rather than again become an instrument to manipulate indigenous Fijian lives. At this point in time, there is no better person than him.

Chairman Seruvakula a relief to the RFMF

Chairman Ratu Viliame Seruvakula knows only too well how the GCC had been misused in the coups of 1987 and especially 2000, as he was one of the few principled RFMF officers in the thick of it.

     The fact that Seruvakula was freely elected as Chairman by the GCC would suggest that the majority of the current GCC today also want to make sure that the GCC is not misused again by politicians or others, a glimmer of hope for the future of Fiji’s elected governments.

     A key asset that Seruvakula brings to his task is the greatest of respect for him among the professional ethical soldiers in the Republic of Fiji Military Forces (RFMF). This should be welcomed by RFMF Commander Kalouniwai who even as recently as the 2022 Elections had to cope with destabilizing elements within and outside of the RFMF.

     The GCC has now set up three committees to look at issues of indigenous Fijian governance, education and culture and language.

     These are all extremely important problem areas for indigenous Fijians where the GCC may be able to provide a helping hand to Fiji’s elected governments, although its record has been utterly dismal in the  past.

Seruvakula’s assets

The general Fiji public will not know about the ethical and professional quality of Viliame Seruvakula. They must read the RFMF’s own Evans Board of Inquiry Report (EBOIR) into the 2000 coup and mutiny, freely available on the pro-democracy website TruthForFiji for more than ten years.

     This EBOIR contains the extremely credible evidence given by Lt Col Viliame Seruvakula, fully described in my Reading 41 of Volume 3 (Our Struggles for Democracy in Fiji: Rule of Law and Media Freedom, “The hidden events of 2000 coup and mutiny”).

     Th EBOIR reveals (pp 938-939). that Lt Col Seruvakula as head of the intelligence unit had told  Commander Bainimarama more than six months in advance that senior army officers, Fijian politicians, high chiefs (some named) and Methodist leaders were plotting the 2000 coup at several private houses. He was told the exact date a week before.  There is no evidence that the Commander did anything to stop the coup against the lawful government of Mahendra Chaudhry. Why didn’t he?

     Seruvakula also gave evidence (EBOIR, pp. 947-948) that while the 2000 coup was clearly treason against the state, a number of senior army officers were “sitting on the fence” waiting to see which group won, supplying rations and maintaining the salaries of the hostage takers. Some were even undermining Seruvakula’s attempts to place blockades which could have ended the hostage crisis much sooner.

     Lt Col.  Seruvakula was also central to the RFMF eventually restoring control during the 2000 hostage and mutiny crises, although subsequent events (such as asking President Ratu Sir Kamisese Mara to step down and not re-appointing the elected Government of Chaudhary) were determined by the RFMF hierarchy and secret advisers.

     If the “truth” about the 2000 coup were to ever be fully revealed  then the world will never refer again to the 2000 coup as a “George Speight coup” (so good luck to MP Sashi Kiran’s call for a Commission of Truth, forget Justice and Reconciliation.

     It is also known that after the 2000 mutiny by a few CRW soldiers, 5 possibly innocent CRW soldiers were picked up by Lt. Col. Seruvakula and deposited for their safety with the Nabua Police Station From there they were picked up on the orders of possibly two senior RFMF officers and subsequently delivered dead to the morgue. 

     The son of one of those CRW soldiers killed (Kalounivale) has now called on the Fiji Police for an inquiry (Fiji Times online report by Anish Chand, 1 February 2024). It will be interesting to see the Police’s progress on this case of gross abuse of the human rights of five murdered CRW soldiers.

     It is also well known in RFMF circles that Seruvakula (and a few honourable others) resigned when it became clear that Bainimarama was hell-bent on doing his 2006 coup against the lawfully elected Government of the late Laisenia Qarase.

     Seruvakula then joined the UN where he served with great honor. Seruvakula is one of the unsung heroes of the RFMF through the crises of twenty four years ago.

The GCC is not the elected government

First note that there is a democratically elected Fiji Government which is given the ultimate responsibility of looking after the welfare of all Fiji citizens and residents, including that of the indigenous Fijians who now comprise 67% of the population.

     Contrary to the hopes and claims of some (including the late Mr Jai Ram Reddy), the GCC is not charged with safeguarding the welfare of non-indigenous Fijians most of whom have no desire for that to be the case, given that they have got along without any help from the GCC.

     The GCC cannot and must not over-ride the legitimate efforts of the elected Government.

     Let us remember again that no one in Fiji, indigenous Fijians or others, jumped up and down in protest for the sixteen years that the GCC was put to sleep by Bainimarama. Indeed, the Government of Fiji (unelected between 2006 and 2014 and elected thereafter) proceeded to run Fiji without the GCC.

     So the challenge to Seruvakula is: how can the GCC make itself useful to the elected Government and Fiji rather than a hindrance?

The Challenges Facing Seruvakula

Just before the coup, the late Ratu Ovini Bokini (Chairman of the GCC) had requested me to give seminars to the GCC on critical development issues facing Fijians in a globalized world. Unfortunately, Bainimarama’s 2006 coup prevented me from making the presentations which I had prepared.

     I gave the presentation anyway at a Panel Discussion on “Challenges Facing Fijian Leadership”, organized by QVS Old Boys Association and USP’s PIAS-DG.

     I published a resulting article “Wakeup Call for GCC” (The Fiji Times 28 July 2007) which may be read as Reading 70 in my Volume 4 (Towards a Decent Fiji).

     I had requested the QVSOB to themselves assess the GCC’s performance by ten criteria I thought important “bread and butter issues” for indigenous Fijians.

     Eight years later, still with no public discussion about what a reformed GCC might look like, I wrote another Fiji Times article giving my personal judgement by these same criteria (“GCC and Chiefs Failing Fijians”, 21 March 2015) (Reading 76 in my Volume 4 Towards a Decent Fiji).

     I concluded that despite the many meritorious chiefs I knew personally (like the late Ratu Joni Madraiwiwi and the late Ratu Ropate Qalo),  the chiefs as leaders, had been badly failing indigenous Fijians by these ten criteria (my scores out of 10):

(1) As “glue” to maintain unity and strength of the Fijian vanua? [8] (PASS).

(2) Guidance on economic development strategies compatible with the WTO? [1] (FAIL)

(3) Assistance in earning remittances abroad?  [1] (FAIL)

(4) Managing Fijian resources (land, timber, sea) in the resource owners’ own interests? [2] (FAIL)

(5) manage Fijian resources in the national interest? [5] (C Grade)

(6) better balance between family interests and traditional obligations? [0] (FAIL)

(7) ethically guiding at times of political crises? (1987, 2000, 2006)? [0] (FAIL)

(8) timely resolution of succession to chiefly titles?[2] (FAIL)

(9) themselves acquiring the professional skills required for the globalized economy? [1] (FAIL)

(10) co-opting qualified Fijian commoners (including women) into the GCC  [1] (FAIL)

Overall, this added up to a mere 21 out of 100.  Even if we generously doubled our score everywhere, the GCC would only have 42 out of 100, still a FAIL.

A guiding agenda?

In my two Fiji Times articles I had suggested a five point agenda for a Review of the GCC and the role of the chiefs,  which Chairman Seruvakula could also look at today.

     Two of them were implemented by Bainimarama: reform of the system of allocating native lease monies and removing the dividend rate differentiation between Class A and Class B shareholders in Fijian Holdings Limited.

     Not acted on were: (a) the development of a sound development strategy for indigenous Fijians for the globalized world order; (b) resolving speedily the conflicts over chiefly titles; and most important, (c) co-opting qualified commoner Fijians (including women) into the GCC.

     The GCC today must identify from the ten criteria I listed above, which are more the responsibility of the national elected government, and which a “reformed” GCC can legitimately lend a “helping hand” to.

GCC and “rule of law”

I should point out that my previous two articles were in the context of a reformed GCC operating within an Upper House as defined by the 1997 Constitution.

     I have previously also written (Fiji Times 3 June 2023 “The GCC: Putting the Cart Before the Horse”) that I found it extremely puzzling that the Rabuka Government was resuscitating the GCC before addressing the most important constitutional issue facing Fiji: what is the legitimate Constitution today?

     The role of the GCC cannot be lawfully established under a “2013 Constitution” which was derived from unknown sources and imposed on the people of Fiji, and to this day, without any approval by an elected parliament or Referendum.

     I believe, as the Fiji Court of Appeal ruled in 2009,  that no one can abrogate a lawful Constitution that has been approved by both Houses of an elected Parliament, as the 1997 Constitution was.

     It that is the case, then there must be re-established an Upper House of Review, in which the GCC was most logically and consistently embedded, with a proper delineation of the responsibilities of the elected Government of the day and the GCC (however constituted).

     It is extremely unfortunate therefore that Chairman Viliame Seruvakula is being asked to formulate directions for the GCC (“reinventing the wheel”), without the overarching “rule of law” that had been provided by the 1997 Constitution.

     Those who have time on their hands can ponder on the possible “game plan” of Prime Minister Rabuka (and his unknown advisers) in bringing back the GCC and tinkering with the 2013 Constitution,  where it suits them.

     What an utter tragedy that the senior lawyers of Fiji are providing no guidance to the nation (and the Rabuka Government) on the critical importance of first re-establishing the “Rule of Law” in Fiji, especially given that the 2013 Constitution is utterly bereft of all the sound principles that constitute the “rule of law” in decent civilised countries.

     Leading lawyer Richard Naidu may have amused himself over his breakfast cereals when he wrote a year ago (“Rule of Law- Maybe a time for Aiyaz to reflect” (Fiji Times January 28 2023) but the nation needs something more than the satirical put-down of the architect of the 2013 Constitution.

     It is a pity that the Fiji Law Society also has stayed suitably quiet. Of course, there are more legal fees to be earned, on all sides, if the “rule of law” is in a mess.