The Great Council of Chiefs (GCC) has declined to publicly comment on submissions to the Constitution Review Commission, including a high-profile proposal from the Fiji Trades Union Congress (FTUC) calling for a nationally elected President with expanded powers and formal accountability. The council’s refusal to engage marks the latest development in the unfolding constitutional review process, as civic groups and institutions press competing visions for the head of state.
FTUC president Felix Anthony told the commission in a written submission that the current system “weakens the role and limits its independence” and urged that the President be elected directly by voters to secure legitimacy and insulation from political influence. “What we’re saying is that the President must be independent, and also that in his own right, he has the right to either sign off a piece of legislation or refuse to sign,” Anthony said, arguing the change would create clearer checks on executive authority. He also told the committee he had little confidence in the present review process, claiming the government’s nominee for the presidency was “almost certain to succeed.”
In response to inquiries about FTUC’s proposals and other submissions, GCC chairman Ratu Viliame Seruvakula said the council would not be drawn into public commentary on individual entries to the Commission. “We will not be making any comment with regards to submissions going to the Constitution Review Commission,” Ratu Viliame said, stressing that the council respects the views of all participants in the review process.
Ratu Viliame framed the GCC’s position as a defence of the review body’s mandate. “People and organisations that are submitting after us, whatever their submissions, we respect it. We will not provide counter comments, because that is what the Constitution Review Commission has been set up for — to allow for dialogues and public consultation,” he said, adding that reacting to each submission would undermine the commission’s role.
The Commission, established to gather public input on possible constitutional changes, has attracted submissions from political parties, civil society, and customary institutions. FTUC’s push for a directly elected President with authority either to assent to or withhold assent from legislation represents one of the more consequential proposals received so far, touching on the balance of power between the presidency, government and parliament.
The GCC’s hands-off stance signals it intends to allow the formal review mechanism to consider and weigh submissions without competing public interventions from the council. That posture may shift how debates over presidential reform play out in the coming weeks: with the GCC refraining from public rebuttal, pressure could increase on the Constitution Review Commission and other political actors to publicly justify their positions. For now, the commission remains the focal point where divergent proposals, including those from the FTUC, will be considered as part of the broader constitutional review.