Fiji Trades Union Congress general secretary Felix Anthony has warned that a provision in the constitution preserving past immunities risks encouraging a repeat of the country’s coups unless it is amended, telling the Constitution Review Committee the law must adopt a “zero tolerance” approach to military takeovers.
In a formal submission to the committee, Mr Anthony criticised Section 156 of the constitution, which he said “states that immunities granted to individuals for certain political events under the 2010 decree would continue to apply”. He argued the clause entrenches a dangerous precedent by effectively promising protection for actors who overthrow democratic institutions, saying it “actually encourages future coups knowing that there will be immunities given.”
“There have been immunities given for all three (coups) before. Anyone doing the same thing in the future will also be given the same immunity and sends a very wrong signal to people,” Mr Anthony told the review panel, according to his submission. He urged the committee to ensure the supreme law makes clear that the constitution cannot simply be discarded to serve the interests of those who seize power.
Mr Anthony called for a constitutional amendment that removes or tightens the immunity provision so individuals cannot evade accountability for actions taken during coups or other unlawful political events. “There must be zero tolerance for any military coup in this country. Period,” he said, stressing that the constitution must explicitly bar future attempts to overturn it and prevent those responsible from avoiding legal consequences.
The concerns expressed by Mr Anthony add to wider public debate as the Constitution Review Committee gathers submissions from a range of stakeholders. Critics of Section 156 say its continuation of immunities authorised by the 2010 decree risks institutionalising impunity; supporters of the clause have argued it was intended to provide legal certainty after turbulent political episodes, a point not directly addressed in Mr Anthony’s submission.
Calls for clearer accountability have also been fuelled by recent high-profile legal proceedings that have tested the boundaries between authority and responsibility. For example, a 2025 High Court ruling in the case of former prime minister Frank Bainimarama—while distinguishing the specifics of that matter—reignited discussion about how the justice system balances past actions by powerful figures with the need for accountability. Mr Anthony’s submission places the spotlight back on whether constitutional protections should be revised to discourage future extra-constitutional interventions.
The Constitution Review Committee has not yet announced a timeline for final recommendations or how it will reconcile competing views from political, civil society and legal groups. Mr Anthony’s submission signals strong pressure from organised labour for any revised constitution to send an unequivocal message that coups will not be tolerated and that those who attempt to overthrow government will be answerable under the law.
Leave a comment