Constitutional lawyer Jon Apted has raised significant concerns regarding the electoral system in Fiji, particularly focusing on Section 53 of the Constitution which he describes as “extremely problematic.” During a session titled “Where to from here? A Constitution for the people by the people” at the Attorney-General’s Conference in Nadi, Mr. Apted explained that Section 53 mandates a multi-member open-list system of proportional representation within a single national electoral roll that includes all registered voters.
This provision suggests that Fiji operates as one extensive constituency, where Parliament is voted on by the “country as a whole.” Mr. Apted criticized this approach, noting the absence of local representation as a major drawback. “Local people have no MP to turn to for safeguarding their interests in Parliament,” he stated, emphasizing that candidates often concentrate on areas with larger populations, neglecting smaller communities.
Additionally, Mr. Apted pointed out the challenges faced by independent candidates, highlighting that the system imposes an unrealistic threshold for these individuals. He also noted that if a by-election becomes necessary due to an independent resigning or being disqualified, the election would have to cover the entire nation, resulting in significant costs.
He further elaborated on the issue of vote centralization, where votes tend to be concentrated around party leaders, subsequently being distributed among party members. This leads to the scenario where some Members of Parliament assume office with as few as 600 to 1,000 votes, raising questions about their legitimacy and representation in the eyes of the public.
Mr. Apted also challenged the constitutional framework of the single-constituency model. He remarked that while Section 53 does not explicitly mandate that the country operate as one constituency, it seems to imply this intention. He pointed out that the Constitution does not confer upon anyone the authority to delineate the country into electoral boundaries, with provisions for filling vacancies referring to a national list as opposed to distinct constituencies.
In conclusion, while Mr. Apted’s critiques underscore significant flaws in Fiji’s election process, they also ignite a crucial conversation about potential reforms. Addressing these issues could enhance local representation and empower communities, paving the way for a more inclusive and effective governmental structure. The insights from experts like Mr. Apted can serve as a foundational step toward creating an electoral system that truly represents the diverse interests of all Fijians.
Leave a comment