The Registrar of Political Parties, Ana Mataiciwa, has rejected an application to register a new political party called FijiansFirst, finding the name too similar to the deregistered FijiFirst and therefore likely to cause confusion among voters. The decision, released yesterday, follows formal objections lodged by the National Federation Party (NFP) and The People’s Alliance (TPA).
Mataiciwa said the NFP and TPA raised several concerns about the FijiansFirst application, including the party’s proposed symbol, which allegedly incorporated the national coat of arms without authorisation, and the overall resemblance of the symbol to that previously used by FijiFirst. Objections also flagged the proposed abbreviation FFP as potentially evoking the former party. In her statement, Mataiciwa said she considered each of these grounds but found only the similarity of the party name met the statutory threshold for refusal.
“Based on NFP and TPA’s objections on similarity between the proposed name FijiansFirst and FijiFirst, I find that the proposed name so nearly resembles that of the deregistered party FijiFirst as to be likely to be confused with or mistaken for that party within the meaning of section 8(h)(iii) of the Political Parties (Registration, Conduct, Funding and Disclosures) Act 2013,” Mataiciwa said. She added that other objections, including those relating to the symbol, use of national imagery and the likely use of the abbreviation FFP, did not satisfy sections 8(b) or 8(h)(iii) of the Act and were therefore dismissed.
The Registrar’s ruling means FijiansFirst cannot be registered under the name it filed. The group behind the application has 14 days from the date of the decision to lodge an appeal with the Electoral Commission under section 30(1) of the Act. If an appeal is filed, the commission will be required to determine whether Mataiciwa’s interpretation of the law and her application of the confusion test were correct.
The rejection underlines tensions in the post-FijiFirst political landscape as former members and supporters of the deregistered party seek new vehicles for political participation. Earlier this year, the Registrar approved the registration of a new grouping called People First — a party led by figures formerly associated with FijiFirst — after dismissing multiple objections to that application. The contrast between the two decisions demonstrates how fine legal distinctions over names, symbols and imagery can determine whether a new political organisation is allowed to enter the formal party register.
NFP and TPA said in their objections that the reuse of familiar branding risked misleading voters and exploiting residual recognition linked to the former FijiFirst. The Registrar’s decision gives legal weight to that argument in the specific case of the name FijiansFirst, while signalling that claims about symbols and national imagery must meet a stricter legal standard to block registration.
The outcome will be watched closely by political operatives and observers ahead of the next general election, as parties and new entrants manoeuvre for identity, recognition and ballot access. If FijiansFirst opts to appeal, the Electoral Commission’s ruling will set a further precedent on how closely new party names may resemble those of deregistered predecessors.