Professor Anthony James Regan, a Constitutional lawyer at Australia’s National University, has stated that Section 131(2) of Fiji’s Constitution does not assign the Republic of Fiji Military Forces (RFMF) the role of guarantors or guardians of the 2013 Constitution.
During a public lecture on Constitutional Change in Fiji, Prof. Regan emphasized that the wording of Section 131(2) does not confer such a duty on the RFMF. This section specifies the military’s overall responsibility as ensuring the security, defense, and well-being of Fiji and its citizens.
Prof. Regan pointed out that this is the only section outlining the military’s role. He suggested that the courts and government should handle constitutional matters, allowing the military to focus on protecting Fiji from external threats and participating in international peacekeeping.
He noted that militaries worldwide are primarily established to address external threats, with constitutional provisions sometimes allowing internal roles only in emergencies under strict conditions and limitations. Such powers would be temporary and set by emergency laws made by Parliament, with the military being held accountable.
Prof. Regan expressed concerns over the RFMF’s current stance on having a guardianship role, implying they could determine when to intervene beyond the government’s authority. He argued that this is not a sound basis for governance. If such a role were intended, it would have been explicitly drafted in the Constitution.
While acknowledging the RFMF’s professionalism and dedication in global security and peacekeeping, Prof. Regan criticized the idea that a military should unilaterally decide its role in guarding the Constitution. He stated that it is typically the government’s responsibility to protect the Constitution and address threats, with the courts providing oversight and interpretation.