Fiji Labour Party

16/10/2026

THE Case of the Switched Constitutions

The National Council of the Fiji Labour Party meets in Nadi tomorrow to deliberate on the serious constitutional and political crisis facing the country amid fears that Prime Minister Rabuka is manipulating an extension to his term in office without going to the polls.

A close reading of Chapter 16 of Bill 32 (Amendments to the Constitution) that is being rammed through Parliament without proper scrutiny, reveals provisions that could allow Rabuka to abort a general election, and remain in power :
Clauses 211(2)(3), 219 (3)(a), 221.

The Prime Minister must explain to the nation why these clauses were inserted, if not to extend his term in office. Such clauses have never been part of any of Fiji’s four previous Constitutions.

These clauses were certainly not in the transitional provisions of the draft CRC constitution that was later ditched by Rabuka.

PM Rabuka has not been honest with the nation. The (draft) constitution proposed in Bill 32 is NOT the draft produced by the CRC. It is not the draft that was tabled in Parliament on 22 September 2026. Yet it is being paraded as basically the CRC draft with some changes made by Cabinet.

Neither Rabuka nor his Cabinet had the mandate to write a constitution.

In fact, he hijacked the CRC draft constitution and presented Parliament with a substantially different document as Bill No.32 of 2026.

This contrived document was handed out to the MPs very late on Wednesday, 30 September as the Cabinet amended CRC document.

Indeed, the entire constitution review process engineered by the Prime Minister is unconstitutional - from the time he advised the President to appoint a constitution review commission without first seeking parliamentary mandate to his now rushing Bill 32 through Parliament, and imposing a National Referendum on the people ahead of the last Writ of Elections date of 24 December 2026, without lawful authority.

His rushed timetable is part of the ‘subterfuge’ to avert an election and remain in office at a time when the nation is clamouring to go to the Polls.

They have had enough of the misrule, mismanagement and profligacy of the Rabuka Coalition in the past four years. They have had enough of the hardship imposed by the anti-social policies of his government.

The people must not allow Sitiveni Rabuka to impose on them yet another controversial, undemocratic constitution written by unknown authors, as was done in 1990 and 2013.

Labour calls on the nation to reject this highly controversial Bill 32 when it comes up for its 3rd Reading in November.

Labour calls on the nation to oppose and reject the Prime Minister’s rushed timeline to hold a National Referendum on December 9 under the current Referendum Act which is critically flawed. It is undemocratic and draconian in that it criminalises public discussion of matters relating to the subject of the Referendum.

Labour demands that general elections be held as constitutionally mandated. Any changes that need to be made to the 2013 Constitution must be the responsibility of the next elected government.

14/10/2026

:

Is a constitutional COUP afoot?

There may not be a general election after all. Fiji Labour Party challenges Prime Minister Rabuka to come clean on his scheme to abort an election.

A close reading of Chapter 16 of Bill 32 of 2026 ( the proposed constitution) reveals provisions that allow Sitiveni Rabuka to extend his government’s term in office without holding a general election.

In other words, the draft constitution allows him to continue the life of the current parliament should the Constitution Amendment Bill pass its Third Reading.

And is approved by a National Referendum on 9 December which he announced without due authority. Further, let’s not forget, that Rabuka called on the Electoral Commission to stop all election campaign activity until after the Referendum.

Labour Leader Mahendra Chaudhry is now calling on Mr Rabuka to explain to the people of Fiji why certain Clauses have been inserted in the draft constitution, if this is not true.

What are these relevant clauses:
• Chapter 16- Clause 211(2) says: "This constitution comes into force on 31st March 2028 [BUT]
Subclause (3) allows the President “…by proclamation published in the Gazette, to fix a date earlier than the date referred to in subsection (2) as the date of the commencement of this Act”.

• Once the constitution comes into force (commencement), Clause 219 (3) (a) comes into play.
Under the subhead "Parliament continues", it says:
“From the commencement –
(a) Each member of the first (existing) Parliament is taken to be a member of the House of Representatives; and
(b) The members of the first Parliament are taken collectively to be the House of Representatives under this Constitution”.

Further, and, presumably as an inducement to buy the support of the existing MPs and Ministers, Clause 221 states:

“From the commencement, the Prime Minister and other Ministers appointed under the 2013 Constitution are taken to be the Prime Minister and Ministers appointed under this Constitution.” [the new Constitution]

The Office of the President is also similarly preserved for the incumbent President under Clause 220. He can stay to assist implementation.

Says Chaudhry: “Prime Minister Rabuka must explain to the nation the intent of these clauses.

“Why have these been inserted unless it is to allow the current term of Parliament to be extended and the government to stay in office without going to the Polls?”

The Prime Minister knows full well that he is likely to lose the elections if he goes to the Polls. His government is so unpopular.

The current show of going through a public consultation is a charade, as has been the entire process.

Wake up, Fiji!

10/10/2026

08/10/2026

Manumanunitoga must face legal consequences for outburst

The online outburst by Paula Manumanunitoga was a shocking display of hostility that is entirely unrepresentative of broader Fijian sentiment.

There is no need to explain here why his social media post of October 5th was so repugnant and derisive – its widespread backlash tells the story.

Crucially, this inciteful hate speech cannot be dismissed as just a disgrace; it warrants the full brunt of legal accountability.

These statements appear to directly breach Section 17 of the Public Order Act and Section 24 of the Online Safety Act.

Furthermore, they violate the Constitution: specifically Section 17.2(c), which states freedom of speech cannot advocate hatred, and Section 26.3(a), which protects citizens from unfair discrimination.

Mr. Manumanunitoga’s outburst has riled emotions among Indo-Fijians and i-Taukei alike, who have rightly stood together to reject his sentiments. Further to this, he must also face legal consequences.

Picture courtesy of Fiji Village.

06/10/2026

OOPS… Biman flips again!

Since voting YES on the 2nd Reading of the Bill on Friday, Biman Prasad has issued several statements on the matter - each of which expresses a different view point.

First he said NFP will not accept any attempt to rush or fast track the amendments through Parliament. Then he and his MPs did just that – voted in favour of the Amendment Bill in the 2nd Reading as well as the highly flawed Referendum Bill.

Now he is doing another back flip.

He is saying the same thing Labour Leader Mahendra Chaudhry has been saying: that the Prime Minister’s actions are unconstitutional (as per S 160) of the 2013 Constitution; and that the PM is pre-empting the outcome.

He now says 30 days is not enough for consultations, that the Prime Minister has no power to name a referendum date, and that the process should wait until next year.

A man who cannot act decisively at moments of crisis does not deserve the mantle of leadership. Time and again since taking office Biman Prasad has shown that he cannot be trusted to keep his word.

The National Federation Party under his weak and vacillating leadership, has now published the record of its own betrayal.

A party that cannot hold one position from one week to the next has no business asking Indians, or anyone else, to trust it with the supreme law.

Now that he is, unfortunately, selected to sit on the bipartisan constitution consultation committee, who can trust him to uphold the principles of democracy, justice and fairness - and not play politics?

06/10/2026

An Update: Joint EC/FEO statement

As we have been posting in the past week or so, Fiji faces a serious constitutional crisis.

The Prime Minister has unlawfully and unconstitutionally declared a National Referendum date even before the Constitutional Amendment Bill is passed by Parliament.

The Bill itself faces serious controversy over the manner in which it was railroaded through Parliament without adequate scrutiny or debate.

The Bill awaits its 3rd Reading scheduled for the Parliament sitting of 2 November 2026. Meanwhile, having passed the 2nd Reading it now goes to a bipartisan committee for public consultation and review.

The 11 member committee is chaired by the Prime Minister with 7 members appointed by the PM and four by the Opposition Leader Inia Seruiratu.

Government Members: Viliame Gavoka, Biman Prasad, Siromi Turaga, Lynda Tabuya, Mosese Bulitavu, Filimoni Vosaroga.

Opposition Leader Inia Seruiratu heads the opposition group. His three nominees are not yet known.

Prime Minister has also directed the Electoral Commission to suspend all election campaign activities ahead of the National Referendum to be held on 9 December.

The Fijian Elections Office and Electoral Commission have issued a joint statement on preparations for the Natonal Referendum etc which is posted below in full for your information. For the time being, they have not suspended election campaign activities.

The Referendum will be carried out both within Fiji and abroad for Fiji citizens living overseas. You need to be registered to participate – registration for national elections will cover the Referendum as well. Please read the notice carefully so you understand the requirements.

Labour will keep you fully posted with developments as they arise via our Facebook Post.

Below: Joint EC/FEO statement

05/10/2026

Rabuka's desperate move to remain in power

Prime Minister Sitiveni Rabuka is acting unlawfully and unconstitutionally in announcing a date for a National Referendum on the Constitution Amendment Bill and directing the Electoral Commission to suspend all general election campaigning until then.

“The Supreme Court opinion has made it clear that the 2013 Constitution remains effective and is the supreme law of the land. The Prime Minister must abide by it, said Labour Leader Mahendra Chaudhry.

The Constitution Amendment Bill has not gone through its 3rd Reading yet. That reading is mandatory. A referendum date cannot be set until the Bill passes its Third Reading.

The Prime Minister cannot act on the assumption that the Bill will pass its 3rd Reading.

“Nor does he have a right to direct the Electoral Commission to suspend all general election campaign activities. The Prime Minister must respect the independence of our electoral institutions.

“He has already acted unconstitutionally by bringing the Bill to Parliament. Now he is going further in pre-empting the outcome of its 3rd Reading.

“ We see it as a desperate bid by the PM to hold on to power at any cost despite his undertaking in Parliament that the elections will be held under the 2013 Constitution,” Mr Chaudhry said.

04/10/2026

Friday's debate on the 2nd Reading of the Constitution Amendment Bill a nullity, says Labour Leader Mahendra Chaudhry

02/10/2026

Crisis
Dispute over voting threshold

Hours before Parliament is to vote on the Second Reading of the Constitution Amendment Bill, the Opposition is still in the dark over the voting threshold to be used.

There is a dispute between the Opposition and the government over the figure: The Opposition says it should be 55. The government says 53.

Opposition Leader Inia Seruiratu wrote to the Speaker three weeks ago seeking clarification on the voting threshold to be used. He received no reply.

A similar request to the Secretary General to Parliament has also not been responded to.

Later inquiries with the Solicitor General’s Office also proved futile as these Civil Servants did not cooperate either.

Labour asks what is going on here? Why has the Hon Speaker not responded to an urgent matter?

The composition of Parliament for the threshold purposes should remain at 55 and not 53 as the government is trying to push. It cannot be altered just to suit the Government’s agenda.

Labour reiterates its strong objection to the extremely hasty, unconstitutional and undemocratic manner in which Prime Minister Rabuka is railroading the Constitution Amendment Bill through parliament.

Members of Parliament have hardly received adequate time to study the amendments before they are to vote on it.

Excluding those in Cabinet, all other MPs received the Constitution Amendment Bill very late on Wednesday afternoon.

They sat in Parliament all day Thursday and into the early hours of Friday morning (1.40am), rushing through all the consequential Bills – amendments to the Electoral and Political Parties Acts and the Referendum Act etc.

This morning they were expected to be back in Parliament at 9am to debate and vote on the Second Reading of the Constitution Amendment Bill.

Chapter 11, Section 160 (2)(c) is absolutely clear on procedures necessary to move constitutional amendments through Parliament:

A “full opportunity for debate” during both the Second and Third Readings of the Bill is mandatory under Section 160(2).

This is not happening

Important questions arise from this:

1. When would the MPs have had the time to read through and study the Bill, and then discuss it with their electorate before debating it in Parliament?

2. Would the MPs have been in a proper frame of mind to discuss the important provisions of the Bill in their current exhausted state?

3. Is one day sufficient for an informed and educated debate on such a crucial issue?

All this rush means Members are not given adequate time to read, understand and properly debate the passage of such significant Bills through Parliament.

Important Bills are rushed through without proper scrutiny and debate.

The entire proceedings could be declared a nullity, if challenged.

01/10/2026

Constitutional Crisis

As our Parliamentarians prepare to vote today on the 2nd Reading of the inexplicably rushed amendments to the 2013 Constitution Bill, they would do well to take heed of this inspirational message from Gandhiji on this auspicious day of Gandhi Jayanti:

- A "NO" uttered from the deepest conviction
is better than a "YES" merely uttered to please,
or worse, to avoid trouble -