A tale of three constitutions: Ethnicity and politics in Fiji
* Constitutional Advisory Support Unit, United Nations Development Programme, Nepal, recently retired from Sir Y. K. Pao Chair of Public Law, University of Hong Kong. Email: ypghai{at}hku.hk
** Constitutional Advisory Support Unit, United Nations Development Programme, Nepal, recently retired from Faculty of Law, University of Hong Kong. Email: cottrell{at}hku.hk
 |
Abstract |
|---|
There have been sharp divisions of opinion throughout Fiji's modern history between those advocating an integrated, nonracial state, based on individual rights, and those in favor of a political order based on ethnic communities. Integration and consociation, perhaps, are not apt terms to categorize this division, but, certainly, they have some resonance. Many features associated with consociation have been present in the colonial and the postcolonial constitutions, such as separate communal representation, group rights, asymmetrical autonomy, power sharing, separate educational systems, and entrenchment of rights to culture and land. Norms regarding indigenous peoples’ rights have been invoked, as well, adding an extra twist to the integration-consociation polarity. But there have also been strong tendencies toward political integration and broad-based, nonethnic social justice policies. Fiji's experience shows that this polarity has limited intellectual or policy value. Consociation easily and, in Fiji's case, seamlessly slides into hegemony.